July 2009
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Jun
	1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29	30	31

BIG NEWS Report: Barnardos asks kids about smacking, and lies about the research”… Why? In order to promote their VoteYes Campaign?

By admin | July 3, 2009

Barnardos have been interviewing New Zealand children by phone to see what they think about getting smacked. The question they asked:

Do you think that adults who are taken to court for hitting a child should be let off if they say they were disciplining the child?”

……. The kids had to push 1 if they should be let off 2 if they think they should not be let off, 3 if they don’t know and 4 to hear the question again. Just over half said they should not be let off. Many probably didn’t understand what ” let off” meant- ……..Nor is it clear whether “adults” included strangers.

They interviewed stressed kids who called the What’s Up hotline, a hotline for kids to talk about anything they wish, including abuse. While the kid was waiting to speak to a real person, they were given an automated message with the above question. That’s a little like asking turkeys on the 15 December whether they are looking forward to Christmas. There was only a 10% valid response rate.

Barnardos’ media release [on their 'research' - used to promote their Yes Vote Campaign in the Citizen's Initiated Referendum] says it asked kids about whether adults should be able to claim a legal defence for assault. They lied. They asked if adults should be let off. But if these adults are not parents or caregivers of the smacked kid they never had a legal defence [to be let off], ever. Let off means a case is dropped or they’re discharged without conviction – not merely being found not guilty. The Barnardos release also says:

Importantly, many of the callers suggested that parents should be let off with a warning or community service if they perpetrated low levels of violence against children.

How many? well, just one actually! The report provides all comments provided by the kids – quoting just 10 children, although it does provide some statements that counsellors said the kids had made. But ONLY ONE said parents should be let off with a warning, and NONE said parents should be charged, let alone prosecuted or have community service.

Barnardos should really stop lying to the media.

For more go to : http://big-news.blogspot.com/2009/06/barnardos-ask-kids-about-smacking-and.html

Topics: Referendum, Section 59 - The Bill | No Comments »

Family Integrity #460 — Before you VOTE in the Referendum consider this

By admin | July 3, 2009

Family Integrity #460 — Before you VOTE in the Referendum consider this:

Greetings

Before you vote in the Referendum please consider these items below.

1. Letter to the Prime Minister asking him to withdraw the Referendum:

In the interests of saving our country most of the estimated $9 million to complete the referendum, Sheryl Savill, the petition proposer, and myself would withdraw the referendum, (as per Sec 22A (1) of the CIR Act 1993) in return for an agreement by yourself to amend the current sec 59 of the crimes Act in the following way.

Delete the following sub clauses from the amended Sec 59,
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.
(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1),

Anti-Smacking Referendum ‘09: ALL THE INFORMATION YOU NEED

By admin | July 2, 2009

Anti-Smacking Referendum ‘09

ALL THE INFORMATION

YOU NEED

…..and NO Copyright!

The VoteNO.org.nz website has all the information you need regarding the upcoming anti-smacking Referendum including
frequently asked questions,
quotes of interest,
summary of polls,
summary of media releases on this issue,
how to enroll,
background of the Referendum
even a cartoons page!

But there are also
FREE downloadable brochures and posters
(and banner adverts and sidebar adverts for your blogs and website). The brochures are even in other translations including Maori, Tongan, Samoan, Fijian, Chinese, and Hindi! Download them - photocopy – and distribute to family and friends!

So GET THE WORD OUT on what this Referendum is all about.

There’s no copyright – we won’t sue you for plagiarism! GO FOR YOUR LIFE!! But especially – encourage people to vote!

We can also make the videos available to show to your group including Simon Barnett, Referendum proposer Sheryl Savill and Maori Child Advocate Bev Adair – simply email us admin@familyfirst.org.nz for the files

There’s also a blog, we’re on Twitter, and a group of supporters have started a Facebook group

You may also see our Billboard campaign underway also.

IT’S ALL GO!

You may even like to financially support the VoteNO campaign!!

But at the end of the day, the Referendum is about you having the opportunity to have YOUR say! Help send a strong message to the politicians that they simply cannot ignore.

Have a great weekend

Bob McCoskrie
National Director

http://www.familyfirst.org.nz

Topics: Referendum, Section 59 - The Bill | No Comments »

Prime Minister’s claims of referendum question confusion are really confusing!!!

By admin | July 1, 2009

“John Key has recently adopted the simplistic tactic of trying to discredit the referendum by complaining about the question being confusing, but the only person that is confused seems to be himself,” said Kiwi Party Leader Larry Baldock.

“He seems to have forgotten that when the petition was first launched March 1st, 2007 National party MPs were very involved in helping us to collect signatures. Many of them even had the petition in their electorate offices at various places across the country. If they thought the question was confusing why would they help to collect signatures to make the referendum become a reality?
“And would they have done this without the knowledge and approval of John Key?

“Unfortunately once the anti-smacking law had been passed after John Key’s amendment deal with Helen Clark the National MPs were told they were no longer allowed to collect signatures.

“The Prime Minister has often said he didn’t want good parents criminalised for a light smack.
Prime Minister they now are, so do you want it to remain that way or not? Answer ‘Yes’ if you do, and ‘No’ if you don’t. It is really that simple!

“The high response or 25,000 people responding in just two weeks to enrol or update their enrolment with the electoral enrolment centre shows that unlike John Key and Phil Goff, Kiwis understand the question and are keen to have their say,” said the petition organiser, Larry Baldock.

Contact
Larry Baldock
021864833

Topics: Referendum, Section 59 - The Bill | No Comments »

Prime Minister turns down offer to call off referendum

By admin | July 1, 2009

Email correspondence released today confirms the Prime Minister John Key turned down an offer to call off the referendum and save taxpayers money.
Kiwi Party Leader and Petition organiser Larry Baldock said he had made a genuine offer that could have put the whole matter to rest.

“It seems that the same man who rushed to make a compromise deal with Helen Clark and Sue Bradford in 2007 is no longer interested in finding sensible solutions,” said Mr Baldock

On April 18th, 2007 John Key’s reported position was very clear when he said, “If Labour really believes that ‘light smacking for the purposes of correction’ will not be outlawed, then they need to explain that. But no matter how you read this bill in its present form it will be illegal to ‘lightly smack for the purposes of correction’.

Last week, after fudging on the question for more than 4 years, Sue Bradford herself finally admitted on National Radio that every parent who uses a light smack or any reasonable force for the purpose of correction was now a criminal in this country, regardless of whether they are eventually prosecuted or not!

John Key then went on to say, “The way to send a strong message on child abuse is to make the law clear and precise and then to police it strongly and vigilantly. This bill as it stands does the opposite. For me, a result that sees the criminalisation of parents for a light smack is simply not on the table.”

In May 2007 the whole nation was shocked by the news that John Key was willing to suddenly change the National party’s position on the anti-smacking law and strike a compromise deal with Helen Clark and Sue Bradford.

I recall John Key explaining his actions then on the basis that the Anti-smacking law was a bad law, but since the Government had the numbers to pass it anyway, he felt responsible to do what he could to minimise the harm the law could cause to parents and families all over the country.

Now that he has the power to amend the ‘bad law’ he seems to have completely changed his position and thinks his amendment has made it into a ‘good law’. In the email reply to my offer, Wayne Eagleson wrote, “As the Prime Minister has indicated publicly on a number of occasions, the government is of the view that the current law is working.”

Perhaps the Prime Minister would take the time to explain to Glenn Groves who was recently convicted of assaulting his 7 year old son for nothing more serious than shoving him in the back, how well his amendment to the ‘bad law’ is working.

My proposed amendments as outlined in the attached correspondence (posted below) would remove the criminalisation of good parents,” said Mr Baldock.

Ends

Contact
Larry Baldock
021864833

Topics: Referendum, Section 59 - The Bill | 1 Comment »

Proposal to withdraw the referendum

By admin | July 1, 2009

From: Larry Baldock
Sent: Wednesday, 17 June 2009 2:23 pm
To: Hon. John Key (MIN)
Cc: Hon. Bill English (MIN); Wayne Eagleson (MIN)
Subject: Proposal to withdraw the referendum.

The Prime Minister,
Parliament Buildings
Wellington
June 16, 2009.

Dear Prime Minister,
In the interests of saving our country most of the estimated $9 million to complete the referendum, Sheryl Savill, the petition proposer, and myself would withdraw the referendum, (as per Sec 22A (1) of the CIR Act 1993) in return for an agreement by yourself to amend the current sec 59 of the crimes Act in the following way.

In this way, the criminalisation of parents who use some reasonable force to correct and train their children would be removed, whilst the other clarifications in Subsection (1) of the permissible use of reasonable force would remain.
Your amendment emphasising the need for the police to use discretion could also remain.

I would be happy to discuss these proposals with your officials and act promptly to call off the referendum and save the hard-earned money of the taxpayers of New Zealand.

Yours sincerely,
Larry Baldock.

On 18/06/09 11:45 AM, “Wayne Eagleson (MIN)” <Wayne.Eagleson@parliament.govt.nz> wrote:

Dear Larry,

The Prime Minister has asked me to reply on his behalf to your email regarding the s59 referendum.

As the Prime Minister has indicated publicly on a number of occasions, the government is of the view that the current law is working. On that basis, the Prime Minister does not support your proposed changes to the law.

With respect to the issue of the cost of the referendum, the Prime Minister said in the House yesterday that while he was concerned at having to spend $9 million, with a legal process having triggered the referendum it would be followed through on.

Thank you for writing to the Prime Minister on this issue.

Yours sincerely,
Wayne Eagleson
Chief of Staff
Office of the Prime Minister
Ph: 64 4 817-9365 or 64 21 709 067
Parliament Buildings
Wellington

Topics: Referendum, Section 59 - The Bill | 1 Comment »

Our ratings among New Zealand blogs – June 09

By admin | July 1, 2009

Our ratings among New Zealand blogs – June 09

FROM: Open Parachute blog http://openparachute.wordpress.com/2009/07/03/nz-blog-ranks-june-09/

For more information about these ratings check out the link above at Open Parachute..

KiwiSmithFamily is rated in the 101-150 blogs in New Zealand.
The Home Education Foundation and Family Integrity come in at 150-200.
These sections are in alphabetical order.

Total Rank	Change	Name	Rank	Links	RSS subs
1	0	Kiwiblog	1	1	1
2	0	Public Address	2	4	1
3	0	frogblog	3	2	13
4	0	The Standard 2.02	4	3	16
5	1	Not PC	5	7	11
6	3	TUMEKE!	7	12	17
7	-2	No Right Turn	31	9	3
8	0	The Dim-Post	10	21	13
9	-2	The Inquiring Mind	18	14	53
10	0	Whale Oil Beef Hooked	53	5	46
11	1	Halfdone	14	17	61
12	5	MacDoctor Moments	17	25	51
13	12	MandM	16	21	10%
14	-3	Auckland Daily Photo	46	12	38
15	-2	No Minister	6	50	34
16	5	Open Parachute	12	41	41
17	6	The Wellingtonista	30	52	5
18	-4	Liturgy	51	16	46
19	-4	In a stange land	47	28	24
20	39	Life is not a race to be first finished	34	51	9
21	13	Cactus Kate	9	79	10
22	8	Kiwipolitico	20	33	77
23	-5	Beatie’s Book Blog	40	35	36
24	4	Wellington Daily Photo	50	23	35
25	-9	Jack Yan: The Persuader	72	11	43
26	-2	The Fundy Post	60	24	22
27	-7	New Zeal	25	59	24
28	-10	Nelson Daily Photo	48	10	108
29	-7	The Hand Mirror	15	85	12
30	-4	New Zealand Conservative	8	46	101
31	-4	The visible hand in economics	13	31	148
32	7	Allthings2all	130	8	27
33	-2	Ethical Martini	26	45	69
34	27	Offsetting Behaviour	37	55	39
35	-2	Liberty Scott	35	57	44
36	9	Stephenfranks.co.nz	43	47	46
37	-1	Hot Topic	27	53	74
38	-3	Keeping Stock	22	69	62
39	-10	Derek’s blog	100	37	6
40	new	Artichoke	123	30	3
41	6	Hitting Metal With A Hammer	44	38	85
42	1	Lindsay Mitchell	24	63	81
43	19	Silent running	66	6	182
44	-2	Clint Heine and Friends	31	73	64
45	12	Big News	19	62	127
46	-9	sustain:if:able kiwi	69	28	83
47	-15	Capitalism is bad	177	15	21
48	-10	Radical Cross Stitch	41	111	7
49	new	Lively	61	42	86
50	22	Knowledge Workers	28	61	122
51	4	Media Law Journal	66	66	31
52	19	Educational Origami	10%	84	22
53	-3	Oswald Bastable’s Ranting	28	87	74
54	new	A cat of impossible colour	52	86	33
55	-14	Homepaddock	11	130	40
56	-10	Christchurch Daily Photo	73	39	93
57	-6	from the morgue	92	49	57
10%	-4	Reading the Maps	68	68	49
59	-19	Poneke’s Weblog	36	132	8
60	-7	Just Left	57	102	15
61	-13	Object dart	97	60	45
62	26	Educating the dragon	78	83	20
63	-14	Anti-Dismal	33	110	65
64	-20	Barnsley Bill	20	127	65
65	-9	Pacific Empire	96	40	96
66	2	Anarchia	127	27	90
67	35	Red Alert	95	32	145
68	-16	Pundit	82	19	185
69	new	Teaching Sagittarian	64	67	99
70	-3	Put ‘em all on an island	82	80	55
71	4	John Key	48	70	139
72	new	Signposts	42	105	81
73	-13	Christchurch City Libraries Blog	125	72	29
74	-10	En Avant	102	77	49
75	-17	The Hive	98	95	28
76	-10	roarprawn	38	108	115
77	-9	Evolving Newsroom	82	120	24
78	new	Contradiction	157	47	76
79	-14	Kotare	137	94	19
80	-10	Policy Blog	126	36	154
81	-7	Greenpeace New Zealand Weblog	65	43	233
82	new	Adventure into romance	143	34	149
83	-20	Greg’s Blog	148	90	29
84	-4	NewZblog	117	65	101
85	new	Luddite Journo	79	89	113
86	0	Einstein Music Journal	56	97	146
87	new	Robyn’s Secret Passage	113	109	37
88	-15	ACT New Zealand blogs	92	26	289
89	-8	Bowalley Road	112	99	71
90	-13	Bioblog	55	81	219
91	-15	Prodigal Kiwi(s) Blog	89	150	18
92	-10	Greenflame	139	74	108
93	30	Liberation	63	153	51
94	-15	Samuel Dennis	45	124	174
95	6	CORE	104	93	131
96	-3	Art and my life	140	92	94
97	-8	Webweaver’s world	135	122	59
98	-15	Monkey with typewriter	54	160	84
99	-15	Bits on the side	175	75	121
100	8	Say Hello	110	101	132

101 – 150
Against the current Alliance Party of New Zealand Aotearoa: a wider perspective Auckland Blog Beautiful Monsters Being Frank Blessed Economist café pacific Canterbury Atheists Christian News NZ Daily New Zealand News Dave Gee: Life from Right Field Education investigation Eye of the Fish Fighting talk g.blog get the skinny:[from skinny]	goNZo Freakpower Brains Trust Hamilton Daily Photo Henry Humanitarian Chronicle Joe Hendren Karl du Fresne KiwiSmithFamily Lefthandpalm Love in a tent Micky’s muses . . From the antipodes Mulholland Drive NZ Blogosphere PM of NZ Put up thy Sword! RobiNZ Personal Blog SageNZ Semper Vita	Sharing the addiction Socialist Aotearoa Stargazer Su’s Sound Bites Tauranga Daily Photo TBR.cc the gossip The Republican Movement of Aotearoa new Zealand The sound of butterflies The world according to Misha theSection59Blog This is halfpie Thoughtspurs Unity Blog whoar.co.nz Workers Party

