Larry Baldock: “You will not drown out the voice of the people”

Kiwi Party singles out drugs, booze

By GRANT MILLER – Manawatu Standard | Monday, 07 July 2008

Random drug-testing in schools, violent criminals losing any right to parole and increasing the penalty for class A drug manufacture and distribution to the same as murder are the planks of a hardline law and order policy from the Kiwi Party.

“Those profiting from the manufacture and sale of class A drugs are murderers in my opinion,” party leader Larry Baldock said at a regional conference in Palmerston North.

The maximum penalty for importing, manufacturing or supplying class A drugs is already life imprisonment, however.

Conspiring to supply class A drugs carries a maximum penalty of 14 years’ imprisonment.

Mr Baldock said drug and alcohol abuse was at the root of much of the nation’s crime.

“Our young people need a strong message to encourage them to make the right choices with regards to binge drinking and drug usage,” he said.

“Random testing would help identify those in need of help and make it clear that we do not intend to stand idly by while they waste their youth and potential. . .”

A World Health Organisation report found that 42 percent of New Zealanders had used cannabis.

Mr Baldock, who had himself used cannabis, said it nearly ruined him.

Lowering the drinking age from 20 to 18 was a mistake, he said.

People alleged to have committed violent offences should not be eligible for bail and violent criminals would not get parole or home detention.

Hail pelted the region in the hours before the conference and the weather was freezing throughout the day.

“For hardy folk like yourselves, it’s a summer’s day really, isn’t it?” party president and emcee Frank Naea joked at the Palmerston North Convention Centre.

Mr Baldock, who led efforts to bring about a referendum on smacking, said the Kiwi Party was not a single-issue party, though repealing anti-smacking legislation had been its top priority.

“Parents should be able to raise their children without the fear of the police turning up at the door,” he said.

“Helen Clark, Sue Bradford, Peter Dunne, John Key – you will not drown out the voice of the people.”

The Christian-based party played clips from the Amazing Grace movie, which depicted anti-slavery campaigner William Wilberforce presenting 390,000 signatures – roughly the same number collected against anti-smacking legislation.

Mr Baldock was frosty about the prime minister’s record of “social engineering”.

He said Miss Clark’s agenda of “humanism, socialism and secularism” undermined traditional Kiwi values exemplified by Sir Edmund Hillary.

The Kiwi Party hoped anger over anti-smacking legislation would translate into votes for the party at this year’s election.

Mr Baldock said he believed the party could cross the 5 percent threshold needed to earn representation in Parliament – or that he could win the Tauranga electorate.

If successful, the party would not support Labour.

It would also “make sure National does not return to the harsh social policies of the 1990s”.

People wanted to get rid of Labour but they were “not really that stoked about National”.


4 responses to “Larry Baldock: “You will not drown out the voice of the people””

  1. Mrs Dianne Woodward Avatar
    Mrs Dianne Woodward

    United Future Peter Dunne’s DONE dictating as Gordon Copeland and Larry Baldock (Kiwi Party) listened to 8 out of 10 Kiwis and dropped dictating Dunne. Smacking is child abuse says Mother of all Mothers Ms Sue Bradford (Greens), NZ’s 2nd female PM Miss Clark(Labour), Childrens Commissioner Cindy Kiro, Jim Anderton.
    Dobbing parents in for using a smack to protect or correct children results in prosecuted parents,John Key plus all in the National Party except Rich promise to reject the antismacking law immediately a parent’s prosecuted for a smack. Poor overwoked Police (all with different ideas on what is inconsequential or not) will waste time investigating each reported smack so historic Section 59 must be restored; it’s reasonable and worked. Sheryl Savill’s Petition for a Referendum with 390,000 signatures represents what 85% of us think.
    Actually believing a Smack is Abuse are organisations Barnadoes NZ, Plunket (God knows why this Labour Government slashed funding to Plunket Nurse home visits which recognized at-risk babies instantly), Save the Children, Unicef, National Network Stopping Violence Services, EPOCH NZ, National Collective of Independent Women’s Refuges. Christine Rankin (For the Sake of our Children Trust) and Simon Barnett (TV Host of Stars In Their Eyes) know and stated publicly on TV3 Campbell Live smacking debate 2/4/07 that employees in these organisations don’t agree that a stinging smack should be a crime, so speaking smacking and bashing in the same breath is alarming.Maxim Institute’s article on smackers and Chris Carter’s monthly Investigate Magazine comment sums smacking up.Britain rejects antismacking law along with Brian Tamaki, John Tamahere & Lyndsay Perigo, Rodney Hide, Heather Roy,Taito Phillip Feild and Bob McCoskrie (Familyfirst) speak language Mum and Dad understand.Enough is enough truth will prevail regardless of the PC Brigade’s beliefs and dictatorship.

  2. Pauline Keating Avatar
    Pauline Keating

    Could you please stop saying that the “vast majority of New Zealand people voted against the anti-smacking legislation”. ALMOST 50% OF THE NEW ZEALAND POPULATION DID NOT VOTE. I chose not to vote because the referendum question was a LEADING question and, therefore, ambiguous. I strongly support the anti-smacking legislation.

  3. This law and everything surrounding it sickens me. It sickens me because I am scared. I am scared because I love my one year old boy more than ANYTHING and am concerned for his future.
    I am afraid that if I break the law and smack my child I may have the police turning up at my home to question me and my son, then refer me onto CYF for monitoring. However if I dont break the law and resort to positive reinforcement, thinking chairs and ‘letting him just work it out for himself’, I will have a small boy that opposes all authority, is disrespectful and has no fear of consequence for bad behaviour.
    What kind of choice is this?

  4. Pauline Keating, I am confused about your comment. You say you strongly support the anti-smacking legislation, so wouldn’t that also mean you would agree that a smack should be a criminal offence as that is what the law states. In that case wouldn’t it have been simple for you to vote ‘yes’ in the recent referendum.
    Sounds like you are just regurgitating Sue Bradford’s excuses for a minority ‘yes’ vote.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *