It might well be that the United Kingdom, or its successor rump state of England and Wales, will be relying on the skills of the New Zealand’s trade negotiators to help shape the Brexit agreement with the EU. Amusingly, these might be the same people who are also representing New Zealand and Australia in areas where those two countries collaborate to reach common terms with the post-EU British / English-Welsh state.
That’s a mouthful of a paragraph because it’s a mind-blowing idea, or should be.
But it would unlikely to have become reality had it been thought about before the Brexit referendum.
Unfortunately, we have somehow got it into our heads that referenda are binary, yes / no questions.
But they needn’t be.
And we could have learned that lesson from New Zealand before forcing many people to choose between the status quo and an option that was, really, many options, none even remotely defined.
Last year and this, New Zealanders voted in two referenda designed to address one issue: to keep the current flag or replace it with a different design.
In developing the question to be put to the electorate, prime Minister John Key, his advisors and the parliamentary committee tasked with establishing the rules under which the referendum would happen realised that a simple yes / no option along the lines of “would you like to replace the current flag of New Zealand with a new design?” might well have resulted in a yes vote. There would then have followed a lengthy period of bitter argument about what the resulting flag should look like, at the end of which a significant percentage of the population who had voted for change might well have ended up wishing after seeing the new flag that they had voted, instead, to keep the current one.