Tag: Kiwi Party

  • A smack or time out for correction should not be a crime

    A smack or time out for correction should not be a crime

    Kiwi Party Press Release 28 July 2009

    The Referendum about the so called “anti-smacking” law (the name which Sue Bradford herself originally gave to her Bill) is really about how children should be corrected according to former MP & now President of the Kiwi Party Gordon Copeland.

    Smacking and taking a child to time out are now criminal acts in New Zealand’ said Mr Copeland. “But only when they are used for the purpose of correction that is to rebuke,  in order to improve a child’s behaviour”.

    “At the heart of this debate therefore there are really two questions.
    Firstly do children need to be corrected?”

    “Most of us would answer this question with an emphatic “yes”. However  some would just as emphatically answer “no” because they believe that children are  born virtuous and will automatically, as if by instinct, grow up to become unselfish & loving adults!  I believe, with the wisdom of the ages, that  both children & and adults need to be corrected.”

    “Secondly should parents be permitted by law to smack or take their children to time out as part of good & loving parenting?”

    “I believe that the answer to this question is also yes. Note that, consistent with the Referendum question, the qualification is that we are here talking about these correction techniques used by good parents. I am not saying that hitting with a jug cord or locking a child in a dark room are acceptable correction techniques, because they are not! Those are the actions of bad parents who need to be corrected (there’s that word again) by the law of the land”.

    “Are we capable of making that distinction clear in law? Of course we are and we should. The training, education and correction of children, accompanied by large lashings of love & good fun, are the central tasks of parenting. Simply stated that is what good parents do!”

    “When it comes to correction parents should have the freedom, under the law, to use a variety of ways to achieve the outcome which they seek, namely an improvement in behaviour, in ways which are appropriate to the circumstances & age of the child. This includes appropriate verbal correction, smacking, timeout and as the child grows older, grounding & the loss of privileges. Parenting on a day by day basis is never one dimensional.”

    “I believe that these decisions must be made by parents and by parents alone! The State has no role to play and it is wrong for politicians to outlaw smacking and the use of time out in these circumstances. They have no mandate to do so. This matter was not widely raised in the 2005 Elections.  The issue made its way onto the floor of Parliament through a private Members Bill.”

    “The claim that smacking and time out should be criminalised to bring the correction of children into line with the correction of adults is a fallacy.”

    “We correct adults through fines, community service and prison sentences but none of these apply to children for the simple reason that they are children! The law always has & always will make that distinction.”

    “I’m delighted that there is to be a Referendum on this issue and the question “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand” is crystal clear. Let’s use the opportunity to deliver a message to the Beehive which politicians will ignore at their peril because this issue really is for the sake of our children, our grandchildren & all generations to come.”

    Gordon Copeland is a former MP who left United Future to become an Independent because of his strong opposition to the criminalisation of smacking and time out for the purposes of correcting children.
    Contact:
    Phone 04 388 9805
    Cell 027 472 6998

  • Prime Minister’s claims of referendum question confusion are really confusing!!!

    “John Key has recently adopted the simplistic tactic of trying to discredit the referendum by complaining about the question being confusing, but the only person that is confused seems to be himself,” said Kiwi Party Leader Larry Baldock.

    “He seems to have forgotten that when the petition was first launched March 1st, 2007 National party MPs were very involved in helping us to collect signatures. Many of them even had the petition in their electorate offices at various places across the country. If they thought the question was confusing why would they help to collect signatures to make the referendum become a reality?
    “And would they have done this without the knowledge and approval of John Key?

    “Unfortunately once the anti-smacking law had been passed after John Key’s amendment deal with Helen Clark the National MPs were told they were no longer allowed to collect signatures.

    “The Prime Minister has often said he didn’t want good parents criminalised for a light smack.
    Prime Minister they now are, so do you want it to remain that way or not? Answer ‘Yes’ if you do, and ‘No’ if you don’t. It is really that simple!

    “The high response or 25,000 people responding in just two weeks to enrol or update their enrolment with the electoral enrolment centre shows that unlike John Key and Phil Goff, Kiwis understand the question and are keen to have their say,” said the petition organiser, Larry Baldock.

    Contact
    Larry Baldock
    021864833

  • Prime Minister turns down offer to call off referendum

    Email correspondence released today confirms the Prime Minister John Key turned down an offer to call off the referendum and save taxpayers money.
    Kiwi Party Leader and Petition organiser Larry Baldock said he had made a genuine offer that could have put the whole matter to rest.

    “It seems that the same man who rushed to make a compromise deal with Helen Clark and Sue Bradford in 2007 is no longer interested in finding sensible solutions,” said Mr Baldock

    On April 18th, 2007 John Key’s reported position was very clear when he said, “If Labour really believes that ‘light smacking for the purposes of correction’ will not be outlawed, then they need to explain that. But no matter how you read this bill in its present form it will be illegal to ‘lightly smack for the purposes of correction’.

    Last week, after fudging on the question for more than 4 years, Sue Bradford herself finally admitted on National Radio that every parent who uses a light smack or any reasonable force for the purpose of correction was now a criminal in this country, regardless of whether they are eventually prosecuted or not!

    John Key then went on to say, “The way to send a strong message on child abuse is to make the law clear and precise and then to police it strongly and vigilantly. This bill as it stands does the opposite. For me, a result that sees the criminalisation of parents for a light smack is simply not on the table.”

    In May 2007 the whole nation was shocked by the news that John Key was willing to suddenly change the National party’s position on the anti-smacking law and strike a compromise deal with Helen Clark and Sue Bradford.

    I recall John Key explaining his actions then on the basis that the Anti-smacking law was a bad law, but since the Government had the numbers to pass it anyway, he felt responsible to do what he could to minimise the harm the law could cause to parents and families all over the country.

    Now that he has the power to amend the ‘bad law’ he seems to have completely changed his position and thinks his amendment has made it into a ‘good law’. In the email reply to my offer, Wayne Eagleson wrote, “As the Prime Minister has indicated publicly on a number of occasions, the government is of the view that the current law is working.”

    Perhaps the Prime Minister would take the time to explain to Glenn Groves who was recently convicted of assaulting his 7 year old son for nothing more serious than shoving him in the back, how well his amendment to the ‘bad law’ is working.

    My proposed amendments as outlined in the attached  correspondence (posted below)  would remove the criminalisation of good parents,” said Mr Baldock.

    Ends

    Contact
    Larry Baldock
    021864833

  • Proposal to withdraw the referendum

    From: Larry Baldock
    Sent: Wednesday, 17 June 2009 2:23 pm
    To: Hon. John Key (MIN)
    Cc: Hon. Bill English (MIN); Wayne Eagleson (MIN)
    Subject: Proposal to withdraw the referendum.

    The Prime Minister,
    Parliament Buildings
    Wellington
    June 16, 2009.

    Dear Prime Minister,
    In the interests of saving our country most of the estimated $9 million to complete the referendum, Sheryl Savill, the petition proposer, and myself would withdraw the referendum, (as per Sec 22A (1) of the CIR Act 1993) in return for an agreement by yourself to amend the current sec 59 of the crimes Act in the following way.

    Delete the following sub clauses from the amended Sec 59,
    (2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.
    (3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1),

    In this way, the criminalisation of parents who use some reasonable force to correct and train their children would be removed, whilst the other clarifications in Subsection (1) of the permissible use of reasonable force would remain.
    Your amendment emphasising the need for the police to use discretion could also remain.

    I would be happy to discuss these proposals with your officials and act promptly to call off the referendum and save the hard-earned money of the taxpayers of New Zealand.

    Yours sincerely,
    Larry Baldock.

    On 18/06/09 11:45 AM, “Wayne Eagleson (MIN)” <Wayne.Eagleson@parliament.govt.nz> wrote:

    Dear Larry,

    The Prime Minister has asked me to reply on his behalf to your email regarding the s59 referendum.

    As the Prime Minister has indicated publicly on a number of occasions, the government is of the view that the current law is working. On that basis, the Prime Minister does not support your proposed changes to the law.

    With respect to the issue of the cost of the referendum, the Prime Minister said in the House yesterday that while he was concerned at having to spend $9 million, with a legal process having triggered the referendum it would be followed through on.

    Thank you for writing to the Prime Minister on this issue.

    Yours sincerely,
    Wayne Eagleson
    Chief of Staff
    Office of the Prime Minister
    Ph: 64 4 817-9365 or 64 21 709 067
    Parliament Buildings
    Wellington

  • CITIZENS INITIATED REFERENDUM REPORT

    CIR Update no.32
    CITIZENS INITIATED REFERENDUM REPORT

    Only 55 days to referendum day! August 21.


    Greetings, Another busy week as media continued to carry more news of the impending referendum.

    Congratulations to Bob McCoskrie and team on a successful launch of the http://www.voteno.org.nz website. If you haven’t seen it yet I encourage you to take a good look. Lots of useful downloads and information. Simon Barnett has done a great job fronting it with a 90 sec video, and has been prepared to make his stand for the principles he believes in.  Thanks Simon, Jody and family.  We are proud of you!

    Also Muriel Newman’s NZCPR weekly newsletter was entitled “A smack in the face of democracy.” Muriel wrote a great article and invited me to be her guest commentator. Click on the link above if you haven’t received it direct. None of these events were co-ordinated or planned but the timing turned out to be great.

    The controversy over Christine Rankin’s appointment to the Families Commission has helped keep media interest alive this week with stories about her being required by the PM to not actively campaign for a ‘NO’ vote.  You may have heard Chief Families Commissioner Jan Pryor say on National Radio that there had been robust debate amongst commissioners previously about the Families Commissions official position on the anti-smacking law. Since in her own words she said the debate was robust, there is a clear indication that the seven previous commissioners were not all in support of the law change.  Hear the interview here

    Now with two new Commissioners that we believe would be opposed to the anti-smacking law, it would be very interesting indeed if the Families Commission had a fresh debate and vote concerning it’s official position of support for the law change.
    You can hear my interview with Geoff Robinson here.
    Perhaps if you were of a mind to write to the Chief Families Commissioner to urge them to re-open the discussion it would be a good way of supporting Christine Rankin.

    Last week we had several meetings with media and creative production teams to finalise plans for Radio and TV advertising campaigns for vote NO.  Under the laws governing CIR anyone wanting advertise to promote one of the answers to the referendum question cannot spend more than $50,000.  View Sec 42 of the CIR Act

    It is fairly obvious already that the Yes vote coalition has been spending up large to spread their half-truths and misinformation. I will give you some examples of this next week.

    We need your help to make our campaign to the finish line in this long battle to make sure ‘the voice of the people is not drowned out!’ We have raised approx one third of our budget so far. Can you help us raise the rest of the total of $50,000? Whether you can afford $10, $20, $50, $500 or much more, whatever the amount, it will be an investment for the future protection of families in New Zealand.

    You can send your checks made out to CIR Referendum, P.O. Box 9228, Greerton, 3142 Tauranga or direct Internet banking to our solicitors, McKenzie Elvin Trust account


    For CIR Referendum Trust        02 0432 0393 450-02


    Or donate on line with credit card via our Kiwi Party website donation page DONATE
    100% of all donations will be used for the advertising campaign. The ads will not be mentioning the Kiwi Party.

    Finally this week, a woman who writes under the pseudonym of Nonen Titi, has self published a book called ‘The Happiness Inquisition.” This fictional novel attempts to portray what the possible ramifications of the anti-smacking law will be in our communities and I found it a worthwhile read. You may find it useful to give to a friend to help explain why this law is bad and must go.

    To view the book cover and make any orders click on her website link. The cost is $10 incl postage in NZ. http://www.nonentiti.com

    Warm regards,
    Larry Baldock

  • Helen Clark still smiles

    Helen Clark still smiles The Kiwi Party
    Press Release
    November 18, 2008
    While we can rejoice in the change of Government that has occurred in NZ we should all realise that defeated Prime Minister Helen Clark will still be wearing a big smile after reading the supply and confidence agreements signed yesterday by ACT, UF and the Maori Party.

    Why? Because none of them contain any initiatives to reverse and dismantle the consequences of her Governments family deconstruction policies over the last nine years. Many commentators have acknowledged that the anti-smacking law passed by 113 MPs in the last Parliament was the piece of legislation that led to the downfall of Helen Clark and the Labour Government. The subject arose time and again during the campaign yet none of the support parties have given any assurance to the citizens of this country that the referendum to be held on Aug 21st on the question, “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence?” will be respected.

    It is particularly disappointing that Rodney Hide and the ACT Party ,who campaigned widely on their commitment to repeal the anti-smacking law, have not secured a commitment from John Key for the result of the referendum to be binding. Prostitution law reform, same sex marriage, (Civil Unions) abortion on demand and the criminalising of good parents for smacking their children are issues that none of the partners to the new Government seem prepared to use their influence to address.

    Underage girls will still be able to be taken from school to the nearest abortion clinic without parental notification or consent. The lowering of the drinking age which has been widely acknowledged to have been a mistake goes unmentioned, as does the awful problems of drug and alcohol addiction and abuse, and the lack of detox and rehabilitation facilities needed to treat those with these problems.

    There is no mention of policies to address our high rates of family breakdown, family violence and child abuse that are at the very core of our social problems, and nothing to promote a stronger and healthier marriage culture in this country without which we will never see a reduction in fatherless young criminals appearing before our youth court.

    The Kiwi traditional common law rights to hunt and fish to put food on the family table will continue to be threatened with no mention in any agreement of support for the Kahawai Legal Challenge. Recreational fishers still face their battle with the Ministry of Fisheries over the depletion of the fish stock in the inshore-shared fishery.

    It also looks like the Department of Conservation, Animal Health Board and Regional Councils will be able continue their insane campaign of dropping 1080 poison that will one day ruin our clean green image and potentially affect our primary exports.

    Helen Clark ‘s new society looks set to remain intact. New Zealand will never be the same again; at least not if it is left up to National and it’s allies ACT, UF and the Maori Party to reverse these things in the next three years.

  • Family Integrity #430 — The Kiwi Party’s 1st Fifteen – policies, LIVE on Youtube!

    25 September 2008 Family Integrity #430 — The Kiwi Party’s 1st Fifteen – policies, LIVE on Youtube!

    Dear All,
    For your information.
    Craig Smith

    The Kiwi Party’s 1st Fifteen – policies,

    LIVE on Youtube!

    Click on links below to view Gordon

    Copland, MP, addressing policy.

    Feel free to ‘cut and paste and pass along’ the information in this email to those on your mailing list, or to any web discussion groups you are on, or simply forward to others.

    Or, if talking to others, tell them to type ‘Kiwi Party’s 1st 15′ in the YouTube (http://www.youtube.com) search box to access all videos.

    No 1

    Length – 03:17

    Repeal of the ‘anti-smacking law’, and establishing a Royal Commission to investigate family breakdown.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnjZZvJWUkk

    No 2

    Length – 02:57

    Establishing lower thresholds for, and making referenda binding.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NnbXxIKRWI

    No 3

    Length – 02:57

    Repeal of law legalizing and legitimizing prostitution.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjT60cD1tFo

    No 4

    Length – 04:48

    Abortion

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRPexIOkDqc

    No 5

    Length – 04:03

    Increase minimum wage to $15/hr and provide tax credits to employers.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5HpcY2GHpM

    No 6

    Income splitting for married couples, and GST off Rates.

    Length – 02:47

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2ngvc_KuD8

    No 7

    Length – 03:42

    Housing affordability.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NeA6K7Az_s

    No 8

    Length – 03:12

    Promoting and aiding strong marriages and families.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xFOD1cG93w

    No 9

    Length – 02:30

    Education – funding follows students.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXAl4IE4C8A

    No 10

    Length – 03:19

    Alcohol and drugs.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfsr6U8ZGZE

    No 11

    Length – 03:03

    Justice – Law and Order – Victim Restoration to become primary focus of sentencing, plus longer, non-parole sentences for serious crime.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYHc-YmMpgo

    No 12

    Length – 02:22

    Health and hospital waiting lists…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeqtW_2UhDE

    No 13

    Length – 04:46

    Right of access to outdoors, and total ban on 1080.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWOe_xtv_FE

    No 14

    Length – 04:07

    Immigration.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-w1Ax0OT408

    No 15

    Length – 05:01

    Climate change, Kyoto, and the Emissions Trading Scheme.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HHXVxv2EPE

  • Richard Lewis Speech To ‘NZ Forum On The Family

    www.familyparty.org.nz

    Richard Lewis Speech To ‘NZ Forum On The Family’

    Kia ora ladies and gentlemen,

    On behalf of the Family Party, I want to thank you for this opportunity to bring something of our message to you today.

    It’s great to see so many people who share our passion. Particularly those grassroots organisations who have dedicated their lives to improving the position of New Zealand families.

    By way of background, I’m married to Mandy and we are blessed with two children.

    My father is of Ngati Awa and Ngati Kahungunu descent. On that note, I want to acknowledge Dr Pita Sharples from Kahungunu: tena koe.

    As a young Maori boy my father was raised on a farm and schooled at Whakarewarewa, near Rotorua. My mother on the other hand was born in London and educated in a British school for girls.

