Tuesday, 29 December 2009

New Blog/Website

New website/blogsite
Please go to http://www.FamilyIntegrity.org.nz for all new updates

Tuesday, 24 June 2008

390,000+ signatures

Re-Presentation to Parliament of Petition against the ‘anti-smacking/anti-correction law’. June 23rd, 2008.

390,000+ signatures

Monday, 23 June 2008

Christian comedian Charles Marshall Spanking bit 1

Christian comedian Charles Marshall Spanking bit 1
Thanks for rating!

Friday, 20 June 2008

Re: Pro Choice Propaganda


Saturday, 1 March 2008

Friday, 25 January 2008

FI-342-U4L; New Total, weekend events

25 January 2008 - Family Integrity #342 -- U4L; New Total, weekend events

From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 8:31 AM
Subject: U4L; New Total, weekend events

Hi All,

It's starting to happen folk

The grand total running into the weekend is now 273,000 signatures, unfortunately, due to a technical hitch our web site won't be updated for a couple of days. We are working on the problem.

One of the main objectives of Unity for Liberty was to be a vehicle that all like minded groups on this issue could use and work through. To defeat this bad law we need to have unity which will lead to liberty. Rodney Hide from the Act Party has stepped up to the plate, he used his time on Radio Live this week to raise the issue and promote Unity for Liberty as a downloading site for the petition, we thank him for this.

Below is a short testimony and an appeal from a person who did the hard yards at the beginning of the campaign and helped to get the ball rolling, followed by some appeals from coordinators.

After being involved in fighting this 'Anti smacking bill' through organising protests, ringing Radio Live, collecting signatures etc.... I thought I'd done enough and that it was someone else's turn.

I wanted to let you know that after seeing how close we are, I'm more determined than ever to get as many as I can!

So I started today, hitting the back streets of Feilding and gathering signatures - they want to sign!!
Tonight while picking up fish n' chips I got 4 signatures from people waiting. I keep a clipboard in the car and also approached two building sites.

I'm seriously thinking of heading out to Ratana south of Wanganui -30,000 people there for the next day or so? Can anyone help?


Starting from the North down:


We plan to set up a booth at Orewa's A&P show on the Western Reserve this coming Sunday 27th January with the CIR petitions and signs. We need people to man the booth and collect signatures outside the booth. 4 people per time period would be good. Please register your interest with me asap.

9.00- 12.00 Peter & Arna Mountain. (We unfortunately have another engagement at 1.00pm)
12.00- 2.00pm
2.00- 4.00
We would like the last person will be responsible to take down the gazebo and pack up the trestle tables and return them to the Mountains, 24 Duncansby Rd
Stanmore Bay.

Arna Mountain
021 166 2924

West Auckland

Helensville A&P Show has been confirmed, still waiting for Kumeu. Dates to be announced next week.
027 471 7099

South Auckland

Monday night door knocking, Next Monday meeting between 6-6.15pm in the Covenant Church Carpark, 77 Rogers Road, Manurewa. Contact Gaylene gaylene@unityforliberty.net.nz or 021 076 7211. The following week will be Manukau New Life carpark as well. Also our tables will continue.


If you wish to help please contact:

Larry Baldock
021 864 833


Steve, our new coordinator is going well with locations around the Waikato, there are initiatives running from Te Rapa to Cambridge. Looking for volunteers.

021 963 626


Taieri Show Saturday 26th January manning tables, gathering signatures in the crowd. Great team at this Show, come along and enjoy the people while getting those final signatures .

Waimumu Field Days Gore 13th, 14th, 15th February manning tables, gathering signatures, pouring the coffee!!! Great event come and help and enjoy this amazing Southland Event.

027 217 4666

Don't forget the others who may be in your area

Thank you
Craig Hill

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing"
(Edmund Burke 1729-1797)

Media-Smack in the middle of hysteria

Smack in the middle of hysteria


Miranda Devine
January 24, 2008

Illustration: Ed Aragon

At the gym one day during the holidays a mother was struggling with a shrieking toddler. The child had worked himself into hysteria and the sounds of his distress gave new meaning to “piercing” for those of us caught in the maelstrom. In the shower at first I thought I was hearing a hurricane ripping off a steel roof. Apart from prompting a flash of admiration for such energy and stamina from so small a set of lungs, the sound was deeply disturbing.

