...to National.The National Party under John Key has determined to ignore the result of the referendum - 87.4% of Kiwis voted No to criminalising smacking, but John Key says "the law is working". John Boscawen's bill to amend the law to allow light hand-smacking was drawn from the ballot on Wednesday, but John Key says "the law is working", and subsequently has determined that National will vote against the bill at its first reading.
The Prime Minister states that if parents are criminalised for a light smack, then he will change the law. The law specifically bans smacking for the purpose of correction, which means that parents are criminalised if they give a corrective smack. "But they won't be prosecuted; the police have discretion," retorts Dear Leader.
The Prime Minister states that if parents are prosecuted for a light smack, then he will change the law. It follows that he believes that until parents are prosecuted for a light smack, the law is working well. However the law is not working well - it is simply a case of a bad law (which John Key has admitted to), which the Govt. has instructed the police to ignore or adhere to at their discretion.
I'd expect more sense from a three-year-old at the pre-school down the road. However it's 1am and I expect the pre-school down the road is closed. So my brother Nathan's debut in political blogging shall suffice. Forthwith, an excerpt...
So a few months back old Larry drove his kiwi party caravan up to the B-hive, and loaded off the box's...and box's...and box's of signatures. Yeah!!! Score....but hey what do you know...uh oh suddenly, whoops, Labour decides to have the referendum at another date...hmmm interesting...another $9,000,000 later, and it comes round. Most people vote except for those who found the multi choice YES or NO quite confusing...
heheh, quite clever.
they were required to have a rerefendum because a certain percentage of citizens signed Sue Bradford's petition (fulfilling the statutory requirement) and therefore J.Key as any other Prime Minister was oblidged to have a referendum even though the law is working fine.
ReplyDeletehave you looked at the yes and no websites for the anti-smacking referendum? because they prove a good read
The law is working. People were not educated about the state of the current law.
People can smack their children for example when they are in a situation (say the child will step infront of a car and die) because it is an act in the interests of their safety.
p.s. labour did not wish to have the referendum with the upcoming election. Fair enough, look at it from their perspective, it is associating a private member's bill with a national political campaign
ReplyDeletepeople are not educated on the legal intricacys of our governance system
As taxpayers, the government is oblidged to spend $$$ on the referendum because it met the authentic number of signatures
It is a shame that Sue Bradford had to do this, because true fact the Nats did not want to change the law because it was working fine.
Private members bills are definately an interesting concept
Perhaps the next referendum on MMP/FPP will prove different because it won't be initiated by a private member but instead as a political party (I think) and this time it will be binding?
I reckon that sounds more practical in terms of democracy, even though the whole fpp /mpp thing is a bit of a wild idea considering we need better education on mmp and fpp before the average citizen should go near it!
MMP rocks :)
I like MMP too.
ReplyDelete