The Kiwi Party
Press Release
Kiwi Party leader Larry Baldock welcomed the news that John Boscawen’s bill was drawn from the Ballot only one day after the Chief Electoral Office released the final results of the referendum. This is good news for all those who want to see a smack no longer a criminal offence in this country.
If the PM thought he might hang tough while hoping the issue would die down, he is very much mistaken. At some point in the near future all the National Caucus will have a tough decision. They could continue their hypocrisy by voting against John Boscawen’s bill that is based upon National MP Chester Borrows’ amendment they supported during the committee stage of Sue Bradford’s anti-smacking law, or vote for the bill and open up the select committee process and anti-smacking debate all over again.
Taking urgency and deleting Subsections 2 & 3 from Sec 59 of the Crimes Act, as I have proposed to the PM, might just be the best way forward. Who knows, if he acts quickly enough he might be forgiven for what many are considering to be an arrogant stand against the 87% of Kiwis that voted no in the referendum.
Ends
Contact Larry Baldock
021864833
Dear all,
I just sent a link out to this, but I’m sending it again (see below or click here). This really is good.
Here’s what we think needs to happen: until this issue is dead and buried, we need to continue to lobby and stir up the MPs, especially John Key and the leader of the ACT Party, who are part of this Government and therefore have some leverage. Rather than go for a new bill, just repeal bits of the current one, as Larry Baldock suggests below. This is good.
Just another few letters, emails and faxes. Not a big deal. Bob McCoskrie of Family First has been at it non stop for quite a while now. Let’s all join in and really put the pressure on, just a little effort on the part of each of us and the overall effect is very great.
The following will help with locating addresses.
Email the PM : j.key@ministers.govt.nz
Face Book him: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/pages/John-Key/12635800428?ref=ts
Email your local MP : http://www.betterdemocracy.co.nz/email_mps.php
Regards,
Craig & Barbara Smith
Family Integrity
https://familyintegrity.org.nz/2009/referendumsection-59-the-way-forward/
The Kiwi Party
Press Release
Kiwi Party Leader and referendum petition organiser Larry Baldock was thrilled by the provisional results released tonight by Chief Electoral Office.
“My wife and I spent 18 months travelling through this country three times listening to people from all walks of life as they signed the petition on street corners, beaches, shows and sports events. What we heard then is confirmed in the result tonight,” said Mr Baldock.
“The turnout of 54% confirms that New Zealanders value democracy and want their voice heard. The 87.6% no vote confirms that parliament was not listening to the people when 113 of them passed the Bradford law in 2007.
“Personally I want to thank so many people for making this referendum and result possible. There have been many hundreds of volunteers who spent many hours of their time collecting signatures who can tonight feel very good about the sacrifice they made.
I also want to thank every Kiwi that took part by casting their vote and continuing to put their faith in our democracy.
“Because of the oxymoronic state of non-binding referenda in this country we must now ask the Prime Minister to respect our efforts and our voices. It is time to stop claiming the ‘law is working well’ when there remains 87% opposition to it after more than 2 years.
“I have outlined a proposal for a way forward in the document attached that I believe would respect the result of this referendum,” Mr Baldock said.
Ends
Contact Larry Baldock
021864833
| Attachments: | The_way_forward.doc |
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2776861/Key-says-no-to-changing-smacking-law
By TOM FITZSIMONS, COLIN ESPINER and CLIO FRANCIS – The Dominion Post
Pro-smacking campaigners are calling on the Government to fast-track a law change to allow parents to smack their children, after a thumping referendum victory.
But Prime Minister John Key says he will not change the law, and the law’s original sponsor, Green MP Sue Bradford, says the question was so flawed the result is meaningless.
Children’s Commissioner John Angus also joined the chorus of people saying the law should remain, as “it is good for children”.
The referendum, which cost $8.9 million and drew a voter turnout larger than most local body elections, asked: Should a smack, as part of good parental correction, be a criminal offence in New Zealand?
In preliminary results issued last night, 87.6 per cent of those who voted answered No, and 11.81 per cent said Yes.
More than 1,622,000 people or 54 per cent of enrolled voters voted.
Mr Key said he “took the message seriously” and would take a series of proposals to the Cabinet on Monday.
The proposals stopped short of a law change, but he would not say whether he was planning to give new instructions to police. “It is my belief that the law is working and that at this point we don’t need to change the law,” he said.
“I don’t think a law change is necessary. There are other changes that fall short of changing the law that I think can be introduced.”
Mr Key has said he smacked his two children “very lightly and in moderation” when they were younger.
Kiwi Party leader and poll campaigner Larry Baldock said the turnout showed how strongly people felt about the issue, and sent a firm message to Mr Key: “They want the authority back in the home and he is foolish to suggest this law is working.”
Mr Baldock, a former MP, said the Government should bypass the select committee process and move straight to a vote in Parliament. References in the Crimes Act that barred parents from using force “for the purpose of correction” should be deleted, he said.
He denied the poll question was biased and confusing. The law had made people angry. “Every parent has been disempowered. They’ve got children coming home and saying, `You can’t touch me’.”
Ms Bradford said she had expected a majority “No” vote. She believed some people were so confused by the question they accidentally voted the wrong way. “Because the question is so flawed, the result is flawed. It’s not a clear indicator to the Government of what it should do, if anything.”
Other voters had told her they had scrawled abusive comments on their ballots instead of answering the question, which could have spoiled their votes, she said.
She accepted some people were still uncomfortable with the law, but said it should stand because “it’s a law about protecting our most vulnerable citizens”.
Sheryl Savill, who instigated the referendum, felt “overwhelmed” by the result. “I am so pleased that such a large number of people have shown their support for this issue.”
Chief Electoral Officer Robert Peden said no data was kept about how many ballots had been written on or otherwise spoiled. But 9696 votes were recorded as “informal” because the voter’s intention could not be understood.
Police are due to release their final report into how the law has affected their operations early next week. In reports so far, they have said its impact has been minimal.
Turnout dwarfed the only previous citizen-initiated referendum decided by mail a 1995 question about firefighter numbers that only 26.96 per cent of voters responded to. Turnout at last year’s local body elections was about 41 per cent.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/2773068/Anti-smacking-side-concede-loss-likely
By MICHAEL FOX – Stuff.co.nz
Campaigners on both sides of the smacking debate believe a referendum result due out tonight will be a victory for those who opposed a controversial 2007 law change.
We will bring you results of the referendum as soon as they are available this evening.
Preliminary results from the controversial $9 million citizens-initiated poll are due at 8.30pm this evening although they are not binding, and the government has not signalled any intention to act on the result.
Those behind the referendum, which asks: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?” believe the majority of respondents will have voted no. As of last Friday, 1,330,900 votes had been cast.
“I’ve been working on this for 32 months and to get the final result it will be great,” Kiwi Party leader Larry Baldock, who initiated the referendum, said.
“I think it will definitely be a majority no vote.”
The referendum follows a controversial law change in 2007 led by Green Party MP Sue Bradford which repealed Section 59 in the Crimes Act, a clause which made it legal for parents to use reasonable force to discipline a child.
The law change made it illegal for parents to use force against their children but affords police discretionary powers not to prosecute where the offence is considered inconsequential.
Mr Baldock said the 2007 Act should be repealed, and is so confident the majority of Kiwis feels the same that he has already organised a party at an Auckland motel for supporters, where they will gather to await the result.
Vote Yes spokeswoman and former NZ First MP Deborah Morris-Travers said the group that opposes smacking did not expect the vote to go their way.
“We’ve always expected that the majority vote would be a No vote because, of course, thats how the question is put. It’s a loaded question.”
However, she said the campaign had allowed them to (miss-educate) educate people about the law and address (spread) some of the misinformation that surrounded it.
She pointed to the latest police statistics which, she said, proved concerns in the community that large numbers of parents would be criminalised for smacking were unfounded.
(No any good family that comes before the Police and CYFs is unnecessary and traumatic for the family)
The figures from the latest six-month review showed police attended 279 child assault events in the six-month review period between last October and April.
Of those events, 39 involved “minor acts of physical discipline”, with four resulting in prosecutions. Eight of those involved smacking.
During the previous review period, police attended 258 child assault events of which 49 were “minor acts of physical discipline” and nine involved smacking.
Police said there had been little impact on their workloads since the law was enacted.
“It’s hardly thousands and thousands of parents are being criminalised because they are absolutely not,” Ms Morris-Travers said
(One good family criminalised is too many – especially if it is your family)
She said she had detected a sea change in people’s attitudes and New Zealanders needed to give the law a chance.
“They can have confidence in [the law] and they can have confidence in the way the police are administering the law,” she said.
The No campaigners would be making recommendations on how the law should be changed and hoped Prime Minister John Key would act quickly, Mr Baldock said.
Mr Baldock said little had been gained from the legislation so far.
“If you look at all the time and money and, you know, angst thats been expended on this for the past three or four years and for what gain?” he said.
However, both Mr Key and opposition leader Phil Goff have said they are comfortable with the legislation as it stands and a No vote would not change that.
Two press releases:
The Kiwi Party
Press Release
The people are speaking!!
Kiwi Party Leader and Referendum Petition organiser Larry Baldock said he was thrilled with the number of Kiwis making their voice heard in the referendum.
The latest update from the Chief Electoral Office confirms that as at 5.00pm Thursday 13 August 1,330,900 votes had been received by the Chief Electoral Office vote-processing centre for the Citizens Initiated Referendum on the question “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand”.
“This is approx 44% of those registered, a significant increase over the first week and many more than normally received after two weeks of the Local Government postal elections. It definitely puts the referendum on track to be a better turnout than Local Body elections with a result that cannot be discredited,” said Mr Baldock.
ends
Larry Baldock
021864833
and
MEDIA RELEASE
14 August 2009
Voters Loud and Clear on Referendum
Family First NZ is welcoming news that 44% of voters have now returned their ballot papers for the anti-smacking referendum.
“It is quite evident that NZ’ers understand the question, want their say on the issue, and expect the politicians to listen,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First NZ.
“44% of registered voters is only just short of the turnout for the recent Mt Albert by-election (47%) and most City Councils, Mayors and Community Boards have been elected by less than 44% in the last 2 local body elections. It is quite evident that NZ’ers feel strongly on this issue and still have another full week to vote.”
“The attempts by politicians to attack the question and to threaten to disregard the result of the Referendum has actually had the opposite effect to what they possibly intended. It has rarked up voters because they feel like it’s more of the previous ‘we know better than you and we’re not listening’ attitude. NZ’ers hoped that we had moved on from that approach.”
“Because of this message, it is even more important that voters return their voting forms and send a strong message to the politicians 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
| The Debate; Bradford vs Baldock |
| Thanks to everyone who sent an encouraging note re the ‘Open Letter to Sue’. That feedback was really appreciated. My apologies for any delay in getting replies out so far.
Just a quick update on developments on the debate so far. Radio Waatea have organised a debate tonight (Thursday 13 August) with Sue Bradford and I for one hour from 9pm. You can check out the frequency or how to listen on line if you are outside their broadcast area by going to their website, http://www.waatea603am.co.nz/ The plan is to also take questions from listeners after the debate and their free calling number is 0800 4 603 603 for those who live out of Auckland, and 257 0603 for those living in Auckland. More information on Friday after we hear the latest update on the numbers from the Electoral Commission. Till then, Larry Baldock |
| Open letter to Sue Bradford from Larry Baldock Referendum Petition Organiser |
| 9 August, 2009
Sue, I watched the forum on Maori Television Friday night with you, Dr Hone Kaa and Bob McCoskrie. How I wished I was there to respond to the drivel you continue to repeat in defence of your anti-smacking law. “Adults can’t hit each other so adults shouldn’t be able to hit children,” is probably the main argument you and your supporters use to justify your law that is now criminalising good parents all over this country. Let me tell you why you are wrong and why your argument is flawed from the very beginning. Firstly, some adults can hit others without breaking the law. They are called police and we give them this authority because we know that in some circumstances someone must use reasonable force to correct the unacceptable behaviour of some adults in our society. If I were to throw a wobbly and begin to refuse to submit to the laws of this country, and act in a threatening manner to persons or property, the police could hit me with a baton, taser me with 50,000 volts of electricity, handcuff me, and backed by the justice system, even enforce my timeout in a correctional institution if necessary for a number of years. It is probably widely known in NZ that you have disliked this authority that is entrusted to our police ever since your early protesting days when you sought to assault some of our good men in uniform. Truth be known you probably would like this authority to use reasonable force for the purpose of correction to be taken away from the police as well as from parents, but most of us in this country are comfortable