    So if I seem a little schizophrenic here today it’s because one half of me wants to read religiously from my notes while the other half would be more comfortable with a guitar and a few yarns.

    My career background is primarily in the police where I served over a decade on the frontlines and in the CIB. My final role before leaving the police was as a sergeant in charge of an emergency response group here in South Auckland.

    But today I am honoured to serve the Family Party as its leader. And I’m thankful to have this opportunity to share our message with you today.

    The Family Party was created primarily for two reasons: To reinstate traditional family values and to put families first again in Parliament.

    These statements obviously imply that traditional family values and the institution we call ‘family’ once had a place of respect and position in New Zealand politics, and that this is no longer the case.

    I believe that is our current reality: evidenced by the fact that New Zealand’s oldest and largest political party thought it not important enough to attend today’s Forum on the Family.

    Yesterday I thought about the policies I should present but realise they will be similar, if not the same, to many of the ideas you will hear from other speakers today. Since it is a family-focused forum.

    For example, the Family Party is all for a lower and flatter tax structure that keeps more money in the home.

    We support income splitting for married couples. We want to fix the smacking laws, repeal the prostitution act and get more cops on the frontlines. We want to confront the drug dealing epidemic and youth gangs and we’ve got a strategy to do it. We want sentencing to reflect the seriousness of crimes committed. New Zealand’s culture of ‘abortion on demand’ requires urgent attention. The Electoral Finance Act is a shambles and needs to be scrapped.

    One of our more adventurous policies is axing GST on basic food-groups and fuel to help families through tough economic times. I see the Maori Party recently adopted this policy. It’s a shame they haven’t adopted our position on the anti-smacking issue too.

    We’ve got a wide range of pro-family policies you can view if you feel so inclined on www.familyparty.org.nz

    But with my remaining time allotment I want to get to the base-issue and the heart of why New Zealand needs the Family Party beyond 2008.

    The single most important issue facing our nation today is ‘family breakdown.’

    Family breakdown and more specifically, fatherlessness, is underneath the vast majority of social ills being manifest in our communities today.

    Economy, education, health, welfare, justice, law and order, environment, government… all of these begin in the home. The health of our nation in my view, is the sum total of the families in it.

    You could say ‘family breakdown’ is to the Family Party… what global-warming-theory is to the Greens.

    The difference is, family breakdown’ is categorically man made.

    And unlike New Zealand’s miniscule carbon emissions, (relative to population), we are a world-leader when it comes to family breakdown and fatherlessness.

    Yet current politicians choose to ignore family breakdown and its roots. Their preference is to spend billions of dollars to achieve a status of ‘world leader’ on global warming. And they want you and I to pay for it.

    ‘Family breakdown’ on the other hand, is an ever-present reality that has arrived on all of our doorsteps.

    Here in South Auckland we’re getting our fair share of attention with all manner of social dysfunctions of the worst kind. Murders, street prostitution, gang violence, poverty, robberies, home invasions, generational dependency. I’m sure you’re familiar with the stories.

    As a former police officer who has served this community and seen the worst of it, I came to this realisation. Law and Order is not first a police issue… it is first a family issue. I believe the same applies across the board.

    Identifying and acknowledging the problem means we can deal with it.

    The good news ladies and gentlemen, is that unlike global warming, restoring strength to New Zealand families doesn’t necessarily have to cost any of us a single cent.

    We don’t need any more surveys, studies or reports to tell us what the problems are. Save the money. Give it back in tax cuts or channel it to those on the coalface doing the real work.

    Under the current regime we don’t even need a Families Commission to tell us families are important. Save the money. Give it back in tax cuts or channel it to those on the coalface doing the real work.

    Nor do we need a Children’s Commission to tell us children are important. Save the money. Give it back in tax cuts or channel it to those on the coalface doing the real work.

    Bringing meaningful change simply starts with Government changing its attitude and thinking towards families.

    It’s a state of mind that understands if families are functional, healthy and prosperous, our nation will be too.

    It’s an ethic that approaches policy on the basis of ‘what’s good for families is good for our country.’ It recognises that parents, not the state, are responsible for raising the next generation.

    It recognises that families should be free to build their own economy, independent of, and without strings attached to the state.

    It recognises that a wise government would protect and encourage the institution of marriage, which is the tried and proven stable basis for child-raising.

