Family Integrity

Category: Section 59 – MPs

  • Another Smacking Poll – Same Response

    MEDIA RELEASE

    29 September 2008

    Another Smacking Poll – Same Response

    Family First NZ says that the NZ Herald poll showing 86% opposition to the anti-smacking law is further proof that the law is fundamentally wrong and should be changed.

    “This is not 86% of NZ’ers who want to ‘thrash and beat’ their children as was suggested by the prime minister last year,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “This is simply NZ’ers saying that a law supposedly designed to tackle child abuse should not end up targeting good parents raising great kids.”

    “Appropriate smacking for the purpose of correcting, training and teaching should never be a crime exposing parents to possible police investigation and CYF intervention.”

    “The law is fundamentally flawed because it fails to deal with the problem it was supposed to – child abuse – and implicates law-abiding parents in the process.”

    The latest poll follows a string of similar polls in 2008 including:

    u 74% parents should be able to smack Research International Feb 2008

    u 85% want law changed to allow light smacking Curia Research – poll commissioned by Family First May 08

    u 85% anti-smacking law should be scrapped TVNZ Website poll June 08

    u 81% say there should be referendum on smacking legislation at this year’s election NZ Herald Poll 25 June 2008 Total Votes: 4624

    u One year on, do you think the anti-smacking Bill has proved to be effective? No 87% Unsure 7% Yes 7% Littlies Magazine online poll July 2008

    “The guarded support for the ‘compromise’ amendment is parents simply hoping that the police may use some common sense in applying this flawed law. Yet evidence has shown that this is not the case, and many parents are more concerned about the way CYF are using the law for unwarranted intervention in good families.”

    “The message is loud and clear to the politicians,” says Mr McCoskrie. “We don’t need a costly referendum to tell us what we already know. Simply change the law so that good parents are not criminalised, and then start targeting the real causes of child abuse including drug and alcohol abuse and family breakdown.”

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie JP – National Director

    Tel. 09 261 2426 | Mob. 027 55 555 42

  • Don’t Vote Greens

    Andy Moore has set up Don’t Vote Greens. He has just  posted this video.

  • FI407-PM Desparate to Shut Down Smacking Referendum

    24 June 2008 – Family Integrity #407 — PM wants to shut down referendum

    The PM has said she reckons there’s not enough time to organise a referendum to occur at the same time as the next general election. What rot. Why is she afraid of the referendum results? Because she knows she’ll be drowned and overwhelmed by opposition to this so-called “anti-smacking” law which in fact makes it a crime for parents to correct their own children.

    TAKE ACTION: Email the Prime Minister and John Key demanding that a Referendum be held at the upcoming Election

    pm@ministers.govt.nz john.key@parliament.govt.nz

    MEDIA RELEASE

    23 June 2008

    Family First NZ is shocked and angry that the Prime Minister is willing to consider spending over $10 million of taxpayers’ money on the anti-smacking Referendum to be held separately from the upcoming election rather than holding it during the upcoming election, which is the most natural timing for it.

    “Helen Clark says that Parliament had spoken on the issue with a near “unanimous mind”. What she fails to say is that both the major parties were ‘whipped’ to vote for the bill, which is highly ironic considering it is the anti-smacking bill,” says Mr McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “The bill would have been dead and buried otherwise, as NZ’ers wanted.”

    “She also fails to hear the voice of over 390,000 signatories who oppose the law change and are demanding a Referendum, and the 80%-plus who want the law changed according to latest polls.”

    “Unless the PM is holding the election before 23 September, the perfect and most economical time to hold the Referendum is Election day in October or November, and any later timing is simply a cynical attempt to try and prevent the voice of NZ’ers being heard.”

    “It would be a sad day for democracy and fairness if that happened.”

    ENDS

    For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

    Bob McCoskrie JP – National Director

    Tel. 09 261 2426 | Mob. 027 55 555 42

    TAKE ACTION: Email the Prime Minister and John Key demanding that a Referendum be held at the upcoming Election
    pm@ministers.govt.nz john.key@parliament.govt.nz

  • Anti-Smacking Law, One Year On

    Thanks Andy for reminding us again of this dark moment in New Zealand’s history 12 months ago. Visit Andy’s site to make comments on this:

    http://section59.blogspot.com/2008/05/anti-smacking-law-one-year-on.html

    Anti-Smacking Law, One Year On

    One year ago, on 2 May 2008, Sue Bradford’s Anti-Smacking Bill passed it’s third reading. The bill had the numbers to pass, however the entire National party turned 180 degrees and all National MPs were forced to vote in favour of the bill.

    Just hours before, John Key and Helen Clark had come to an agreement for a “compromise” on the bill. ACT Party leader, Rodney Hide had this to say, on 3 May:

    “I arrived back in the country jetlagged and flew onto Wellington to learn that an historic peace had broken out with Helen Clark and John Key agreeing to a compromise on the smacking bill. Good on John Key I thought. He’s taken the high ground and made a difference. That’s what I thought. Until I saw the amendment. It makes no difference. Of course, the police have the discretion whether to prosecute. If anyone knows that, it’s Helen Clark!! This
    amendment just confirms it and then adds the confusing terms “inconsequential” and “public interest”. – Rodney Hide: “Ammendment makes no difference”

    The ammendment was the new subsection 4 of Section 59 of the Crimes Act, 1961, and reads:

    (4) To avoid doubt it is affirmed that police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against parents of any child, or those standing in place of any child, in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential

    However, the ridiculous thing is that this “inconsequential” clause was already a part of the law in New Zealand, and applies to all cases where police are considering prosecution.

    Sue Bradford’s bill to repeal Section 59 of the Crimes act
     Criminalises parents who elect to lightly smack their child(ren) occasionally.

    …Everyday mums and dads.

    The bill for repeal passes with

    113 votes for. 93% of the members of Parliament. 17% to 32% of New Zealanders
    Labour, National, Maori, Greens, Progressive, Peter Dunne (United Future), 4 members of NZ First

    8     votes against. 7% of the members of     Parliament. 68% to 83% of New Zealanders
     ACT, Gordon Copeland (ex United Future), Taito Philip Field (ex Labour), 3 NZ First, Judy Turner (United Future)



    And on 21 May 2008, the Governor General abandoned his duty of protecting New Zealand citizens from bad law that had managed to get through the parliamentary process – and gave consent to the bill becoming law.

    On Thursday 21 June 2007, the law came into effect.

    New Zealand has not forgotten this dark moment in her history. This will make itself evident at the 2008 election.

    To read the rest and to make comments on this go to:

    http://section59.blogspot.com/2008/05/anti-smacking-law-one-year-on.html

  • MPs who need to be targeted

    Click here for the names and email addresses of those MPs who need to be targeted over Sue Bradford’s Anti-Smacking Bill
    http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/MPs%20to%20target%20re%20smacking.xls