It continued for five or 10 minutes. All over the gym, from the pool to the women’s changing room, concerned gym-goers tiptoed towards the source of the sound to determine the cause of distress, retreating in embarrassment when they saw the mother, sitting passively in the face of such fury.

She seemed calm, if hunkered down, not remonstrating with the child, in fact scarcely acknowledging his drama, just unemotionally absorbing the noise at close quarters. Perhaps she was deaf.

On top of the incivility of subjecting others to the noise in a not particularly child-friendly establishment, her zen-like refusal to even try to dim the din was annoying.

Everyone else was powerless to control the volume and was waiting for her to do her job, or at least to remove the child to a place where his noise would not be amplified by porcelain-tiled walls.

What was her plan? Was she so exhausted by a difficult child that she could only cope by remaining silent? Or was she merely exercising a modern form of permissive parenting?

It was obviously not what the child wanted - he needed a reaction to all his effort, though after a while he was beyond reason. It can’t have been what the mother wanted, and it sure wasn’t what anyone else in the gym wanted.

People wanted to reach out and help the wretched woman and her poor child, but were at a loss.

How do you tell a women her child needs a good smack?

Remembering the bossy older women who used to exasperate my friends and me when our children were younger by offering unsolicited snarky advice about our tots’ perceived public misbehaviour, I hesitate before casting judgment on other mothers. We even started a joke support group, “Mothers Against Meanies” (MAM) to get the nosey-parkers to back off.

But, seriously, what happened to discipline? Little in the history of parenting has ever proven as effective as a sharp rebuke or, dare I say it, a swift smack on the bottom that acts as an instant “reboot” of a naughty child.

Some people will never agree with corporal punishment. But that doesn’t mean they can’t or shouldn’t control their kids; it’s just more complicated. For their own sake as much as for the children, not to mention the rest of society, they should at least try.

In the ABC-TV program The Madness of Modern Families, on Tuesday night, a British father described meal-times in his child-led household: “There’s been times when we’ve cooked a healthy meal and plonked it down in front of the children and then seen them eat nothing and worry they’re going to wake up in the night, and think it’d be easier to cook them another meal now.”

That’s not good parenting. It’s a recipe for monsters.

This reluctance by well-meaning modern parents to enforce fair, firm, quickly administered discipline is creating havoc with the generation into which infamous Melbourne party planner Corey Delaney (aka Worthington) was born.

The 16-year-old with the pierced nipple and trademark yellow sunglasses achieved international notoriety when he threw an out-of-control party while his parents were away, attracting 500 teenagers and the police riot squad.

He doesn’t seem a bad kid, and was at least trying to sweep up the mess the next day when TV cameras descended. His refusal to be intimidated by A Current Affair’s school-marmish interviewer was commendable. It’s his ineffectual parents, Jo and Steve Delaney, who are the problem, with their posturing TV interviews, “open letter” to newspapers and utter inability to command their son’s respect.

“He’s devastated,” Jo Delaney told one program while her son was on a rival channel boasting about “the best party ever”.

Public opinion on the internet advocates a firmer approach. The website www.slapcorey.com, has an image of the spotty, barechested teen, and a hand you can click to administer the punishment. By yesterday afternoon almost 650,000 people had indulged.

The Delaneys seem typical of a subset of laissez-faire baby-boomer parents who haven’t learned to say “No”.

Data from a new NSW Government parent helpline shows a crisis in parental confidence, with 20 per cent of calls from parents tearing out their hair about how to discipline their unruly offspring. And a study last year from the Vanderbilt Medical Centre in Tennessee found a third of parents believe their discipline methods are “never” or only “sometimes effective”.

Perhaps working parents try to outsource discipline and training of their children to nannies and other carers in the mistaken hope that family time will be calm. Perhaps step-parents are reluctant to mete out discipline, concerned the child will not recognise their authority.

Meanwhile the anti-smacking lobby is flexing its muscles, with the Australian Childhood Foundation pushing for a national law, following New Zealand, to prevent parents using corporal punishment. The Federal Government last year even gave them $2.5 million to fund a campaign warning parents not to smack.

The idea is that banning smacking in the home reduces violence in society. But common sense and the facts say the opposite, that lax parenting leads to more aggressive children.

The Norwegian bullying expert and psychology professor Dan Olweus has shown that “overly permissive parenting” actually creates bullies. No one wants to go back to an era in which children were seen and not heard, or belted when they were bad. There is plenty to admire about today’s parents, who are involved and interested in their children’s lives, and treat them with respect.

But there is a sensible middle ground, in which a firm “No”, even the odd smack, or raised voice, does not make you a bad parent. At the very least, if permissive parents want to give their misbehaving children free rein, could they please do it in the privacy of their own homes. Preferably with soundproofing.

Media - Gisborne Herald

Anti-smacking law likely to come under more heavy fire this year

The Gisborne Herald

http://www.gisborneherald.co.nz/Default.aspx?s=3&s1=2&id=2924913200c34d588eb1b03c5ba41246Thursday, 24 January 2008

By Iain Gillies

Politicians look like being confronted, challenged and possibly embarrassed by the prospect of a referendum on the anti-smacking law later this year, almost certainly held in tandem with the next election.

Opponents of the controversial legislation initiated by Green MP Sue Bradford are now close to the 300,000 signatures necessary to force a citizen’s initiated referenda.

Almost 5000 signatures were obtained last weekend, including 1000 at the World Cup of Motorsport event at Taupo, 720 at a “blues, brews and barbecues” event in Hastings and other tallies from A&P Shows.

The current total of almost 268,000 represents a gain of 43,000 in the past two months, suggesting no diminution of public feeling on the issue.

Principal organiser Larry Baldock told The Gisborne Herald: “We’ve got to keep it moving, but we’re pretty confident we’ll be able to see this through to a referendum.”

Two petitions are being canvassed with a deadline of February 28 to obtain the signatures of at least 10 percent of registered electors and present them to the Clerk of the House of Representatives.

The first — “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand? — is in the name of Aucklander Sheryl Savill, a mother-of-two who works with Focus on the Family and whose husband is a policeman.

The second, in Mr Baldock’s name, is “Should the Government give urgent priority to understanding and addressing the wider causes of family breakdown, family violence and child abuse in New Zealand?”

As a former United Future MP Mr Baldock has been the public face of the campaign since the petitions began circulating a year ago, with strong support from volunteers, organised groups and churches.

The terms for organising and conducting Citizen’s Initiated Referenda (CIR) are defined by legislation enacted by the Bolger administration in 1993, since when only two petitions have reached the point of forcing a plebiscite.

Interesting stuff . . . but even a referendum result is not binding on the Government.

Thursday, 24 January 2008

Section 59 and Foster Children


Jim Mora on The Panel (note: audit link) yesterday spoke with with Mike Williams (Labour President) and Graham Bell (ex. cop). They spoke about the concerns of foster parents, raised earlier today in other media.It sheds some light on the issue, and makes a point that we have always made - that the new legal framework puts far more power in the hands of children than parents. This is then resulting in people choosing to avoid what was already an increasingly risky proposition - caring for troubled children.

Interview transcribed below.

Jim: … does this make sense to you panel?

Mike Williams: It does make a lot of sense to me and it seems to be that it could… um, if this is a problem a) they don’t’ tell us any numbers, is this two people have dropped out of 8 people, or, you know, 200 out of 800 - what is it, we don’t know. [actually, they said at least 10, so Mike is playing with the truth here just a little - S1] But it seems to me that you do not need to smack children to bring them up, I’m sure Jim you do not smack your own beautiful children and these people need training and that’s what should be offered to them.

Jim: I suppose so, … a lot of parents talk about this, we all hear people up and down the country discuss this and especially in the wake of the recent warning in Christchurch where that bloke was given a warning for ostensibly, ostensibly flicking his son on the head - isn’t that precisely the kind of trivial breach of the law that we were told would be more or less ignored?

Graham Bell: That’s right, and I said when this thing came out that it was just totally pointless, ill conceived, and was going to create problems, and was not going to stop the ill-treatment or murder of one child - it’s not going to prevent anything. These things have continued, there’s been another couple in Auckland since the, ah, this year, the bill is ill-conceived, a waste of time and it’s having more bad effects than good ones.

