Let us look at some of the comments that have been made this evening. Annette King said that no one is asking for the change. Well, I wonder what planet she is on. Over 300,000 people took the trouble to put their names to a petition asking for a referendum on this issue. Over 300,000 people took the trouble to ask for a referendum, and 1.4 million voted to change the law—1.4 million; 87.4 percent. Annette King has the gall to sit there and say that no one wants a change in the law, and no one is asking for this. She should listen to the people of New Zealand. This is absolutely about reflecting the views of 1.4 million people; 87 percent of people. It is no wonder that politicians have a bad reputation amongst the people of New Zealand; it is no wonder. Even when 1.4 million people—87 percent—voted to change the law, Labour members sit there and totally ignore these people and show their absolute contempt for them.

However, let me make one acknowledgment. I thank Annette King for the time that she took to discuss this bill. I asked to speak with Mr Goff and he gave me the courtesy of his time, and Annette King joined the discussion. For that I am grateful; I appreciated the opportunity. I was unsuccessful in convincing Labour members to support the bill, but I certainly appreciated the opportunity to speak.

Let me turn now to some comments that Chester Borrows made. He said: “Look, this law is based on my Supplementary Order Paper. If we had had the numbers, we would have passed this law.” So Chester Borrows is saying that had the National Party had the numbers 4 years ago when this law was originally passed, this is what would have happened. Chester says: “Well, it’s a dog’s breakfast. It’s a dog’s breakfast; it’s a law that is not easy to understand.” What do I say to this Parliament? I say surely it is the job of this Parliament to pass laws that can be understood, and that can be enforced. Surely we have no greater responsibility than to pass laws that can give people certainty.

I would like to quote a couple of paragraphs from the explanatory note of the bill. In particular, it states: “Section 59(4) also creates confusion with its reference to Police discretion. According to members of Parliament, the intention of this subsection is to provide a safeguard against the consequences of banning reasonable physical correction, so that parents will not be ‘subject automatically to investigation and police prosecution’ if they give their child a light ‘smack’ …”. The law is not certain. Although Mr Borrows referred to 33 people being charged, I ask how many thousands of parents do not actually know what the law is. They do not actually have the confidence. I say to Mr Borrows, and to National members, that surely we owe the people of New Zealand a law that is simple and that can be understood.

My bill was drawn out of the ballot just 3 days after the results of the referendum were announced. It was drawn out of the ballot at 12.00 on a Wednesday, and by 4.30 that afternoon, 4½ hours later, National had called a press conference and said it would not be supporting my bill. National members said they would not give effect to those 1.4 million people, the 87 percent of New Zealanders, who voted in the referendum for a change in the law. Annette King says this is political. It is not political, I say to Annette King; it is representing and standing up for the rights of those people. If the member wants to ignore them, I say good luck to her, but I am not prepared to and I am very proud that my ACT colleagues and I take the same view. Thank you

“The latest issue of ‘Investigate’ raises serious doubts about the review into the anti-smacking law, which was conducted by clinical psychologist Nigel Latta, assisted by Police Commissioner Howard Broad and Social Development Ministry head Peter Hughes,” Mr Boscawen said.

“The article asserts that the review was grossly misleading and, in some cases, completely incorrect. In one case the report cites a father convicted of common assault for allegedly striking his daughter with a telephone book and punching her in the side of the head after she wagged school. Yet the report fails to mention these allegations were never substantiated and the father was charged with assault after admitting to smacking his daughter’s leg with an open hand.

“In another case, a daughter alleged her father punched her in the face and mouth three times. The Latta report claimed that, following the police investigation, the father was convicted of assault and discharged on condition of counselling sessions – yet official police records show he was discharged without conviction and police agreed that no punching had occurred.

“The Latta report was used as justification that the law works and doesn’t need to be changed. But how can parents – let alone the Government – put their faith in a report that appears to contain so many inaccuracies?

“Prime Minister John Key promised that parents would be able to lightly smack their child without fear of investigation or prosecution. The ‘Investigate’ report shows otherwise.