    It recognises that the best Families Commission, the best Children’s Commission, indeed, the best form of Government, is actually the ‘family’ itself.

    We’re talking about the traditional ‘values system’ that now more than ever, needs to be rekindled in New Zealand’s Parliament. I believe it can be because our forebears laid the foundations with families in mind.

    We just have to extract the political deadwood and blow fresh life on the embers.

    The alternative is more political correctness that suffocates families and the inherent potential of our children. The alternative means weaker families and bigger government. The alternative is a renegade generation that lacks identity and purpose.

    To tackle family breakdown doesn’t have to cost us anything. But not to, will eventually cost us everything.

    So again, this year we have a choice.

    I want to touch in referendums. I understand the call for them. But they are not the ultimate answer. Referendums are a response to a Government that gets out of sync with the electorate.

    How is it that the two major political parties could pass the anti-smacking bill against the overwhelming public majority? The answer ladies and gentlemen, is politics being put ahead of people through politicians who carry a different set of values to that of the electorate.

    Doesn’t it make more sense to elect people who carry our values so that political decisions are more likely to harmonise with the people.

    I do want to acknowledge the incredibly hard work undertaken by Larry Baldock and his team on the anti smacking petition.

    As a side note, the anti-smacking debate continues to be misrepresented by those politicians responsible for pushing it through. Jeanette Fitzsimons said this morning that bashing a child was not a crime until Section 59 was repealed. This is simply not true. I can tell you that I have arrested parents for bashing their children and that happened well before Section 59 was repealed. Section 59 never protected child abusers.

    Now touching quickly on our organisation, the Family Party is a Christian political vehicle that has a management board of wonderful people from a wide range of professional backgrounds and churches.

    We have already announced a number of fantastic candidates and will be announcing more in the very near future, which is very heartening based on 11 months of building.

    Our strategy to win seats in order to remove the 5% threshold is proving fruitful and we are well positioned with the election date announcement due any day now.

    The final thought I want to put to you today is this: the thing most political parties have in common is that they pursue a healthy economy with the idea of contributing back to families.

    The Family Party takes the opposite approach. We believe by pursuing healthy and prosperous families we’ll achieve much, much more for our nation and our economy.

    The Family Party offers you that fresh approach and a dogged determination to stand up against the PC culture: to declare an end to over a decade’s worth of social experimentation on New Zealand families.

    To come back to the basics: to reinstate traditional family values and put families first again in Parliament.

    That’s exactly what New Zealand needs. And that’s why the Family Party is the best choice for voters at this year’s General Election.

    Thank you for your time and your attention.

    ENDS

  • Family policies released at Family First Forum

    Family policies released at Family First Forum

    Kiwi Party Leader Larry Baldock released the party’s Family Policy brochure at the Family First Forum today.

    Speaking to the forum delegates Mr Baldock said, “This brochure brings together our policies from a wide range of portfolios which will, we believe, impact positively on New Zealand families.

    Of course our number one priority is to ensure that the referendum on the anti-smacking law is respected and that law repealed to return parental authority back to the homes of good parents all over this country.”

    “This list of family policies makes it abundantly clear that our vision for the strengthening of family life in New Zealand does not rest on one issue alone. The Kiwi party is not a single issue party. The truth is our nation’s families have been negatively affected by so many government policies and laws over the past few decades. These now need to be rectified and we have a huge amount of work ahead of us in that regard. It is difficult to prioritise just the “top ten” when they are all so important to the health of our nation.

    “What we can be clear about is that the top ten priorities released by the National party at their conference last month do not have a single item that addresses the social engineering of Labour’s last nine years.

    “We believe it is vitally important that we establish a Royal Commission to begin ‘understanding and addressing the wider causes of family breakdown, family violence and child abuse.’ We have already written comprehensive draft terms of reference for that Commission’s task, which would also include reviewing the impact of the DPB as part of welfare reform.

    “As partner to the next government we would immediately begin investing in pre-marriage, marriage enrichment and parenting education programmes to put the nation on a path towards rebuilding stronger families.

    “Our family policies will make a very positive difference to the quality of life for current and future generations of Kiwis. We look forward to the support of the family organisations represented at this important Forum, as we embark on our election campaign over the next 8 -10 weeks” said the Kiwi Party leader.
    ENDS
    Attachments:

    Family_policy.pdf
    Draft_Terms_of_reference_for_Royal_Commission-1.pdf