|
| |
Editorial
opinion July 2009
Referendum question will not satisfy
people on either side of ‘debate’
Despite a "NZ Herald" -- and others --
survey that showed some three out of four Nzers believed that a multimillion
dollar referendum was an unnecessary waste of taxpayers’ money, the referendum
will go ahead.
The key issues behind the question will not satisfy people on either side of the
‘debate’. You will only have the choice of answering “YES” or “NO”. And the
question will read…
"Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New
Zealand?"
Let us look at the question itself -
smack
* When does a smack become a hit - how hard…?
* a smack where - hand leg, ear, hair …?
* a smack with what - hand, foot, 4X2.…?
good parental correction
* What does “good” mean ?
* Who constitutes a “good parent” ?
* If the parent has an adult child, what then ?
* At what age then does this applyParliament, with no interest in altering the Law
-- key MPs hav said they won't return their papers -- supported by the Commission’s report [see*1
right] on what has actually transpired as a result of the 'new' Law.
At
very best for the promoters of the Referendum, they can expect that Police will be
aware that ‘trivial’ reports can be ignored. Rather obvious already, it would
seem.
So how does one decide "yes" or "no" ? Is it possible to invalidate the question
and have that recorded in the total results? Invalidated votes are usually
recorded so...
|
|
|
|
[*1] NZ Herald Jul 07, 2009 advised…
Parents have little reason to fear prosecution if they give their child a
trivial smack, according to a legal opinion prepared by the Human Rights
Commission.
The commission, which released the legal opinion yesterday, said it wanted
to help inform debate before the non-binding citizens-initiated referendum
on the child smacking law.
It said critics had argued that the new law, which came into force two years
ago, created uncertainty for parents.
However, the legal opinion said the original section 59 of the Crimes Act
was no clearer.
It said the use of force by parents "by way of correction" was justified if
the force was "reasonable in the circumstances".
Read in full….
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/the-smacking-debate/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501165&objectid=10582926
.. Which ends…"The real issue is that there should be no tolerance for
violence against children, even in the guise of parental correction."
The referendum will be held by postal ballot from July 31 to August 21.
|
Until
the Herald (Monday, July 27,2009 PpA2)
everyone seems unaware that clause 4 in the bill advises Police to take no
action when the actions "where the offence is
considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in
proceeding with a prosecution."
Personally I will return my voting paper with a big cross over it and in big
letters "INVALID LOADED QUESTION"
-- PER Managing-Editor
NB:
These matters may be on the thoughts of others . Do
share your thoughts with us – with or without your name being published (but your
identity must known to Editor).
Puhoi's Tourist site*
www.puhoi.com Have you
taken photos in Puhoi? - Please let us know
Waiwera's Tourist site*
www.waiwera-nz.com Have you
taken photos in Waiwera? - Please let us know
|