150 – 200
A Sensitivity to Things Alf Grumble Ali’s blog All embracing, but underwhelming Bill English Blogging it real Brian Edward’s Media Canvassing for opinion cbmilne33 Contra Celsum Cr!key Creek dad4justice definitive Developing the mind of Christ Distractions ragonsingDer Dunedin Public Libraries news and reviews blog	Ellis in Wellyland ereport Family integrity Funerals and snakes Genius Home Education Foundation I see red ki ta himi titiro Leigh Blackall Lunchbox Manaia Kindergarten Maori Party Naketa’s Blog Neil Stockley Nevermind Not quite perfect NZ Conservative	Opposable thumb People Points Physics Stop Planet NZ Tech Prog blog rob’s blockhead blog simon.net.nz Spleen Stanselen Star Studded Super Step The Fairfacts Media Show Thinking Matters Talk Truth Seeker Turning the supertanker United Future Website.net.nz

201 – 370 (Check out the link at the top of this post to see theses rates and more…)

Topics: Visits to website | No Comments »

Family Integrity #460 — Youtube video seen as desperate: Barnardos

By admin | July 1, 2009

Family Integrity #460 — Youtube video seen as desperate: Barnardos

Forwarded to you by:

Craig Smith

Family Integrity

Youtube video seen as desperate: Barnardos

By ESTHER LAUAKI – Kapi-Mana News

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/communities/kapi-mana-news/2549421/

Barnardos has rubbished a Youtube video posted by a local man about the “anti-smacking” referendum, saying it was a desperate attempt at a smear campaign.

The controversial referendum, to be held between July 30 and August 21, on the so-called anti-smacking legislation, will ask Kiwis to vote yes or no to the question, “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”

Porirua resident Renton MacLachlan, who opposes the legislation, posted a political satire about the topic on the popular website Youtube earlier this month.

Supporters of the law, Barnardos, took exception to the video in which Mr MacLachlan conducts an ‘in-depth’ interview with a fictional Barnardos employee (also played by Mr MacLachlan) called Dennis Morris-Traveler, spokesperson for the ‘yes vote’ campaign.

“I’ve been a supporter of parents’ rights to raise their own children for some time,” he told Kapi-Mana News.

“Barnardos and all other organisations like them who support the bill are saying that every parent that has ever smacked their child to discipline them – that’s most parents in New Zealand – is a child abuser. I think for an outfit like Barnardos to step into a public arena and label all these parents child abusers is outrageous.”

The organisation asked Mr MacLachlan to remove the video upon legal advice that its rights had been violated by him purporting to be an employee and expressing views that were not necessarily its own.

Every Child Counts project manager Deborah Morris-Travers, the real spokesperson for the yes-vote campaign, said the video was a desperate attempt to boost the opposition’s campaign.

“We here at Barnardos strongly believe that children should not be harmed and we support the safety of children. We’re not about using dirty, defamatory tactics for our campaign. They know that they’re going to lose this referendum and that this legislation will stay the same. The video is evidence of just how desperate they are really getting.”

Mr MacLachlan rejected her sentiments and said she was “whistling in the dark”.

“Consistently for years 85 per cent of people have rejected their arguments and for her to say it’s a desperate attempt is over the top.” He said Barnardos was one of several organisations he alluded to in the clip and feels they over-reacted.

“It was ridiculous. Anyone with half a brain could see that it was meant as a comedy. Spoof and satire are pretty well covered under freedom of speech law so I went ahead with it.”

Barnardos is not pursuing legal action.

Watch the video

Topics: Family Integrity email newsletter, Referendum, Youtube | No Comments »

Family Integrity #459 — SPCS Media Release: Condomania, S. 59 and YesVote Silence

By admin | July 1, 2009

Family Integrity #459 — SPCS Media Release: Condomania, S. 59 and YesVote Silence

Forwarded to you by:

Craig Smith

Family Integrity

From: David Lane
Sent: Tuesday, 30 June 2009 7:28 p.m.
To: spcs.org@gmail.com

Subject: SPCS Media Release: Condomania, S. 59 and YesVote Silence

Scoop News

Condomania, S. 59 and YesVote Silence

Tuesday, 30 June 2009, 5:26 pm
Press Release: spcs

The Society for Promotion of Community Standards Inc.
P.O. Box 13-683 Johnsonville

New Zealanders may have forgotten that in 1988 Deborah Morris-Travis, currently spokesperson for the VoteYes anti-smacking campaign, while the then Minister of Youth Affairs, vigorously lobbied to have condom vending machines in all our schools and colleges and in all places where young people gather. She failed in her “condomania bid” as it was referred to. The Dominon Post (30 June) has reported that Board members of a primary school in her sedate seaside hometown of sunny Otaki, have resigned in the wake of the fallout over children as young as 6 and 10 at the school being forced by their teacher to pick up used condoms in the school grounds. Parents are outraged at the failure of St Peter Chanel’s board of management to deal with the condomania scandal and associated health and safety issues involved.

However, it is the use of FORCE for the purpose of correction – in her own sunny ‘backyard’ – that must be of more serious concern to Ms Morris-Travers, her employer Barnardos and her YesVote coalition, given that “the anti-smacking law” they lobby so tirelessly for, at huge financial cost, outlaws the use of any kind of FORCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF CORRECTION. Surely reports on the use of FORCE by teaches to make Otaki primary school children pick up used condoms as a punishment for misbehaving, failure to complete homework, or whatever; should have prompted the entire Yes Vote Coaliton into action: including Barnardos CEO Mr Murray Eldredge and their spokespeson Ms Morris-Travers.