“It’s time the Government stopped wasting taxpayers’ money on flawed reviews. Mr Key promised to amend the law if good parents were being criminalised. He must honour that pledge and adopt my Private Member’s Bill to amend the law so that lightly smacking for the purpose of correction is no longer a crime,” Mr Boscawen said

“Instead of focusing on the real causes of child abuse, valuable police resources have been tied up investigating and reporting on the anti-smacking law; meanwhile child abuse rates have continued to soar,” Mr Boscawen said.

“Instead of continuing to waste police resources over the next three years investigating and issuing reports on a law which has had no impact on child abuse, the Government should change it and give law-abiding parents the certainty that they asked for.

“When talking to Michael Laws last year Prime Minister John Key admitted that the law ‘basically says that you can’t smack your kids’. This problem could be easily fixed by adopting my private members Bill which would amend the law.

“Police resources would no longer be wasted and law-abiding parents would have certainty – which is all they have ever asked for,” Mr Boscawen said.

“I was not surprised to find that this report contained nothing more than recommendations that will see more taxpayers dollars wasted on pointless bureaucracy,” Mr Boscawen said.

“The report recommends the introduction of a parent support helpline, the publication of guidelines for social workers and a requirement for police and others to tell parents what to expect, what their rights are and what they can do when they want to question what is happening.

“Not one of these recommendations will do anything to address the serious problem of child abuse in New Zealand. Rather than addressing abuse, this law has become a circus – the hallmarks of which are endless costs, go-nowhere reviews, increased bureaucracy, and a huge waste of police resources.

“It shouldn’t be this difficult to make a law work. Rather than wasting even more taxpayers dollars creating ever-increasing levels of bureaucracy, National should adopt my Private Members Bill. Then, parents will have real certainty under the law,” Mr Boscawen said.

“In it, Social Development Ministry CEO Peter Hughes basically admits that he cannot conclude one way or the other whether parents are being subjected to unnecessary state intervention for lightly smacking their children,” Mr Boscawen said.

“Mr Hughes cites a lack of sufficient data with which to draw a definitive conclusion. He cannot even conclude whether the Act is resulting in a safer and more secure environment for children – the very purpose of the review.

“The fact is that no one will ever be charged under Section 59 as it is not counted as an offence type. People who smack their child are instead charged under the Crimes Act – making it near impossible to extrapolate accurate Section 59 figures.

“We have a law that must be reviewed, but no cogent data to review it – meaning today’s report contains no conclusions and isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. If there were ever any intention of it being effective, proper mechanisms would have been put in place to record accurate information and allow for proper assessment of its effectiveness.

“The review of the Anti-Smacking law was set up to be a whitewash in order to give the perception of action – making the public think that the law could be changed when, in fact, it never would. Meanwhile, parents are still left not knowing where they stand under a law that does not achieve its purpose,” Mr Boscawen said.

“National thought the recent referendum results could be ignored and that New Zealanders would forget – but the full-page ad in today’s New Zealand Herald advertising a ‘March For Democracy’ on November 21 2009 shows otherwise,” Mr Boscawen said.

“This issue won’t go away – 87 percent of Kiwis voted ‘No’, asserting that a smack shouldn’t be a criminal offence. My Private Members Bill achieves that, yet National refuses to support it. It is Parliament that is responsible for making the law and if this law is flawed – as the Prime Minister agrees – then it’s Parliament’s job to fix it.

“Two years ago New Zealanders marched on the streets against a ‘we know best’ Labour-led Government that refused to listen to its citizens. Labour paid the price for this at the last election. Now, barely one year later, New Zealanders are forced to march against a new Government that in this case has proven no better than its predecessor.

“It’s great to see New Zealanders coming together to exercise their right to democracy and I wish the organisers of this event all the best,” Mr Boscawen said.

“Waimakiriri generated 27,071 ‘No’ votes in the Anti-Smacking Referendum – the most out of all Labour seats. That’s far more than the 16,360 people who voted Mr Cosgrove in as their local MP,” Mr Boscawen said

“That’s 16,360 people who are probably feeling pretty ripped off right now. After all, New Zealanders expect their electorate MPs to be their voice in Parliament – what the people of Waimakariri got was an MP who tries to run their lives and tell them what to do.

“This is no longer solely about the smacking referendum results but, rather, the bigger issue of democracy – something Mr Cosgrove clearly doesn’t understand, otherwise he would be listening to his constituents and supporting a change to the law.

