John Key Has Betrayed My Family
Far from winning a great victory, National leader John Key has betrayed every parent of young kids in this country.
By forcing National MPs to vote for Sue Bradford's miniscually amended anti-smacking bill, he has killed virtually any chance of abolishing the bill after the next election.
I have always been loathe to criticise John Key. It is not smart to aggravate those you wish to govern with.
However as the parent of two pre-schoolers I feel truly let down by someone I expected better of.
John Key could have taken the Thatcher/Reagan road. He could have told Clark and Bradford to pass their corrupt bill. He could have stuck to his guns and promised the nation he would repeal the bill immediately after winning the '08 election.
He could have but he didn't.
Rodney Hide is not happy either.
From the ACT website
ACT Leader Rodney Hide has written to Helen Clark and John Key urging them to allow their MPs a free vote on Sue Bradford's Anti-Smacking Bill.
"It's all very well for John Key and Helen Clark to decide that they want to criminalise parents who smack their children – but it's wrong that they dictate that their MPs must vote for the Bill.
"I don't believe that the majority of Parliament is for this Bill. I believe, given the choice, the majority of Labour and National MPs would vote with ACT against this Bill. But there's only one way to find out: Have a free vote in Parliament. After all, if Helen and John think the Bill is so good, then they should have no problem allowing their MPs a free vote.
"Make no mistake this Bill criminalises parents who smack their children. The Bill states its purpose is to abolish the use of parental force for the purpose of correction. Clause 4 substitutes a new section 59(2) into the Crimes Act 1961 and declares:
"(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction."
"The amendment that John Key and Helen Clark have agreed to does nothing to alter the fact that parents who smack their children will be breaking the law. All it does is confirm that the police have discretion as to whether they will prosecute parents who smack their kids.
"Smacking parents may not be prosecuted but they will still be breaking the law and Sue Bradford's Bill makes good, loving parents criminals.
"It's an atrocious Bill. That's why we need a free vote" said Rodney Hide.
By forcing National MPs to vote for Sue Bradford's miniscually amended anti-smacking bill, he has killed virtually any chance of abolishing the bill after the next election.
I have always been loathe to criticise John Key. It is not smart to aggravate those you wish to govern with.
However as the parent of two pre-schoolers I feel truly let down by someone I expected better of.
John Key could have taken the Thatcher/Reagan road. He could have told Clark and Bradford to pass their corrupt bill. He could have stuck to his guns and promised the nation he would repeal the bill immediately after winning the '08 election.
He could have but he didn't.
Rodney Hide is not happy either.
From the ACT website
ACT Leader Rodney Hide has written to Helen Clark and John Key urging them to allow their MPs a free vote on Sue Bradford's Anti-Smacking Bill.
"It's all very well for John Key and Helen Clark to decide that they want to criminalise parents who smack their children – but it's wrong that they dictate that their MPs must vote for the Bill.
"I don't believe that the majority of Parliament is for this Bill. I believe, given the choice, the majority of Labour and National MPs would vote with ACT against this Bill. But there's only one way to find out: Have a free vote in Parliament. After all, if Helen and John think the Bill is so good, then they should have no problem allowing their MPs a free vote.
"Make no mistake this Bill criminalises parents who smack their children. The Bill states its purpose is to abolish the use of parental force for the purpose of correction. Clause 4 substitutes a new section 59(2) into the Crimes Act 1961 and declares:
"(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction."
"The amendment that John Key and Helen Clark have agreed to does nothing to alter the fact that parents who smack their children will be breaking the law. All it does is confirm that the police have discretion as to whether they will prosecute parents who smack their kids.
"Smacking parents may not be prosecuted but they will still be breaking the law and Sue Bradford's Bill makes good, loving parents criminals.
"It's an atrocious Bill. That's why we need a free vote" said Rodney Hide.
posted by Trevor Loudon at
5/15/2007 08:06:00 PM
5 Comments:
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah Rodders. You were more colourful when you were a perk-buster - and one of the crew on Jonathan Hunt's most expensive ever Speaker's Tour.
But that was then and this is now. Today, in the electorate office, you've had the most exquisite massaging from a squadron of blue rinse. All suckin' up to ya, makin' ya feel good.
Guess that's why you feel bullet proof cuz, comin' out with essentially flighty crap, just 'cos you're "up".
You'll win Epsom again my friend and good on ya. If I was sentenced to live "in the shadow" I'd vote for you too ! Might as well have someone "interesting" to stroke the folk there. Better than that pompous fart Worth in my book.
Overall however, there's a side show, and you're it !
Serious note: this law will change the consciousness - no decent parents will get prosecuted - I'll be first there if they are - but in 20 years 15 year old males who would otherwise be nasty little women and children bashers will have a different consciousness !
That's what this law is all about you antediluvians !
Steve-the abolition of corporal punishment in schools was sold on the basis that it would reduce violence, by changing the "conciousness".
I would argue that youth violence and societal violence in general has increased since 1990.
I predict that violence against kids and in society in general will rise because of this bill.
What's the bet that serious violence against children continues to rise Steve?
Spare your breath Trevor, people like Steve are not interested in facts or statistics. And he certainly won't come back in 20 years to apologise.
But I take issue with another statement: John Key could have taken the Thatcher/Reagan road.
That would have required leadership skills. J.K. is deal maker. Not a leader. Unfortunately that seems the best we can expect in hopefully the next NZ PM.
You're dead right Trevor.
John thinks he's being smart, working at getting votes. But it's all too pragmatic. Just this vote-winning stuff, no real policies that they stick to! It's blimmin frustrating.
Here's what Ron Mark's been saying:
He voted for the amendment at the committee stage because, as it was evident the bill is going to pass, it was better to soften it than have it pass unadulterated. Having said that, however, he believes the amendment to be a nonsense. His intention is still to vote against the Bill in its entirety at the third reading this week, as he is fundamentally opposed to it.
Help me, that's just bureaucratic bull shite.
Key hasn't betrayed my trust because he never had it.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home