Family Integrity

Tag: Elections

  • Anti-smacking referendum timing (2)

    From:

    http://www.stephenfranks.co.nz/?p=452

    Speaking 2008 So the PM says she will get the Governor General to order that a postal poll be held next year.

    Parliament can stymie that scheme too. Section 22AB allows a majority vote in Parliament to require that the last day of postal voting be the date of the general election. The words are clear:

    “(6) [If there has been an order to conduct a postal poll, and ] —

    • (a) a general election must be held on a date that is within 12 months after the date on which the indicative referendum petition is presented to the House of Representatives (because of section 17 of the Constitution Act 1986); and

    • (b) the House of Representatives passes a resolution requiring the voting period to close on the polling day for the general election.

    (7) In the circumstances described in subsection (6), the date on which the voting period closes is polling day”

    To have a postal referendum poll close on election day would be almost as good as holding it with the general election, in terms of reminding people of her arrogant interference in ordinary lives and decisions. Only downside would be the $millions wasted on the postal poll, instead of combining it.

    John Armstrong’s piece in this morning’s Herald pointed out that the whole 1984 snap election was organised in 4 weeks.

    Clark’s reasons……A simple “it will be separate from the election because $10m and the criticism are still less to me than having my short-memory voters being reminded of my contempt for their values” would scarcely gain as much attention (and now ridicule).

  • FI414-FAMILY FIRST – Please join our call

    26 June 2008 – Family Integrity #414 — FAMILY FIRST – Please join our call

    Dear Friends,
    Let me encourage you to please join this call to get some MPs to force the referendum to go though at the same time as the election in November.
    There are only 7 MPs to email. A sample letter of what to say and the email addresses are all reproduced below.
    Thanks a million.
    Regards,
    Craig Smith
    National Director
    Family Integrity
    Ph: (06) 357-4399
    Fax: (06) 357-4389
    Family.Integrity@xtra.co.nz
    http://    www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz

    Our Home….Our Castle
    25 Jun 2008

    Would you consider joining our call…

    Call for Majority of Parliament

    To Demand Election Day Referendum

    Family First Media Release 25 June 2008
    Family First NZ has written to the leaders of National, Act, NZ First, United Future and the two independent MP’s asking that they form a majority and require the anti-smacking Referendum to be held on Election Day.

    Under section 22AA (5) of the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993, a Referendum can be scheduled for polling day if the “House of Representatives passes a resolution requiring the indicative referendum to be held on the polling day for the general election.”

    “That is an ordinary 50% majority vote,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “ We are therefore calling on National, Act, NZ First, United Future and the two independent MP’s to acknowledge the voice of over 350,000 people and require that the Referendum be held at the most obvious and cost-efficient time of the upcoming election.”

    “ Any party that votes against this proposal should have the $10 million that it will cost to do a postal ballot charged against their election expenses ,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    “If Sir Robert Muldoon could call a 1984 snap election just four weeks before polling day, and the-then National Government in 1999 take only a week to determine Norm Withers’ petition for a referendum on violent crime would be held on election day, it proves that the Prime Minister’s claim that there is not enough time is a cynical and desparate attempt to sweep the issue under the carpet and undermine democracy.”

    If the Prime Minister goes ahead and forces the Governor-General to declare that it be held by postal voting, then the majority of Parliament can still require the voting period to close on the day of the general election – s22AB(6)(b)

    “This is second best as it is a completely unnecessary waste of taxpayer money,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    JOIN OUR CALL

    Email
    john.key@parliament.govt.nz
    peter.dunne@parliament.govt.nz
    rodney.hide@parliament.govt.nz
    winston.peters@parliament.govt.nz
    gordon.copeland@parliament.govt.nz
    taito.phillip.field@parliament.govt.nz
    pita.sharples@parliament.govt.nz

    View the Act: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1993/0101/latest/DLM318489.html

    LETTER

    We are asking that you form a majority in the House and require the anti-smacking Referendum to be held on Election Day.