Jim: I take your point too mike and Allysa, and we’ll get her on in a minute and there’s a quote from her:

“These kids are really hard. They just don’t care who they hurt, and you need really special people to take them on. If you have a kid that is yelling and screaming at you, what are you supposed to do?”

Jim: So she’s talking about life at the coal face, and she joins, Allysa Carberry joins us now. Good Afternoon Allysa.

Allysa Carberry: Hi

Jim: So how bad is it, I mean, Mike Williams says how many people involved.. in your experience have left the whole area because of the new law?

Allysa: [points out that she was interviewed on a different topic]

Jim: nevertheless you do hold those beliefs do you?

Allysa: Ah, it’s the fear of being charged should you need to restrain a child or place a child in care, in time out. That’s a real fear. But there’s also, you know, caregivers are also leaving because of the statements that Brian Perkins made, about being dissatisfied with Child Youth and Family. So it’s not just one issue of why they’re leaving. Yes section, the repeal of section 59 is there in the background, but it’s a whole number of topics of why they’re leaving.

Jim: Hm, all right, so the headline “Anti-smacking worries push foster parents out” how accurate a reflection of your views and observations Allysa is that headline?

Allysa: The anti-smacking, it’s got nothing to do with anti-smacking as it states caregivers have never been allowed to smack foster-children.

Jim: [cautiously]Officially

Allysa: Officially [hard to describe the tone here - high I guess. One gets the impression that Allysa knows it happens and needs to happen sometimes] Um, they’ve never been allowed to do that but there have been kids, children in care that have been needed to be restrained because they were going to hurt themselves or others, and that’s… a real… fear that’s a really good possibility of it happening.........

Read the rest here at halfdone:


FI-341-U4L, attention please

23 January 2008 - Family Integrity #341 -- U4L, attention please

From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 9:24 PM
Subject: U4L, attention please

Hi All,



By the end of the working week, we will achieved 270,000 signatures. This means the target of 300,000 sigs is not beyond reach. These signatures will be marched up the steps of Parliament on the 29th of February, "Our politicians will be kept honest".


1) Keep up the work, as the deadline approaches we can not afford to become complacent. Now is the time for all to step up and be counted, our future generations depend on us making this happen.

2) Send all petitions in as soon as possible, The count is based on received mail, please do not wait till the last week.

I wish to take this moment to thank everyone for all their effort to date, well done.

Our official count is 268,095 signatures, here is last week's counts

From Larry:

Official count was 263,145
2050 from our trip to Taupo and Hastings
300 Steve and Angela in Wairoa. (bad weather halved the crowd)
1200 last week +500 this weekend from Craig
500 Andy Christchurch
400 Marion, Elspeth and team in Tauranga Friday Sat. (more than 1000 this week, and yes I am proud of them. The per capita winning city prize is looking within Tauranga's sights now Andy J ! )

This gives the grand total of 268,095. Now since this figure was released we have received notice from Renton, he collected 700 at the Golden Bay A&P Show, plus 239 from the South Auckland door knocking group, another 30 from a friend and 110 from the Papakura table today. These figures are not included in the grand total.


Below are some interesting registrations for everyones encouragement:

I am an expat from Epsom electorate working in Brunei. Can i sign the petition and e-mail it to you or must it be in hard copy? AB.

Greetings, I read your Website, and agree totally with the erroneous arrogance of present day politicians. Briefly, I also work overseas, so am limited with my time commitment in assisting. Just to give me that warm fuzzy feeling, I have expedited a Petition List, and will forward this to you when I have as many names as possible, plus forwarding the same to other Friends. I have 25 signatures already the first 2 hours, and will with certainly have more to follow. Thank you for making the first Move. Regards DL.

Thank You All,

Craig Hill
021 746 113

All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing
(Edmund Burke 1728-1797)

Tuesday, 22 January 2008

Media-Parent smacking ban is ruled out

Parent smacking ban is ruled out

Wales will not have the power to ban parents from smacking their children, the assembly government has been told.

The UK government said new law-making powers for the assembly government to protect vulnerable children would not extend to a complete smacking ban.

