■ New Zealanders like to think of ourselves as an independent bunch. We’re quite happy telling Australia how to play rugby, America how to run politics, and the rest of the world to keep their nuclear stuff out of our backyard, writes David Hick.

Yet, when it comes to choosing our own head of state, we suddenly become strangely timid.

For a country that prides itself on punching above its weight, it’s an odd place to lose our nerve.

Every few years someone suggests New Zealand should become a republic.

Not that we should become one immediately. Just that perhaps we should have the conversation.

Remarkably, even that seems to make some politicians nervous.

“What about my knighthood?”

The British monarchy plays almost no part in our daily lives. The King doesn’t govern us. He doesn’t make our laws. He doesn’t settle coalition negotiations or open the local A&P Show.

The Governor-General quietly carries out the constitutional duties while most New Zealanders get on with life without giving the monarchy much thought at all. The last visit here by a reigning monarch was … in 2002

Today’s New Zealand is a very different country from the one that inherited these constitutional arrangements. Nearly one in three New Zealanders was born overseas, and our largest overseas-born community now comes from Asia rather than Britain. We are a proudly multicultural, Pacific nation whose identity is increasingly our own.

Yet for the country’s highest constitutional office, the eligibility criteria remain remarkably exclusive.

Applicants need not apply.

The position is filled by hereditary succession from one particular family living on the other side of the world.

If any other public appointment worked that way, the Auditor-General would probably have a few questions.

The curious thing is that becoming a republic wouldn’t actually change very much.

The prime minister would still run the Government. Parliament would still make the laws. The courts would still interpret them. We would still be a member of the Commonwealth.

Councils would still put your rates up. The sun would still come up in the east. Life would carry on pretty much as before.

The only real change is that our Head of State could finally be a New Zealander.

Not elected in an American-style popularity contest, but appointed in much the same ceremonial way as the Governor-General is today.

The constitutional machinery barely changes. The symbolism does.

And symbols matter.

Every independent nation eventually decides how it wishes to represent itself. The question isn’t whether the British monarchy has served New Zealand well. By and large, it has.

The question is whether it still makes sense.

Some people will disagree, and that’s exactly as it should be.

But surely the decision belongs to New Zealanders … not to politicians reluctant to ask the question in the first place. Hold a referendum.

Have an informed debate.

If New Zealand votes to remain a constitutional monarchy, excellent. The matter is settled for another generation. If we vote for a republic, equally excellent. We make the change carefully and sensibly.

Either way, we stop pretending the conversation itself is somehow too dangerous to have.

New Zealand has never lacked the confidence to change what no longer serves us. It’s curious that, on this one question, we seem more comfortable inheriting a decision than making one.

For a nation that prides itself on independence, perhaps the most surprising thing isn’t that we still have a king. It’s that we’re still reluctant to decide whether we want one.

What are we scared of?