However, there’s been total silence over this condomania – forced child labour scandal.from the Yes Vote coalition who claim they oppose force being used against children for correcton

For much more go to:

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0906/S00342.htm

Topics: Family Integrity email newsletter, Referendum | No Comments »

Should a smack be a criminal offence? – Vote NO

By admin | July 1, 2009

Protect Good Parents. Tackle the real causes of child abuse.

I’ve got slow internet! | video not working? try upgrading Adobe Flash Player

“““““““““““““““““““““““““““`

Check out this website:

http://www.voteno.org.nz/video.htm

Topics: Referendum | 1 Comment »

$9 Million Found To Cover Referendum

By admin | July 1, 2009

MEDIA RELEASE

1 July 2009

$9 Million Found To Cover Referendum

Family First NZ says that Treasury figures reveal that $52 million has been budgeted for social policy advice for the financial year and that only a portion of this is needed to cover the cost of the Referendum.

“The upcoming Referendum is simply an outcome of political deafness but its cost is covered under projected government spending,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

“$52 million has been budgeted for Social Policy Advice under the Social Development Vote, and includes ‘the provision of information to, and discussion for, the public and other agencies on social policy issues’.”

“The anti-smacking law is a massive social issue which has affected the role of parents and the functioning of families. The Referendum will allow the public to finally have a say on this issue after being completely ignored by the politicians.”

“Getting the anti-smacking law right will also have economic benefits. Latest figures on child abuse reported in the Christchurch Press show an incredible 2/3’rds of notifications to CYF requiring no further action.”

“By correcting the anti-smacking law to avoid unnecessary investigation and intervention, and with $433 million being budgeted for CYF according to Treasury papers, the $9 million on the Referendum is not just about a flawed law but correcting an expensive exercise in mis-defining real abuse.”

“We can now refer to the Referendum as Social Policy Advice,” says Mr McCoskrie. “Its cost is covered.”

ENDS

For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

Bob McCoskrie – National Director

Mob. 027 55 555 42

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | No Comments »

Smacking poll in hands of mother

By admin | June 30, 2009

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/politics/2550600/Smacking-poll-in-hands-of-mother

Smacking poll in hands of mother

By NICK VENTER – The Dominion Post

Last updated 05:00 30/06/2009

LAST WORD: The referendum on the anti-smacking law will not go ahead if promoter Sheryl Savill withdraws her petition.

The dark-haired, bespectacled woman talking forcefully across an outdoor table laden with scones, cake and drinks on Family First’s pro-smacking website does not have a bionic arm and cannot run faster than a speeding car. But Sheryl Savill is New Zealand’s $6 million woman.

The mother of two and policeman’s wife will have the final say this week on whether another $6m is spent on a referendum that Prime Minister John Key says the Government will ignore.

That is because the petition calling for a referendum on the anti-smacking law was submitted in her name.

A spokeswoman for the chief electoral officer said yesterday that $700,000 had already been spent preparing for the August referendum and a public information campaign costing $2.2m had also begun.

If the referendum goes ahead it will cost another $6m. However, if Ms Savill withdraws her petition before the governor-general issues the writ, the last day for which is Friday, the referendum can be cancelled.

Family First director Bob McCoskrie and petition organiser Larry Baldock say that will not happen unless the Government agrees to decriminalise smacking.

“The consequences of this law remaining in New Zealand are far too serious and will cost the country far more than the cost of the referendum,” Mr Baldock said.

He said Ms Savill, who is in the United States on a family holiday, was chosen as the petition promoter because she was a mother.

“She was concerned about the law and as a young mum felt she was prepared to put her name to it.”

Ms Savill, 40, has asked petition organisers not to give her contact details to the news media, but her views are explained in the video produced for the Vote No website. “I’m the mum of two lovely girls and when I realised how the anti-smacking law would directly affect the way I was raising my girls I knew that I had to do something,” she says, children and friends seated nearby.

“A light smack done in a good home that’s full of love sure isn’t child abuse.”

Mr McCoskrie said Ms Savill’s girls were aged about eight and 11. He declined to say whether she smacked them. “I can’t answer that. I won’t answer that on her behalf. I’m not going to comment on her parenting practice. All I know is that she is supporting the law change.”

Ms Savill, of South Auckland, works as a “communicator” for a conservative critics say Right wing evangelical organisation, Focus on the Family. Its headquarters are in the United States and it offers advice on parenting and marriage.

Family First Comment : The Referendum is actually in the hands of the Prime Minister. 300,000-plus signatures, 80% support for amending the anti-smacking law. Only the PM can prevent a costly Referendum. And Sheryl isn’t the $9 million dollar woman. Each person who signed the petition (300k) is the $30 protester!!!

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | No Comments »

Woman behind smacking referendum ‘concerned’ mum

By admin | June 30, 2009

http://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/63271/woman-behind-smacking-referendum-039concerned039-mum

Woman behind smacking referendum

‘concerned’ mum

Mon, 29 Jun 2009

The one woman with the power to halt the $9 million “anti-smacking” referendum is a “concerned” South Auckland married mother of two.

Do you think the referendum should go ahead?

A Research New Zealand survey of 481 people released yesterday found 77 percent of respondents thought the referendum was a waste of money, 18 percent supported it and 5 percent were unsure.

Prime Minister John Key said it was up to the referendum’s instigator to decide whether to go ahead or not.

The referendum asks: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”.

Opponents of a 2007 law change, which removed the reasonable force defence in child abuse cases, want the public to vote no.

Sheryl Savill, who is currently on a two-week family holiday in the United States and unavailable to media, works for Focus on the Family New Zealand – a member of the Vote No coalition – and is the instigator of the poll.

“Her role as proposer is simply because of being a concerned mum”, Family First director Bob McCoskrie said.

Mrs Savill, 40, has two daughters with her policeman husband and has worked for Focus since 2006.

She is the programme manager for the parent education programme Drug Proof Your Kids.

In an opinion piece for the New Zealand Centre for Political Research in August, Mrs Savill said she did not normally get involved in politics but “knew she had to do something”.

“The government was intruding, yet again, into the lives or parents and, as a mum, I was really concerned about the impact that this type of bill would have on my family,” she wrote.

“To remove and undermine a parent’s authority in their own home is a treacherous area for the State to wade into.”

New Zealand needs to deal with “real causes” of child abuse, Mrs Savill said.

Mr McCoskrie said that, “as discussed” with Mrs Savill before she left on holiday, the referendum would only be withdrawn if the law was amended.

“The responsibility for the referendum continuing currently lies fairly and squarely with the Government.”

The referendum has been criticised as being confusing, as some people who support the status quo may think that is what they are voting for if they tick no.

The Government believes the law is working as intended and police are only prosecuting serious cases.

The non-binding, citizens-initiated referendum will be held by postal ballot from July 31 to August 21.

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | No Comments »

Read real-life stories of how the Anti-smacking law has hurt Kiwi families…

By admin | June 29, 2009

From: http://www.voteno.org.nz/

Click on the writing below:

Topics: Normal Families-Police/CYFs since Section 59 amended, Referendum, Section 59 - The Bill, Some Normal Families/Police and CYFs since Section 59 a | 1 Comment »

CITIZENS INITIATED REFERENDUM REPORT

By admin | June 29, 2009

CIR Update no.32

CITIZENS INITIATED REFERENDUM REPORT

Only 55 days to referendum day! August 21.

Greetings, Another busy week as media continued to carry more news of the impending referendum.
Congratulations to Bob McCoskrie and team on a successful launch of the http://www.voteno.org.nz website. If you haven’t seen it yet I encourage you to take a good look. Lots of useful downloads and information. Simon Barnett has done a great job fronting it with a 90 sec video, and has been prepared to make his stand for the principles he believes in. Thanks Simon, Jody and family. We are proud of you!

Also Muriel Newman’s NZCPR weekly newsletter was entitled “A smack in the face of democracy.” Muriel wrote a great article and invited me to be her guest commentator. Click on the link above if you haven’t received it direct. None of these events were co-ordinated or planned but the timing turned out to be great.

The controversy over Christine Rankin’s appointment to the Families Commission has helped keep media interest alive this week with stories about her being required by the PM to not actively campaign for a ‘NO’ vote. You may have heard Chief Families Commissioner Jan Pryor say on National Radio that there had been robust debate amongst commissioners previously about the Families Commissions official position on the anti-smacking law. Since in her own words she said the debate was robust, there is a clear indication that the seven previous commissioners were not all in support of the law change. Hear the interview here

Now with two new Commissioners that we believe would be opposed to the anti-smacking law, it would be very interesting indeed if the Families Commission had a fresh debate and vote concerning it’s official position of support for the law change.
You can hear my interview with Geoff Robinson here.
Perhaps if you were of a mind to write to the Chief Families Commissioner to urge them to re-open the discussion it would be a good way of supporting Christine Rankin.

Last week we had several meetings with media and creative production teams to finalise plans for Radio and TV advertising campaigns for vote NO. Under the laws governing CIR anyone wanting advertise to promote one of the answers to the referendum question cannot spend more than $50,000. View Sec 42 of the CIR Act

It is fairly obvious already that the Yes vote coalition has been spending up large to spread their half-truths and misinformation. I will give you some examples of this next week.

We need your help to make our campaign to the finish line in this long battle to make sure ‘the voice of the people is not drowned out!’ We have raised approx one third of our budget so far. Can you help us raise the rest of the total of $50,000? Whether you can afford $10, $20, $50, $500 or much more, whatever the amount, it will be an investment for the future protection of families in New Zealand.

You can send your checks made out to CIR Referendum, P.O. Box 9228, Greerton, 3142 Tauranga or direct Internet banking to our solicitors, McKenzie Elvin Trust account

For CIR Referendum Trust 02 0432 0393 450-02

Or donate on line with credit card via our Kiwi Party website donation page DONATE
100% of all donations will be used for the advertising campaign. The ads will not be mentioning the Kiwi Party.

Finally this week, a woman who writes under the pseudonym of Nonen Titi, has self published a book called ‘The Happiness Inquisition.” This fictional novel attempts to portray what the possible ramifications of the anti-smacking law will be in our communities and I found it a worthwhile read. You may find it useful to give to a friend to help explain why this law is bad and must go.

To view the book cover and make any orders click on her website link. The cost is $10 incl postage in NZ. http://www.nonentiti.com

Warm regards,
Larry Baldock

Topics: Referendum | No Comments »

Referendum Cost Unfortunate Outcome of Political ‘Deafness’

By admin | June 28, 2009

MEDIA RELEASE
28 June 2009
Referendum Cost Unfortunate Outcome of Political ‘Deafness’
Family First NZ is not surprised by a poll today that says that 77% of NZ’ers think the Referendum is a waste
of money, and says that the government should save the taxpayer $9 million on a postal referendum and
simply fix the anti-smacking law now as demanded by 80% of kiwis.
“It is incredible that in the midst of a recession, the government will be spending that amount of money to tell
them what they already know – that the law should be fixed,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family
First NZ.
“But that is the unfortunate price of ‘political deafness’. The blame for having to even have a Referendum is
pointed fairly and squarely at the politicians. Even supporters of the Referendum would say that the
Referendum is a waste of money – but completely necessary in the circumstances.”
“The Referendum has resulted in a huge amount of time, energy and resources being spent collecting the
300,000-plus signatures to force the Referendum in the hope that the government would be spurred to amend
the law and target the real causes of child abuse. Unfortunately they remained deaf.”
“The law can be easily fixed by removing the criminality of parents who use reasonable force for the purpose
of correcting their children.
“The politicians have tried to paint the Referendum as confusing. They should try explaining the anti-smacking
law to parents,” says Mr McCoskrie.
“NZ’ers are crying out for politicians to listen to the voice of the people and to tackle the real causes of child
abuse, without criminalising and threatening good parents with investigation and interference from already
overworked police and CYF social workers,” says Mr McCoskrie.
ENDS
For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:
Bob McCoskrie – NATIONAL DIRECTOR
Mob. 027 55 555 42

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | No Comments »

Senior Labour MP Says Referendum Not Confusing

By admin | June 28, 2009

MEDIA RELEASE

29 June 2009

Senior Labour MP Says Referendum Not Confusing

Family First NZ is welcoming comments by a senior Labour MP that the Referendum wording is not confusing.

Pete Hodgson was a Minister of Health, Minister for Economic Development, Minister of Research, Science and Technology and Minister for Tertiary Education under the previous Labour government.

A constituent recently wrote to the MP and said:

““Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offense in NZ” This is a most unambiguous question: given that the defense of reasonable force was repealed in the legislation passed last year as part of Sue Bradford’s bill and therefore parents who even lightly tapped their child could be prosecuted if the police elected to do so. It is misleading for anyone to say the above is an ambiguous question. It is patently clear what it is asking. The reason to argue for ambiguity is to try and confuse the issue in order to undermine the referendum. To refuse to vote on the basis of the ambiguity of the question is the ultimate act of fence sitting and self preservation. If one believes the question is wrong then one and the legislation is correct then one should vote accordingly!”

In response, Mr Hodgson simply wrote “agreed”.

“The smokescreen which has been created around the Referendum has simply been an attempt by some politicians to attempt to ridicule and dismiss an issue that they don’t want to resurface,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “It has been a direct attack on the process of democracy. And the cost can only be attributed to their deafness on this issue.”

Family First is calling on the government to amend the anti-smacking law so that a non-abusive smack for the purpose of correction is not a criminal offence.

“300,000 signatures, an 80%-average in all the polls, and now a senior Labour MP, shows the country is not confused as to what they want on this issue,” says Mr McCoskrie.

ENDS

For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

Bob McCoskrie – National Director

Mob. 027 55 555 42

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | No Comments »

Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

By admin | June 26, 2009

Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

Friday, 26 June 2009, 11:51 am

Anti-smacking legislation counterproductive and an insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

Peter Tashkoff, Spokesperson for Maori issues

Anti-smacking legislation is not simply useless, but is in fact making the problem worse. What’s more it is an insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga of whanau, ACT New Zealand Maori Issues Spokesperson Peter Tashkoff said today.

“This well meaning legislation is based on a false ideology that attacks the Tino-Rangatiratanga of families, and has had the opposite effect to what even its supporters intended,” Mr. Tashkoff said.

“Why do we have this legislation to begin with? It was sold to us as a way to stop kids being violently assaulted by their caregivers, but now we see that if anything, things have gotten worse. This is known as the law of unintended consequences; it’s what you get when you pass laws based on ideology. The supporters of the bill are now claiming that was never the intention, and that somehow the bill was just meant to make us all nicer people.

“It’s rubbish of course, all that the bill does is move one notch closer to a situation where the people have no power and the state has it all. If a child refuses to go to school the whanau are not allowed to lift a finger to make them, yet a complete stranger working for the state is allowed to use whatever force is needed to do so. In the same way, you can’t smack a child that refuses to obey, but try not paying your taxes and just watch what extent the state can go to in order to force your obedience. This is an insult to the dignity of families and an insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga. When as a country did we ever buy into the ridiculous notion that strangers care more about kids than their parents do?

“And look at the effect on whanau. Sure its fine if you have the regulation 2.4 kids, or your kids are very young, but look at the larger families, which is where Maori are at, and see what’s going on. I’ve heard reports of kids running riot the length and breadth of the country. This law, which was meant to make things better, has simply loaded more stress onto families and has led to more, not less, conflict in the home. Supporters of the law have tried to pass off this effect as being as a result of ‘higher reporting by the police to CYFs’ but that’s simply a rationalisation to excuse an effect that doesn’t agree with their ideology. Parents in these homes know that after the law was passed children became more challenging and more undisciplined, and that conflict and stress levels in the home rose, not fell. The law has made things worse not better.

“Irrespective of a small number of criminally minded people that carry out extreme violence whether to children or adults, there can be no question that the people that care most about kids are their own parents, not strangers paid by

“That’s some of the reasons why the

ACT party stands for the repeal of

this anti-smacking legislation, and

that’s why I do too,”

said Mr Tashkoff

ENDS

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | 1 Comment »

Heather Roy – Anti-Smacking Referendum

By admin | June 26, 2009

Speech: Roy – Anti-Smacking Referendum

Wednesday, 24 June 2009, 3:55 pm
Speech: ACT New Zealand

Anti-Smacking Referendum

Hon Heather Roy, ACT Deputy Leader
Hon Heather Roy – General Debate, Slot One; Parliament; Wednesday, June 24 2009.