It said this would impinge on the criminal justice system, which is not devolved to Wales.

The assembly government said it still had the right to ban smacking in childrens' homes or by carers.

This comes within the boundaries of 'social welfare', which the assembly government has control over.

The Labour-Plaid coalition had asked for the right to legislate - known as a Legislative Competence Order (LCO) - on vulnerable children.

But Welsh Secretary State Peter Hain has written to First Minister Rhodri Morgan to tell him the assembly government will not be able to introduce a blanket smacking ban, based on legal advice from the attorney-general.

Some children's charities had supported the prospect, saying a ban would clarify a confusing issue for parents.

Deputy Health Minister Gwenda Thomas also told a committee of AMs that she was in favour of Wales having its own law.

But Family and Youth Concern, which researches the effects of family breakdown, said it was wrong to pass laws on how parents should bring up children.

Under the 2004 Children's Act, which came into force in January 2005, mild smacking is allowed but any punishment which causes visible bruising, grazes, scratches, minor swellings or cuts can result in legal action.

The assembly government said: "We have only just received correspondence from the secretary of state on this issue, and will want to consider carefully all of the points raised."

Monday, 21 January 2008

Media- Anti-smacking worries push foster parents out

Anti-smacking worries push foster parents out
By Simon Collins

A South Auckland foster care group says a quarter of its foster parents have quit because of the "anti-smacking" law passed last year.

South Auckland Caregivers Association chairwoman Allysa Carberry said the repeal of section 59 of the Crimes Act, which allowed caregivers to use reasonable force to "correct" children, had made a chronic shortage worse.

"A quarter of our members have left because of section 59. I could rattle off about 10 in South Auckland. I know of many, many caregivers who have been longstanding caregivers but won't do caregiving any more. It's too dangerous.

"These kids are really hard. They just don't care who they hurt, and you need really special people to take them on. If you have a kid that is yelling and screaming at you, what are you supposed to do?"

Child, Youth and Family Services has faced mounting problems finding foster parents in recent years, as the number of children in care has grown by 18 per cent in the past five years to 5049, while the number of single-income families with one parent available at home for caregiving has shrunk.

However, other foster care groups said the smacking law was not a factor for their members.

Both Carolyn Hill, who chairs the national Family and Foster Care Federation, and Foster Care Auckland chairman Byron Perkins said they had not heard of any caregiver leaving because of the law change.

"People are leaving because they are dissatisfied with CYFS," Mr Perkins said. "It comes down to the whole area of professionalism and payments because both couples have to go to work to earn the money to pay the mortgage."

A CYFS survey published in November found that 71 per cent of its mainly-female primary caregivers now work outside the home - 20 per cent fulltime and 51 per cent part-time. Although 80 per cent of its mainly-male secondary caregivers have paid work, most are low-paid. Only 46 per cent earn more than $35,000 a year.

Three-quarters said the foster care allowance of $124 to $174 a week per child depending on the child's age did not cover all their costs such as transporting the children to school and other activities.

Grandparents Raising Grandchildren convener Di Vivian said many grandparents were "frightened" by the new law, but she did not know of any who had given up caring for their grandchildren because of it.

A CYFS spokeswoman said the repeal of section 59 made no difference to the service's long-standing policy against any "physical discipline".

Also look at:

Friday, 18 January 2008

Christchurch this weekend

Hi team,

Re: Petition for referendum on the Anti-Smacking law.

If you are free to help out with collecting signatures tomorrow, please let me know - by email, or phone: 03 357 4599 (or) 021 1140 751.
We’ll be meeting at the corner of Cashel St. and Colombo St. - and if there are enough people, will run 2 tables.

We really need volunteers at this time, as we’re getting close to the deadline and it’s touch and go as to whether we can make it or not.

Kind Regards,
Andy Moore
phone: 021 1140 751

FI-340-U4L, upcoming events W/E 19 Jan 08

18 January 2008 - Family Integrity #340 — U4L, upcoming events W/E 19 Jan 08

From: Craig Hill [mailto:craighill@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: Friday, January 18, 2008 8:15 AM
Subject: U4L, upcoming events

Hi All,

Big weekends coming up, Larry Baldock is covering several events this weekend. If anyone can help with the race meeting in Taupo this weekend, please contact Larry on
There is also a Blues, Brews and BQQs in Hastings starting at 2.00pm on Saturday, if you are free also contact Larry on 021864833
And to all people who may be available to help at Parachute again contact Larry on his mobile

We also have new contacts, if you can help in the Hamilton area please contact Steve at hamilton@unityforliberty.net.nz He has tables this week that he would like help with

There is also West Coast westcoast@unityforliberty.net.nz again they are also looking for help.

Catlins is gearing up, contact Natalie at catlins@unityforliberty.net.nz


Gore Monday 21st January, Tuesday 29th Door knocking again in the area we will go in teams of two..


Taieri Show Saturday 26th January manning tables, gathering signatures in the crowd. Great team at this Show, come along and enjoy the people while getting those final signatures .


Waimumu Field Days Gore 13th, 14th, 15th February manning tables, gathering signatures, pouring the coffee!!! Great event come and help and enjoy this amazing Southland Event.

Don’t forget the doorknocking in Manurewa on Monday night. Last week we collected 450 signatures in two hours. Many hands make light work.
Meeting between 6-6.15pm at Covenant Church, 77 Rodgers Road, Manurewa. contact gaylene@unityforliberty.net.nz or 021 075 7211

All other areas would like to hear from anyone who can assist this coming Sat.

Looking forward to hearing from you,
Craig Hill
021 746 113

All that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing
(Edmund Burke 1728-1797)

Thursday, 17 January 2008

Dominion Post Editorial


Editorial: Labour's lesson in innovation
The Dominion Post | Thursday, 17 January 2008

When Christchurch musician Jimmy Mason "flicked" his three-year-old son on the ear he thought he was giving him a lesson about road safety. Don't ride your bike near the road when you're told not to. What he was actually getting was a firsthand look at the Government's anti-smacking legislation in operation, The Dominion Post writes.

A nearby teacher took umbrage at his actions, an off-duty policewoman rang the office and, minutes later, Mr Mason found himself surrounded by six police officers.

"They were going to arrest me and were trying to ascertain whether it was safe for the kids to go home with me," he said. "It was pretty bizarre."

In time Mr Mason may discover, like many parents before him, that there are other, more effective ways to discipline his children and keep them safe.

If the anti-smacking legislation, championed by Green MP Sue Bradford, hastens that process it will have served a useful purpose.

But just as there is no such thing as a perfect child, there is no such thing as a perfect parent. Like children, parents get tired and irritable. Like children, parents occasionally do things they later regret.

But nothing that Mr Mason did appears to warrant the attention of six police officers, at least five more than the ordinary citizen can expect to show an interest when reporting a theft, burglary or assault.

Nor do his actions appear to warrant the warning that has now been placed on his record, though that could change as a result of a police review of discrepancies between Mr Mason's story and those of witnesses.

When the anti-smacking legislation was steered through Parliament last year, Ms Bradford and her Labour allies assured the public that the law change would not criminalise parents who administered a light smack to their children.

Technically they are correct in Mr Mason's case. He has not been charged. But he has been stigmatised, something that is likely to be of almost as much concern to the Government as it is to Mr Mason.

Labour believes the initial furore over the anti-smacking legislation has died down now that it has been in place for more than six months.

But publicity about such cases revives the damaging spectre of a nanny state interfering in the private affairs of citizens.

When voters go to the polls later this year they will not recall that National voted for the legislation alongside Labour, the Greens and the Maori Party as a result of a last-minute deal with its leader John Key, but that it was Labour and its allies who pushed the bill through, just as it was Labour that took the lead in legalising prostitution, establishing civil unions, banning unhealthy food from school tuckshops and outlawing smoking in bars and restaurants.

All are initiatives that fit with New Zealand's tradition of pioneering social legislation, a tradition that began when New Zealand became the first country to give women the vote.

But politicians with long careers in mind know there is only so much innovation the public is prepared to put up with.

Labour could yet pay a price for going too far too fast.

Read Lindsay Mitchell's comments on this editorial here:

Where is the support for good Parents?


Press Release: The Family Party

Where is the support for good Parents raising their children?

Most good parents would confirm that bringing up children in 2008 brings many challenges.

