• Full Story

Govt to introduce smacking 'safeguards'

Print

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:00a.m.

Preliminary results found more than 85 percent of voters answered no to the smacking referendum question

Preliminary results found more than 85 percent of voters answered no to the smacking referendum question

By Angela Beswick
 
Parents who lightly smack their children should not fear being treated like criminals, Prime Minister John Key said today.
 
Mr Key took a series of proposals to Cabinet today following Friday's resounding referendum victory for opponents of the 2007 child discipline law change.
 
"The referendum research reinforces the message that parents do not want to see themselves criminalised for a light smack," Mr Key said.
 
Preliminary results of the smacking referendum found more than 85 percent of voters answered no when asked; 'Should a smack, as part of good parents correction, be a criminal offence in New Zealand?'
 
Despite earlier criticism, Mr Key said he would not ignore the referendum results. Cabinet has agreed on a number of measures to give parents confidence they will not be criminalised for lightly smacking their children.
 
Police and the Chief Executive of the Ministry of Social Development will lead a review of Child Youth and Families polices and procedures - including the referral procedure.
 
Mr Key says the review will help; "identify any changes necessary or desirable to ensure good parents are treated as Parliament intended".
 
An independent person would assist in the review, which would be completed by December.
 
A report on the effects of the law will be brought forward from the end of the year, to late September. Police will continue their ongoing reviews of the law.
 
"If police data indicates a worrying trend, the law will be changed," Mr Key says.
 
"As I've said repeatedly - I believe the law is working as intended."
 
The referendum was organised after Green MP Sue Bradford's member's bill was passed in 2007. That law change amended the Crimes Act to remove the defence of reasonable force when an adult was charged with assaulting a child.
 
Voter turnout on the referendums initial result was 54 percent - just over 1.6 million votes were cast.
 
The final result will be announced tomorrow.
 
3 News
Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

29 Aug 2009 09:34a.m.

Phil wrote:

Now we have rules for smacking. Give me a break!

25 Aug 2009 05:57p.m.

Deane Duxfield wrote:

Key Offers the 'Status Quo' we had before the referendum. His word and assurances that themselves contradict the Law.

They new safeguards and assurances that are the same as we had before, may last for his term but he must think the huge majority of people out there are idiots to think this law won't be used in as mischevious a manner as it was forced upon the majority by the inversely proportional representative parliament we have.
Theoretically this is an impossible law in a democracy. A Law that so many hate for its illegitimate formation and the illegitimisation it inflicts on parents.

And it would be impossible in a Democracy.
We don't have one! We have an Ideocracy.
Where ideology of a few unbalanced reactionaries dominate the masses and reason.

NZ is stuffed if they don't demonstrate that Key can not after getting conclusive confirmation of what the Nation already knew and not remove a law that is DOING NOTHING to change the violence problem and simply undermining a culture of respect for authority for a culture of Do As you Will!
Key Defies the people for Who Knows What reason?

The Law harms the reasonable and emboldens the defiant. It's Killing his credibility for nothing!

25 Aug 2009 02:03p.m.

Kiwi Chick wrote:

Key MOCKS THE MASSES offering the Status Quo calling it new "Safeguards". The same safeguards as we had before.
Key OBEY or GO AWAY
The STATUS QUO IS NOT OK!
CONTEMPT FOR US WHO VOTE YOU IN
IS THE SUPREME POLITICAL SIN!

Do you think us Idiots?
CYFS and the Police have already been 'carefully monitoring' this. Waiting for the referendum to pass and debate to die down.
When they see the law is unthreatened, oddballs will use it exuburantly.
You can sell antismackers spin with a smile and they may think they have the best thing since Free love and Marijuana. But not to the wise majority, worried for kids and NZ's future & not the emotive.
Key YOU as PM Call US criminals for smacking our Kids as it is You that OVERSEES this Ultra Virus Law! YOU ARE ACCOUNTABLE for its continued presence.
An Imossible law in a Democracy!
WHO is RUNNING YOU KEY?
WHO IS PULLING YOUR STRINGS?
Don't waste what could have been a Great Prime Ministership on ideology of extremists.
We put you there to Represent Us!
Do What You Are TOLD You NAUGHTY Politician!
We Are ANGRY. And that is the RIGHT Response for your Violation of Democracy.
WE Will Not Let this Go!
We are Not the Dumb Sheep you seem to obviously think we are.
You undermine the Moral authority of Every parent in this nation!
Kids can raise their middle finger to their parents and Say
"You carnt du Narfin bout it. And that is toxic!
Reminds me of Bailey Kauriki the teen killer who raised his middle finger in response to the nation when violating Parole.
We will have more...More Ghettos, More Youth Crime, More Police at schools, more stabbings, more Knife Fights, more Police in Body Bags and More citizens resorting to Violence to defend themselves, when you undermine natural authority.
New Zealand will be a Foolish Nation Dominated by a tiny squad of Deluded psychobabblers. Thanks MR KEY!
The Law isn't working and isn't effective. So, Your Promise?
It's been voted out as you'll be if you simply Defy Us.

25 Aug 2009 07:40a.m.

Peter wrote:

Huh??? I don't know how people don't get it. How many parents have been convicted of lightly smacking their kids. ZERO.. I just don't understand why the right wing religous groups in the US are allowed to talk such rubbish and scare ordinary parents into thinking they are going to have their kids taken off them if they lightly smack their kids. Come on.. you pro-smacker lot... get over yourself. It's just a non-event.

25 Aug 2009 12:37a.m.

Robert Dossmann wrote:

Mr. Key - You are our REPRESENTATIVE, not our King. Please pay attention. Our kids stand there, with arms crossed, yelling "you can't spank us, it's against the law !" and they are right, thanks to you. Parenting is hard enough without you tying our hands behind our backs. We'll just have to wag our finger at them especially hard.

24 Aug 2009 06:19p.m.

Penny wrote:

Sue Bradford said police would not prosecute parents fot "trivial or inconsequential abuse". Has she totally lost her marbles? The word abuse is defined as
1. to use wrongly or improperly; misuse: to abuse one's authority.
2. to treat in a harmful, injurious, or offensive way: to abuse a horse; to abuse one's eyesight.
3. to speak insultingly, harshly, and unjustly to or about; revile; malign.
4. to commit sexual assault upon.
In light of the definition, how can any abuse be trivial or inconsequential? She is desperately trying to hang onto her credibility now that the nation has made it very clear that her bill is offensive, not to mention unnecessary. We already have laws to deal with people who abuse their children. What a shocking waste of time and money.

24 Aug 2009 06:03p.m.

km wrote:

a smack is a smack! who says what is hard and what isnt . this law is a joke. that needs to go in the bin .! no vote for john key

24 Aug 2009 05:51p.m.

thomas wrote:

Kim: The law is replete with variance in how policy is reinforced, especially in terms of assault.

It seems resonable if not the best option to keep a leniant mind in terms of this law.

I don't think this law criminalises parents - the assault laws are now the same for children as they are for all other people. The general population hasn't been walking around feeling criminalised because there is no reasonable force defense for them for non-parental assult

24 Aug 2009 05:24p.m.

Kim wrote:

What the hell???? How can you have a law and then tell the police not to enforce it? By retaining this law on the books it opens up this issue to change with a change of govt.We all know what political partys will agree too to retain power. national most of all. NZders voted for this law to be dumped not tinkered with. The main problem people have with this law is that it criminalises parents. Even people who don't smack have expressed concern about it because of that issue alone. The solution is simple...Repeal this idiotic law and then instruct judges how to define what consitutes a smack and what is abuse. If its ok for keys to instruct police how to apply this stupid law why couldn't they have just instructed judges not to allow high priced lawyers to turn the law into a joke.