• 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 Press Release: Friday, 26 June 2009
  • Recent Posts

  • Networkedblogs

  • Recent Comments

  • Christian Blog Topsites

    Christian Blog Topsites
  • Tags

  • Don’t Vote Labour

    www.dontvotelabour.org.nz
  • Unity For Liberty


    Anti-Smacking Petition
    Signature Counter


  • September 2020
    M T W T F S S
    « Aug    
     123456
    78910111213
    14151617181920
    21222324252627
    282930  
  • abort73

    For more information about abortion and what you can do to help, please visit... Abort73.com http://www.abort73.com/
  • Archives

  • Statcounter since February 2008

  • online counter
  • Meta

  • Blog Catalog since May 2008

  • « | Main | »

    Proposal to withdraw the referendum

    By HEF 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.

    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),

    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 »

    One Response to “Proposal to withdraw the referendum”

    1. Family Integrity #460 — Before you VOTE in the Referendum consider this | Family Integrity Says:
      July 3rd, 2009 at 6:35 am

      […] Proposal to withdraw the referendum […]

    Comments