MEDIA RELEASE

6 July 2009

Yet More Government Funding for Opposing Referendum

Family First NZ says that government funded organisations are working and spending overtime pushing the anti-smacking law, attacking the Referendum, and promoting a yes-vote.

“Following on from the Families Commission last week, and ongoing lobbying from the Children’s Commissioner and government-funded groups like Barnardos and Plunket, the latest example is the Human Rights Commission who admitted today that they funded a legal opinion to try to validate their support for the anti-smacking law,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ. “They also labeled the Referendum as ‘flawed’ and ‘meaningless’.”

“Once again, this makes a complete sham of claims by the government that the Referendum won’t make any difference, yet the law change, an answer to the Referendum, and attempts to undermine the process are being promoted by government organisations – and being paid for by taxpayers.”

“But groups such as Family First NZ and many others who oppose the law and promoting a No-vote are limited to the $50,000 maximum spending limit set under the CIR Act and have to raise it through donations from individuals and families concerned by this issue.”

“The spending limit is penalising groups who oppose the anti-smacking law, but taxpayer-funded groups are spending like there’s no recession!”

Ironically, in response to a formal complaint by Family First NZ that the anti-smacking law is vague and uncertain, the Human Rights Commission acknowledged the potential uncertainty of the law but said they were not convinced that the earlier version of section 59 ‘provided any better guidance than the present legislation’.

Mr McCoskrie says that recent research by Curia Marketing Research found widespread confusion about the effect of the law. 55% of the respondents said that smacking was always illegal, 31% said it wasn’t, and 14% didn’t know. A recent Families Commission report showed that immigrant families are confused by the anti-smacking law and see smacking as a viable option for correcting their children.

“The Referendum is being dismissed by the government yet there’s no shortage of cheques being signed to determine a favourable outcome to the politicians,” says Mr McCoskrie.

ENDS

For More Information and Media Interviews, contact Family First:

Bob McCoskrie – National Director

Mob. 027 55 555 42

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 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!!!

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