“It’s time for Mr Cosgrove to front up. Next week I will be holding a public meeting on the results of the Anti-Smacking Referendum – the second of a series to be held throughout the country and designed to maintain pressure on politicians about this issue.

“This meeting will be held in Mr Cosgrove’s Waimakiriri electorate and I challenge him to come along and face his constituents, to explain why he knows better than them how they should live their lives and raise their children,” Mr Boscawen said.

Public Meeting On The Smacking Referendum, Monday, September 21 2009, 7.30pm, St Bedes College, 210 Main North Road, Papanui, Christchurch

For further information on the public debates schedule please visit http://www.act.org.nz/events

“More people voted ‘No’ within the Mt Roskill electorate than voted for Mr Goff to be their local MP. It’s time Mr Goff fronted up to the residents of Mt Roskill to explain why he is ignoring their wishes and why he thinks he knows best,” Mr Boscawen said.

“In fact, out of the 70 electoral seats in Parliament, 56 electorates had more residents vote ‘No’ in the referendum, than who voted for the MP who now represents them. I have yet to see one of those MPs fighting for a change in the law.

“New Zealanders vote for their electorate MPs to be their voice in Parliament – not so that those MPs can run their lives and tell them what to do.

“That is why I will be holding not one, but a series of public debates around the country on the smacking referendum and how the adoption of my Private Members Bill – to amend Section 59 – could solve this issue. I intend to hold a public debate in the Helensville electorate where 25,327 voted ‘No’.

“I will be challenging the local electorate MP in each area – including Prime Minister John Key – to front up to their constituents, and defend their decision not to support a change to the law.

“This is no longer just about the smacking referendum; it’s about the whole democratic process in New Zealand. After all, what value is there in an electorate MP that doesn’t listen to their constituents?”

“Under the constitutional principle of the rule of law, our citizens need to have certainty that they can go about their lawful business without fear or threat of being detained or investigated by the police. I am delighted that Professor Jim Evans, Emeritus Professor of Auckland Law School, has agreed to address this issue at the Mt Roskill meeting,” Mr Boscawen said.

Public Debate On Smacking Referendum, Monday, September 7 2009, 7.30pm, Hay Park School, 670 Richardson Road, Mt Roskill, Auckland

For more information contact kbridgman@xtra.co.nz or phone 09 531 5531

“More than 1.4 million people voted ‘NO’ in the referendum, expressing their view that lightly smacking children for the purpose of correction should no longer be illegal. My Bill offers the Government the perfect opportunity to achieve this,” Mr Boscawen said.

“Despite what the critics say, my Bill does not condone child abuse. It simply clearly defines the use of reasonable force for correction and states that the effect must be no more than transitory or trifling.

“The fact is that parents need certainty under the law and my Bill – by amending Section 59 of the Crimes Act – achieves that.

“Earlier this month Prime Minister John Key stated on TVNZ’s ‘Breakfast’ that National would have supported this amendment had the Party been in Government when the current law was passed. If he was happy to support it then, he should be happy to support it now.

“ACT is still the only Party listening to parents and supporting a law change. Ignoring the voice of 1.4 million people is anti-democratic. If Mr Key and National want to do the right thing they should listen to the people of New Zealand and support ACT by passing this Bill,” Mr Boscawen said.

“New Zealanders have tonight made it clear that the Anti-Smacking law passed by National, the Greens and Labour is not working,” Mr Boscawen said.

“ACT has spent two years as the only Party in Parliament listening to the views of the public on this issue – which is why I have introduced the Crimes (Reasonable Parental Control and Correction) Amendment Private Member’s Bill on behalf of ACT.

“This Bill is ready to go and Prime Minister John Key could introduce it quickly to Parliament as a Government Bill so that good prents are no longer criminalized.

“This Bill will specifically set out the conditions that a light smack for the purpose of correction can be used, stating that the use of force is defined as unreasonable:

‘if it should cause the child to suffer injury that is no more than transitional or trifling; or it is inflicted with any weapon, tool or other implement; or it is inflicted in any means that is cruel or degrading.’

“My Bill will stop the criminalising of good parents and give them certainty under the law. New Zealand has spoken loud and clear and the Government must heed the call of an overwhelming majority of New
Zealanders,” Mr Boscawen said.