leaving such power in their hands. So let me say it again, it is not true that it is always against the law for an adult to use force against another adult if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances. Sounds very much like the old sec 59 doesn’t it! Your second error is made when you constantly bleat on about how children should be treated the same as adults in law because this neglects that fact that sec 21 & 22 of the crimes Act has always treated children differently by giving them specific exemptions from prosecution for any criminal activity they may commit. We do this for two reasons. Firstly, because they are not mature enough mentally and emotionally to be held accountable to adult laws. Your line of argument for equality would demand that when a two year old at Preschool lashes out and hits another two year old the police should be called to arrest them for assault, then prosecute and jail them like adults. That of course would be ridiculous. And secondly this exemption was given for children because it was widely accepted by society that they should not have their behaviour corrected by the police, but rather by their parents who would be in a much better position to do so. Now, as a consequence of your ill-considered law that has removed any legal authority for parents to ‘use force for the purpose of correction,’ we have empowered children and disempowered the parents that society reasonably expects to be responsible for their children’s correction and training for adulthood. Thirdly, this argument of yours is stupid because it does not recognise the difference in relationship between a husband and wife as two mature adults, and the relationship between adult parents and their children. This constant referral to an old law that permitted a husband to correct his wife adds nothing to the real debate about parental correction. Of course these laws of inequality between men and women should have been changed and it is a shame it took so long. A husband is not responsible to make his wife go to school, a wife is not responsible to make her husband eat healthy vegetables, take a bath, etc (though some may argue they have to anyway) therefore the pleas you make for equal rights cannot be logically argued. Sue, when my wife and I were traversing the country collecting signatures from thousands of good Kiwis from all walks of life, do you know what they were most upset about? They wanted to know when it was that you earned the right to become the ‘mother of the nation.’ What possesses you to think that you know more about raising children than the hundreds of thousands who have raised healthy, well adjusted, law abiding citizens in this country. Though they have been smacked and corrected they have not grown up violent and disrespectful, and this argument you make about smacking creating violent adults is not supported by any sensible research that distinguishes between reasonable force and a beating and abuse. In this wonderful free country of ours you are of course entitled to your views, and you can parent your kids and give advice to them on how they raise your grandchildren as much as you like, but don’t try and tell me my mother was a child abuser when she corrected me as a child. You know Sue, we have clashed a few times in debates on different topics over the past few years. I have never yet heard a proposition from you that really stood the test of common sense and proper scrutiny. How I would love to debate the anti-smacking issue with you again before all the votes are cast. Perhaps there may be some media organisation that could serve the public of NZ by setting up such a contest. A contest between just you and me. You, as the author of the anti-smacking law and dedicated supporter, and me, the organiser of the referendum petition and dedicated opponent. You said you would be willing to meet for a debate with me anywhere anytime. Let’s do it. The taxpayer will cover your travel; I’ll take care of my own. Regards, Larry Baldock 021864833 |
The Kiwi Party
Press Release
The TV One Colmar Brunton poll released today shows opposition to the anti-smacking law remains strong and consistent at 83%.
Referendum Petition organiser Larry Baldock said the other result from the poll was that 3 out 4 New Zealanders felt the cost of the referendum was a waste of money and that is not surprising.
“However, since the referendum requires the cost of at least two letters being posted to 3 million registered voters and the return of the voting papers by prepaid return, NZ Post will be receiving a Government investment of at least $3-4 million,” said Mr Baldock.
“This cost could definitely have been avoided if the referendum had been held at the election last year when voters were going to the polls anyway.
“Given that most of the estimated $9million cost of the referendum will be spent on postage, printing, advertising and employing staff for counting etc, it cannot be considered a waste. For a start the Government will get some of the money back from its SOEs like NZ Post and TV One as well as the GST from money spent elsewhere in the economy.
“If Government spending in infrastructure is an investment in the economy and the future of our country then so is the referendum. The cost benefit ratio of reversing this ill-conceived socially destructive law will far outweigh a similar amount spent on a road, in my opinion.
“As I have been saying in my radio ads, there are now only two people who can waste this money, the voter if he does not vote, and John key of he refuses to listen.”
Ends
contact
Larry Baldock 021864833