Violence is not acceptable in any shape or form. It is a plague that haunts our communities, and violence against the vulnerable – against our children – is totally abhorrent.

I say that as a mother, and as a politician. That’s why we have laws that are explicit about violent behaviour and which impose punishments on those in our society who choose to inflict violence on others.

The Anti-Smacking Bill – repeal of Section 59 – was promoted as the solution to the terrible abuse suffered by too many children. Details published around these cases – the Kahui twins, Lillybing, Nia Glassie and far too many other children – were so repugnant that I couldn’t read them.

But the Anti-Smacking Bill is not the answer to stopping child abuse. The debate has relied on emotion rather than reason, and focussed on rules rather than results. The unintended result of the smacking ban has been to criminalise hundreds of thousands of good parents.

Those who beat children to a pulp have never paid attention to the law and never will. The police have been told to use their discretion when complaints are made, but this makes a farce of the law. Laws must be clear, enforceable and regularly enforced to be effective. This is not the case we have now.

What really surprised New Zealanders during the anti-smacking debate was the flip-flop of the National Party. They did a complete U-turn after opposing the Bill all the way through.

It is only the ACT Party that believes that intrusion of the State into the homes of good parents is unacceptable.

More than 300,000 people signed a petition to hold a referendum on the question: should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand.

It is a question that has divided the country – not 50/50; not even 60/40. It has split the New Zealand Parliament from the rest of New Zealand. A Parliament that voted 113 to eight in support of the Anti-Smacking Bill, but which ignored polls showing public opinion was opposed to the Bill by a ratio of four to one.

It is no wonder the people of New Zealand feel alienated – that the politicians are not listening. ACT supports this referendum; we support the people of New Zealand having a say; we support democracy. We do so because this Parliament has refused to listen to the people.

Prime Minister John Key has dismissed the referendum as an irrelevance and that the result will not change his mind. I’d ask the Prime Minister to reflect on those statements and consider the anguish and confusion that the Anti-Smacking Bill has had around the country.

Proponents of the law say it is working; that it is reducing child abuse – but 13 children have been killed since this law was passed 25 months ago. The long list of names we had before the Bill was passed continues to grow.

This law targets the wrong people. The thugs and bullies, the child abusers, the real criminals – not good parents – will continue to assault and murder children. It won’t stop the James Whakarurus, Delcelia Witikas or Tamati Pokaias from being abused and killed.

What it does do is frighten, confuse and prevent loving parents from parenting. The ACT Party is the only Party in this House that opposed the anti-smacking law; we were the only Party to publicly support the referendum to allow New Zealanders to have a say and we remain the only party committed to reforming the law to protect loving New Zealand families.

ENDS

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | No Comments »

Real Issues – Referendum

By admin | June 26, 2009

Real Issues – Referendum

Friday, 26 June 2009, 9:24 am

Real Issues No. 344 – Referendum

Maxim Institute – Real Issues – No. 344 25 June 2009 http://www.maxim.org.nz

REFERENDUM ANGST

The continuing debate over the referendum on child discipline took a turn for the surreal this week, with politicians from across the spectrum lining up to attack the referendum question as nonsensical, saying things like ‘the law is working’ and ‘the question is weird.’ The question we are supposed to answer does not seem hard. ‘Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?’ Committed to his brokered ‘compromise’ John Key can’t afford to admit the law is not working. Phil Goff can’t afford to offend elements in his own party, ideologically committed to the ban on physical discipline. And neither of them want to ignore the large majority of Kiwis who keep telling pollsters they support a good parent’s right to make disciplinary decisions. So, they pretend contempt for the question, and count on a low turnout. This in itself is a damning indictment. The growing popularity of referenda and public distrust in politicians, are the products of people feeling that the government is distant, that they don’t care what we think. Regardless of the merits of the question (whose limitations are unavoidable given that it must be a yes/no question) the gist of the referendum is clear to both the Yes and No campaigns, and the public should have their say on it. Contempt for the democratic process is far too general across the spectrum–from Parliament, when it abuses urgency, to leaders when they disregard the feedback they are receiving from constituents. Luckily for the country, our democracy does not belong to them alone–it is a precious right belonging to all of us. From the end of July, we should all do our duty and value the imperfect but vital process of democracy–especially when others are not.

Enrol to vote http://www.elections.org.nz

Topics: News Media/Press Releases, Referendum | No Comments »

« Previous Entries

Categories

New Zealand National Anthem

Vote No

Search

Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

Blogroll

International Websites

NZ Blogs

NZ Websites

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Tags

Don’t Vote Labour

Unity For Liberty

abort73

Archives

Statcounter since February 2008

Meta

Blog Catalog since May 2008

Scoop News

Condomania, S. 59 and YesVote Silence

Bob McCoskrie – National Director

Mob. 027 55 555 42

Smacking poll in hands of mother

Woman behind smacking referendum

‘concerned’ mum

MEDIA RELEASE

Bob McCoskrie – National Director

Mob. 027 55 555 42

Anti-smacking law insult to Tino-Rangatiratanga

“That’s some of the reasons why the

ACT party stands for the repeal of

this anti-smacking legislation, and

that’s why I do too,”

said Mr Tashkoff

Speech: Roy – Anti-Smacking Referendum

Real Issues – Referendum