    Under section 22AA (5) of the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993, a Referendum can be scheduled for polling day if the “House of Representatives passes a resolution requiring the indicative referendum to be held on the polling day for the general election.”

    That is a simple 50% majority vote.

    We are asking you and your party to acknowledge the voice of over 350,000 people who have signed the petitions and require that the Referendum be held at the most obvious and cost-efficient time of the upcoming election.

    If the Prime Minister goes ahead and forces the Governor-General to declare that it be held by postal voting, then the majority of Parliament can still require the voting period to close on the day of the general election – s22AB(6)(b). This is second best as it is a completely unnecessary waste of taxpayer money.

    If Sir Robert Muldoon could call a 1984 snap election just four weeks before polling day, and the Government in 1999 could take only a week to determine Norm Withers’ petition for a referendum on violent crime would be held on election day, it proves that the Prime Minister’s claim that there is not enough time is an attempt to sweep the issue under the carpet and undermine democracy.

    The ability to get 390,000 signatures on a petition is a major feat in itself. Please help us uphold democracy in New Zealand.

    www.familyfirst.org.nz

  • John Armstrong: Election needn’t delay smacking referendum

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/466/story.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10518214

    Wednesday June 25, 2008 By John Armstrong

    Your Views

    Do you support another attempt at a referendum on child discipline laws?

    The Smacking Debate

    Unless the Prime Minister is planning to go to the country much earlier than everyone expects, her assertion that it is not possible to hold the anticipated citizens-initiated referendum on the anti-smacking law on election day simply does not stack up.

    Helen Clark claims there is not enough time for the referendum to run alongside the general election “just in terms of sheer organisation”.

    The real reason, of course, is Labour does not want its election campaign sullied by periodic discussion of the smacking law whose “nanny-state” connotations have proved to be so damaging to her and her party. Better to take some flak now for delaying the referendum than see the debate resurrected over the amended section 59 of the Crimes Act which removes the defence of reasonable force for parents who physically discipline their children.

    There are good reasons for holding such plebiscites on election day. They are considerably cheaper than stand-alone ones. There is also likely to be a much higher voter turnout.

    Helen Clark might see the latter as a disadvantage, however. Although the Government is not bound by the result, a high turnout could reinforce any majority vote in favour of returning the smacking law to what was previously the case.

    So to hide the realpolitik, the Prime Minister cites practical difficulties in organising a referendum.

    But if that is the case, then it would be impossible to hold a snap election. In case the Prime Minister has forgotten, the 1984 snap election was called by Sir Robert Muldoon just four weeks before polling day. Somehow, electoral officials coped.

    In fact, the law covering citizens-initiated referendums specifically allows Parliament to shift the date of a referendum to the day of a snap election. That suggests there is sufficient time and it is not a problem.

    This year’s general election is still about four months away. The organisers of the petition seeking the smacking referendum have presented some 390,000 signatures in what was their second and final bid to force a ballot on the question: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”

    The Office of the Clerk in Parliament now has two months to check whether the petition is signed by the valid signatures of 10 per cent of registered voters.

    That equates to around 290,000 valid signatures. If that threshold is reached, the Government has another month to name the date of the referendum. There is no reason why it should take that long. In 1999, the-then National Government took only a week to determine Norm Withers’ petition for a referendum on violent crime would be held on election day.

    If Labour was as quick, there would still be the best part of two months to organise referendum arrangements. Given ballot papers for the general election cannot be printed until nominations close – around three weeks before election day – it is again hard to see what the problem would be.

    There would be a problem if the election was called before the Office of the Clerk had finished validating the signatures on the petition. That is highly unlikely.

    When asked outside Labour’s caucus meeting yesterday about how the referendum might square with the election date, Helen Clark walked away. The election timetable is not a subject she is ready to traverse.

