Posts Tagged ‘referendum’

Well, it's not their money they are spending

Kiwi Party leader Larry Baldock  didn't get his the way for the first referendum, so he decides to have another go - this time, it's on whether a referendum should be binding.

I actually agree with him this time. In a democracy people should be the utilmate ruler, and a binding referendum provides a check on politicans, preventing them from forgetting who voted them in the first place.

However, in order to make the referendum binding, there are some criteria the referendum you have to meet first - the most obvious one - people ought to at least know what it binds for. The last referendum question is by no contest, the worst example of this.

It was very clear from the start, Mr Baldock hijacked the smacking issue for his own political gains, and this time he didn't even bother to hide his intention - he wants the referendum to coincide with the next general election.

Stunned

Thinking about voting in the child discipline referendum ? Don't know how to decide? This elegantly produced flow chart will help to make the right decision (warning: large picture).

The related story can be found here.

Corporal punishment referendum

I supported the amendment on section 59 of the Crimes Act, or commonly known as the "anti-smacking bill" . New Zealand is far from a safe heaven for children to grow up, although a change in law would not solve the problem our society is facing in a split second, but you always need to start on something.

The fundamental problem of child abuse is the parents, not the law nor the children. I could still recall that some of people who oppose the bill even made a personal threat to the Green MP Sue Bradford: that left you wondering, if they don't even treat a human being, an adult in a proper manner, how do you expect them to take care of their children?

However, for this referendum, there is another problem, the question used for voting:

Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?

I'm not quite sure who was behind the basis of this question,  Clerk of the House finalised the question but I guess the basis of the question was the work of  some Christian fundamentalists, but I mean, can it get any more stupid  than this? This question carries a clear presumption that smacking (at least some kinds of smacking) is "good parental correction" - well if so, then what heck we are debating about? Should a good thing be criminalised? It's a no brainer question, even I can write something better than that:

Should the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007 (Commonly known as the "anti-smacking legislation") be repealed?

That's the root of all the fuss is it?

I (and many others) actually believe that smacking is not a tool parents should be used to teach their kids as it is inherently bad,  but if the currently adapted question is being asked in the referendum, there is no way I could tick either yes or no. For that reason, I will not be voting in this referendum.