“A comment by the Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro commending the public for intervening in a father’s discipline of his child is a worrying trend that concerns many good parents,” said the deputy leader of The Family Party, Paul Adams.

“I agree all the facts are not known, however let’s put our self in the fathers shoes for a moment.” Adams continued.

“Here is a father taking time out to take his two young sons on a biking outing, apparently a regular occurrence. This surely is to be commended. The younger son (2 years) has an accident beside the roadway and is hurt. The second son (3 years) does not understand the seriousness of the situation and the father being responsible for both of his sons, handles the situation in a manner he felt was appropriate for the safety of both boys.”

Adams says,” The Children’s Commissioner is NOT the authority on child raising – parents are. These parents need all the help that they can get. The emerging trend that the state knows best for all children is a dangerous fallacy.”

The Family Party has been actively door knocking in the Mangere electorate. A major concern is this anti-smacking law, which was opposed by many New Zealanders but forced through by the current Government.

“There is genuine fear and uncertainty amongst parents who have used traditional methods of corrective discipline such as smacking. Based on what I’ve seen, these are decent, law-abiding parents who know the difference between a smack and abuse. Nevertheless, there is a sense of disempowerment because parents fear being criminalised if they hold on to their traditional values and methods of discipline.

“The reality is we either encourage parents to discipline their children while they are young, or sadly, as in the case of too many New Zealanders the state will discipline them when they are older. Personally I prefer loving parental correction, rather than this over the top anti parent legislation we currently have to deal with.”

Wednesday, 16 January 2008





Anti-Parental-Authority Law Criminalises Loving Father

Jimmy Mason was out for a walk with his two boys - Seth, 3yrs and Zach, 2yrs. They were having a great time learning to ride the bikes that they had recieved as an early Christmas present. Making their way along Cashel Mall in Christchurch, they came up to the Bridge of Remembrance.

This magnificent memorial was built as an enduring mark of gratituded to the thousands of young men from Christchurch who selflessly gave their lives to defend our Free Land of New Zealand from the tyranous usurpers, many thousands of miles over the water. They fought and died so that the generations that came after them might live in freedom and without fear of oppression from any government, whether it be their own, or a foreign governement.

As all little boys do, Seth and Zach crouched low over their handlebars, racing down the ramp leading down from the bridge, the path leading around a sharp corner. Seth, one year older than his brother, took the corner nicely. Zach however, struggled to keep control of his bike - and losing control, he smashed into the solid brick construction of the bridge. When his father ran up to assist his 2yr old son, he found him lying on the ground, holding his hand to his eye.

Seth had stopped at the corner. He looked down at his brother, lying on the ground, slipping in and out of conciousness. He saw the concern on his dad’s face, and heard him say “wait Seth, we have to look after Zach”. Whether or not he understood how serious the situation, it was with loving fatherly discipline that Jimmy flicked his son on the ear as he started peddling away.

An off-duty police-officer stood nearby, and she immediately reported the incident. With a few minutes, six uniformed police officers stood around the Man and his two little boys. As Jimmy cradled his injured toddler in his lap, one policemen pulled out his notebook as another pulled out his radio and spoke brusquely to head-office.

One can only imagine how scared the two little boys must have been, and the terrifying thoughts rushing through their dad’s head. How was he going to tell his wife that their children were going to be put into a foster-home?…


Sue Bradford (Green Party MP):

Ms Bradford, the instigator of the anti-smacking legislation, says if an adult whacked another adult around the ear, they would be “marched down to the slammer.”

Ms Bradford says parents need to accept that it is no longer legal to hit children. She remains confident her anti-smacking laws will change what she describes as a culture of violence.

from http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz

Cindy Kiro, “Children’s Commissioner”:

Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro says she is pleased to see people in the community making a stand against violence towards children after a Christchurch man was reported for flicking his son’s ear.

“The most common cause of death by child abuse in this country is from injuries to the head. This should never be taken lightly.”

from http://www.nzherald.co.nz


Kiro and Bradford, are both part of the huge bireaucracy of New Zealand. Kiro’s role as “children’s commissioner” was appointed by the Labour Government, and Bradford got into Parliament as a list MP. Neither of them represent New Zealanders. Bradford puts a spin on the case, labelling the flicked ear as a whack around the ear. In a statement to the media a couple of hours later, Kiro joins in the martyrdom of the caring father, firstly by honouring the off-duty police-woman that reported the incident, and then by linking child deaths resulting from being bashed on the head with a light flick on the ear.