  • Govt creating renegade generation

    THE FAMILY PARTY

    http://www.thefamilyparty.org.nz

    Govt creating renegade generation

    24 June 2008. The Family Party is calling on the Prime Minister to acknowledge the concerns of the majority of New Zealanders by holding the smacking referendum at the General Election.

    In today’s NZ Herald Prime Minister Helen Clark has virtually ruled out a referendum on smacking at this year’s election, saying there will not be time to organise one.

    Family Party leader Richard Lewis says the smacking law remain a serious concern in South Auckland communities, where the Family Party has continued to collect petition signatures.

    “The Prime Minister continues to manipulate New Zealand’s democratic process by denying New Zealanders the opportunity to have their say on this very important issue at the most cost-effective and expedient opportunity, which is this coming General Election. It is this kind of disregard towards the concerns of New Zealanders that has rendered Labour irrelevant and out of touch with the realities of everyday family life,” said Mr Lewis.

    Mr Lewis says the Government has failed to make the connection between Law and Order and parental authority in the home.

    “Not a day goes by without a parent raising the issue of parental correction and establishing boundaries in the home. Government still fails to realise that Law and Order begins in the home. By undermining parents in the home they’re setting up a generation of kids to be renegades in community. So don’t be surprised when more children and young people emerge into community with a bad attitude and a complete disregard for others and authority,” he added.

    ENDS

    Richard Lewis

    0275 398730

    Family Party online advertisement

  • Plenty of time to organise a referendum

    Hi Everyone,

    Kiwi Party leader and organiser of the petition for a referendum on the anti-smacking law Larry Baldock says there is plenty of time to hold the referendum at this years election.

    “Claims by the Prime Minister reported in the Herald today that there is not enough time to get things organised are ridiculous,” said Mr Baldock.

    The confirmation of the success of the petition must be given by the Clerk of the House no later than August 23rd.
    “You can’t tell me that it will take more than 2 months to organise one simple question to be added to the ballot paper,” said Mr Baldock.

    “If the Labour party’s fortunes were to suddenly improve in the polls the Prime Minister would have no qualms whatsoever in calling an early election and she would have everyone pulling out all the stops to get this organised on time,” he said.

    Ends

    Larry Baldock
    Party Leader
    Phone: 021 86 4833
    Email: l.baldock@xtra.co.nz

  • Sports & Fielddays Crowds Give CIR Petition Huge Boost

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0806/S00175.htm

    Sports and Fielddays Crowds Give

    Anti-Smacking Petition Huge Boost

    Family First Media Release 15 June 2008

    Family First NZ says that the numbers of signatures on the petition against the anti-smacking law and demanding a Referendum at the upcoming Election has been hugely boosted by a number of large events over the past 2 weekends.

    “ Over 12,000 signatures have been collected at the two recent All Blacks tests, a Warriors game, the Waikato Fielddays, and other sporting and community events ,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.

    “ The signature count from the Fielddays alone was a whopping 8,700. It has certainly reinforced to us the strong feeling against this unpopular and ineffective law by typical NZ’ers who are attending these events. There is no shortage of people wanting to sign the petition.”

    The organisers originally had a shortfall of 18,027 signatures after the audit of the original 324,216 signatures submitted in April. However, since then, more than 50,000 signatures have been collected. These will be submitted before the deadline of the end of the month.

    “This confirms that a Referendum will be held on the anti-smacking law at the same time as the Election, it confirms that a huge proportion of NZ’ers want the law changed to protect good parents, and it sends a very clear and loud message to the politicians that they should listen to the views of the voters who will be making a choice at the upcoming Election.”

    “It’s time to tackle the real causes of child abuse, violence and crime without criminalising the efforts of good parents raising productive and law-abiding citizens of the future,” says Mr McCoskrie.

    “There is good reason that only 23 of the almost 200 countries have adopted this law. NZ can lead the world by being the first country to reverse this flawed law before its effects are fully felt by families and the community.”

    ENDS

    www.familyfirst.org.nz