Wednesday, 16 May 2007

16 May 2007 - Family Integrity #251 -- Section 59 - Please send one last email by 2:00pm today

Greetings All

This is our last email to you before the vote for the most extreme anti-smacking law in the world (according to Dr Robert E Larzelere).

There will be a two hour discussion before the vote today.

I spoke to three different offices in Parliament to try to determine when the discussion and vote will be. It wont start before 4:00pm and may not start until after the tea break 6-7:30pm.

You can listen to the debate and to the voting here:

While talking to one office, the secretary told me that of all emails the MPs have received, they have consistently been 80/90% against the repeal or amendment of Section 59. Around the time of the first March on Parliament they received about 30 emails from those who are for repeal. So even since the amendment the emails are consistently against repeal. At the time that I was talking to the secretary she looked at the inbox of an MP and all 16 emails were against repeal.

Let us all send one last email to the MPs even if it is just "Please Keep Section 59" or "Section 59 - Vote with your Conscience" in the Subject line. The MPs need to know that we are against this right up to the end. That the 83% of us have not been swayed by Key, Clark and Bradford. The amendment is no protection for good parents. It is the world's most extreme anti-smacking law. If the MPs want to be in Parliament at the next election then they should vote against this Bill. Information on sending emails is at the end of this email.

"It's the people against Parliament now!"

1. From: Ron Mark
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2007 1:44 PM
Subject: RE: Most extreme legislation
Dear Correspondent,
Mr Mark has voted against the bill at 1st and 2nd readings - he sees it as interference in people's lives to an unnecessary degree. He also does
not believe it will have the effect of reducing real child abuse, which he abhors. 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. Regards, Jan Dyer,
Executive Assistant to Ron Mark MP, New Zealand First, Ph +64 4 4706693, Fax +64 4 4712414

At the moment this is how the MPs intend to vote unless they change their minds at the last moment:National, Labour, the Greens the Maori Party, and Progressive now support the bill while NZ First (at least 2 against) and United Future (2 against) are split. ACT's two MPs and Taito-Field will vote against the bill.


2. 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. Read more here:


3. Here is the Investigate link again.

And here is a link for some updates:


4. You might like to send this whole article to the MPs - Maybe if they get it 50, 100 or more times then they might read it before the debate and discussion (click on the link then copy and paste in a new email and copy the link too, then send to all the MPs) Here is a snippet from the article:

Politicians will vote this week on the world's most extreme anti-smacking law in the world, according to Dr Robert E Larzelere, Associate Professor of Human Development and Family Science at the Oklahoma State University, who was brought to New Zealand by Family First NZ as a scientific expert on child correction for the debate on Sue Bradford's anti-smacking bill.
In a commentary written after his week in NZ earlier this month speaking with politicians and media, he says "...the imminent New Zealand smacking ban is more extreme than Sweden's ban in three ways. Using force to correct children will be subject to full criminal penalties .... Sweden's ban had no criminal penalty. In addition, New Zealand's bill bans the mildest use of force to correct children, not just smacking. This removes most disciplinary enforcements parents have used for generations, especially for the most defiant youngsters. Finally, the required change in disciplinary enforcements will be the biggest change ever imposed on parents." Read more here:


Please send one last email before 2pm today. Tomorrow will be too late.
Please forward this email to your friends, neighbours and relations, any list that you are on and your Church email list. Thank you
Craig and Barbara Smith
P O Box 9064, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Phone: (06) 357-4399 or (06) 354-7699
Fax: (06) 357-4389

if Section59 is repealed - or replaced...

1. Lobbying tools
EMAIL: Consider sending an email to all the MPs using one of these links today:



LETTER: A very effective way to lobby, no stamp required for your own MP. Address to: (First Name)(Last Name), c/- Parliament Buildings, Wellington

FAX: This costs a bit more and is time consuming but effective.

PHONING: This is much easier to do than it would seem. You just ring the MP's office and say "Please add my name to the list of people you have who are against the Repeal or amendment of Section 59". You have to give your name of course and that is it.

Write letters to editors, talk on talk back shows, get your friends, relations and neighbours involved


You can read much commentary about it here:
Family Integrity newsletters:
Press Releases:
Family Integrity Blog:


3. Re-written Section 59 -- Parental Control
(1) Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of --
(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or
(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or
(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disuptive behaviour; or
(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.
(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1).
(4) To avoid doubt it is affirmed that police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against parents of any child, or those standing in place of any child, in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in pursuing a prosecution.


Please get your friends, neighbours and relations also lobbying the MPs. The fight must go on in the name of Freedom for families!
Please forward this email to your friends, neighbours, relations, Church email list, club email lists etc

No comments: