The media furore that has erupted from new Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s decision to stand in respectful silence during a rendition of God Save the Queen opens up a much needed debate about the UK’s national anthem.

Leaving aside querulous arguments about whether or not the Queen – who was enterprising enough to be born a princess, and receive £35.7 million a year from taxpayers – has been personally insulted by Corbyn’s decision, it is important to address a certain elephant in the room: the national anthem is not fit for purpose.

First and foremost, it’s important to remember that the supposed national anthem doesn’t actually once mention the nation. Unlike, say, Brazil’s wonderfully jaunty anthem, ours is a plodding throwback from the 18th century, which originally contained a verse about crushing rebellious Scots – hardly something befitting of a supposed multicultural, unified Britain.

We need, simply, an anthem that represents all of us. Just 60% of the population support the monarchy – and, while that is clearly a majority, it means there remains a significant number who feel completely unrepresented by a tune that goes on and on about an old privileged white person who lives in a palace.

Looking elsewhere around the globe, it’s tempting to feel no little amount of envy for some of the cracking tunes other countries have. Take Jamaica’s, for instance. Now there’s an anthem we could all get on board with, surely?

It’s interesting to recall that, in 2007, Lord Goldsmith led a citizenship review in which he considered changing the national anthem to make it more inclusive – and to avoid quite so badly offending the Scots, the Welsh, and the Irish.

Of course, as with the results of so many reviews, no changes were made. And this truly should be regarded as a missed opportunity. How long will the people of Britain have to wait until we are able to sing a song that does not remind us of our subjugation to a bejewelled monarch – there for luck of birth rather than through skill or merit – and instead allows us to sing side by side as equal citizens? Let us hope that Jeremy Corbyn’s stance on this issue enables this much needed debate to take place – and let us hope it isn’t simply used to distract from far more pressing issues at hand, such as global conflict, environmental break down and catastrophe, refugee crises and an economy on the brink of collapse thanks to the pursuit of endless neoliberalism espoused by the Conservative Party.

Indeed, more than anything this latest media controversy once again appears simply to blow something out of proportion, in order to detract from other matters at hand. Think of the words of WW2 Veteran, Harry Leslie Smith: “I’m not offended by Corbyn not singing, but I am offended by politicians who sell guns to tyrants.”

Now, to return to Jeremy Corbyn for a moment, let us not forget that he finds himself in an utterly paradoxical catch-22 situation. For, had he chosen to ignore his long-standing and principled Republicanism and decided to sing along with the national anthem, the chances are the bias British media would have crucified him for being a hypocrite.

So let’s leave the personal insults for the journalists and editors who trade in them – remembering as we do so that the supposedly patriotic Daily Mail was quite a big fan of Hitler, and supported the Nazis and railed against Britain helping Jewish refugees fleeing the holocaust.

Instead, let’s seize this opportunity to modernise our national anthem and give the people of Great Britain a song they actually like and are able to sing or not sing without controversy.

As it happens, there’s already a good template available for us, provided by the late, great, Terry Pratchett. Here, the national anthem of Ankh Morpork contains a second verse officially consisting of incoherent muttering. Since no group of people singing their country’s national anthem ever actually remembers how the second verse goes, such a template would likely be well-received by everyone in the UK. Anything that makes life a little easier, right?