Nu Tireni · Evidence Series · Part 42 · Candidate-Selection Audit

Why was the United Tribes flag one of only four candidates in 2009?

The 2009 Government process did not place every Māori flag or political emblem before the public. It selected four flags described by Manatū Taonga as flags of national significance. The United Tribes of New Zealand flag survived that selection process. That fact is important, but its meaning must be controlled carefully: it shows Government treated the flag as nationally significant, not that Cabinet thereby resolved its constitutional status.

Selection logicHistorical significanceEvidence boundary

The first point is simple: this was a filtered shortlist

Manatū Taonga's current account says the 2009 consultation considered four flags of national significance: the New Zealand Flag, the New Zealand Red Ensign, the national or United Tribes of New Zealand flag, and the Tino Rangatiratanga flag.

That wording matters. The United Tribes flag was not merely submitted by one participant after consultation began. It was one of the Government-selected options placed before the public.

The contemporary Human Rights Commission record confirms the historical framing

The Human Rights Commission's 2009 race-relations report described the four options and identified the United Tribes flag as the Flag of the Independent Tribes of New Zealand, dating from 1834. It separately described the Red Ensign by reference to its maritime and Māori history and the Tino Rangatiratanga flag as dating from 1989.

That contemporary account is useful because it shows the flags were not presented as interchangeable designs. Each carried a different history.

The 1834 flag already had an official historical pedigree

Manatū Taonga's United Tribes flag history records that northern rangatira selected the design in 1834, that it was saluted, that King William IV approved the revised design, and that the Admiralty circulated it for recognition as New Zealand's flag. It also records its later connection with the 1835 Declaration of Independence.

That does not establish that the flag retained the same legal status after later Crown sovereignty claims and colonial legislation. It does establish why the flag could not sensibly be treated as just another modern protest or movement flag.

The surviving public record still does not tell us the whole selection algorithm

The evidence located so far tells us the outcome of the shortlist and how later official sources describe the four options. It does not yet disclose the complete internal Te Puni Kōkiri decision matrix that determined which flags were included and which were excluded.

That distinction is critical. We should not infer from the final shortlist that officials necessarily conducted a constitutional analysis of the 1834 flag. They may have selected it because of historical prominence, because of northern support, because it was already widely recognised, or for several reasons at once.

Why this matters for 28 October 2026

The present bridge request is not asking Government to reverse the 2009 preferred-national-Māori-flag decision. It asks for a historically specific flag to be flown on the anniversary of the 1835 instrument that expressly referred to that flag.

The 2009 shortlist therefore assists in a narrower way: Government has already acknowledged the United Tribes flag as nationally significant enough to stand in an official national consultation alongside the New Zealand Flag, the Red Ensign and Tino Rangatiratanga.

The next documents must focus on the shortlist itself

The next record request should target the pre-consultation phase rather than the final vote. Specifically, we need:

1. Te Puni Kōkiri's 3 June 2009 memorandum to the Minister of Māori Affairs;
2. all drafts of the consultation brochure and candidate descriptions;
3. all internal advice identifying possible flags before the final four were selected;
4. the criteria used to classify a flag as having “national significance”;
5. all records explaining why the United Tribes flag was included;
6. all records explaining why other Māori, iwi, hapū, movement or historical flags were excluded;
7. all historical advice supplied about the 1834 selection, King William IV approval, Admiralty circulation and He Wakaputanga;
8. all correspondence involving Pita Sharples, Hone Harawira, Te Puni Kōkiri and the Prime Minister's office concerning the candidate list before public consultation commenced.

Finding at this stage

Primary and official sources

Manatū Taonga — 2009 four-flag consultation ↗

Human Rights Commission — Race Relations in 2009 ↗

NZHistory — United Tribes flag historical record ↗

Te Puni Kōkiri — 2009/10 annual report, national Māori flag process ↗