Following on from the mention in stuff.co.nz, Sam Hurly from TVNZ emailed Jarred and I for comment about the flag process and our work on the flagtest.nz site.
In contrast to Stuff, Hurly got in touch directly and asked clear questions I was easily able to respond to. Firstly, I explained some of the reasoning for creating the site:
“The official site didn’t provide any context to view the flags other than the main gallery,” Mr Newman told ONE News.
“All the submissions were being reviewed and debated as static designs, without considering how well they’d perform in the wind or without any.
“We wanted people to be able to ‘test’ if a flag worked in context.”
I also took the opportunity to briefly outline my view on the process and “long list” announcement:
He said both Mr Bishop and himself, who both submitted their own flag designs, were keen on a flag change that “represents a more contemporary and multicultural view of New Zealand”.
“Unfortunately the process has been a farce. There was no official design representation on the panel and the recently announced ‘long list’ is basically only a few different ideas presented in a variation of colours.
“Only two designs don’t feature a fern, Southern Cross or koru. Having 40 designs so similar to each other doesn’t show the depth of ideas and quality of designs that were submitted,” he said.
“There’s many bold, simple and creative ideas that didn’t make the cut. As Gareth Morgan mentioned, the majority look like tea towels, not flags.”
Was great to see TVNZ quote me precisely and present an alternative view highlighting some of the issues with the process and “long list”.