Jimmy Mason:

“It was pretty bizarre to tell you the truth.”

“[The police officers] didn’t know and I said to them, ‘Well, you’ve just told me what I did was wrong so you must know what is right’.”
“It needs to be on record that I disciplined him for something he deserved, not that I’m a child beater. There’s an irony there that they can spray, Taser or shoot me but I can’t flick my son in the ear to stop him getting run over at an intersection.”

He was considering legal action to have the warning removed from his record.

from http://www.stuff.co.nz


Seth and Zach are now confused, because they know that their daddy who they love is in trouble with the police. Jimmy is angry because he now has a warning on his record, and CYFS will be faster than ever to remove his children from him and his wife if they hear the slightest little thing.



“I Like the Big Brother Society” - Kiro

Apparently Cindy Kiro is not only ok with the “Big Brother” dobbing in of parents trying to do their jobs, but she is actually pleased people are doing it.

Children’s Commissioner Cindy Kiro says she is pleased to see people in the community making a stand against violence towards children after a Christchurch man was reported for flicking his son’s ear.

“My office strongly supported the law change to section 59 because all the evidence points to physical punishment as ineffective and in the hands of some people, dangerous.”

Heh, here’s where the lie gets mixed with the truth. Physical punishment was not what was banned - reasonable force as physical punishment was banned. No one ever suggested that unreasonable force (which is not “dangerous” by definition) should not be illegal.

Dr Kiro said it was important not to jump to conclusions and view what facts had been presented in the case.

Great! so I guess we won’t be seeing more quotes like this then:

She told Radio New Zealand the school was “irresponsible” and “I don’t think
the school should be doing that.” The same criticism was reported in newspapers throughout New Zealand. On national television she described me as “seriously misguided”. All that despite not knowing what I had done. All that despite the law under which she works requiring her not to “make any comment that is adverse to a person if the Commissioner has not given the person an opportunity to be heard.” When I asked her about the illegality of her comments she would not reply. It was just one of many things she won’t include in the “discussion” she initiated.

I guess we shouldn’t examine the good doctor too carefully…

“The incident was such that at least two bystanders contacted police.

One was a teacher and the other an off-duty police officer and if they were concerned, then I believe there was something to be concerned about.”

On the other hand, the teacher may be a socialist busy-body, who bullied the policeman into calling up his mates for no reason. Yet another mark off the reputation of the teaching profession.

She said she was especially concerned when she heard the punishment included hitting the child’s head.

“The most common cause of death by child abuse in this country is from injuries to the head. This should never be taken lightly.”

Technically, the ear is on the head.

If parents needed information about how to discipline children without the use of physical punishment, they could contact the commissioner’s office for information, Dr Kiro said.

Funny how Ms Kiro doesn’t share any of that wisdom with us here. Frankly I think most parents would rather walk a mile over hot coals than walk into that office and ask for “help” from a woman who is only interested in persecuting good parents, ignoring her statuary obligation* to investigate bad ones.

Tuesday, 15 January 2008



Anti smacking law puts young boy at risk

The New Zealand Labour Party's chickens have finally come home to roost in a monumental way. The removal of section 59 or the "anti smacking bill", as it has become commonly known, midway through last year, has had another casualty, perhaps the worst one so far.

A Christchurch father who disciplined his 3 year old son who put his younger brother at risk, and was subsequently injured, was surrounded by six police officers minutes after a teacher(who would have guessed) witnessing the flick of the ear by the father informed an off duty female cop.

The father has been left with a warning by officers and a "black mark" noted on police records for attempting to keep his children safe from harm.

Apart from the obvious overkill by the six police attending and the stupidity of the off duty officer and teacher, the trauma that the 2 kids must have gone through seeing their father subject to extreme police harassment cannot be overstated.

The father's children will be getting a lesson from the whole incident that their dad has done something wrong, and that the lessons that he is trying to teach them are not to be believed.

When you undermine a parents authority in such a public way you risk that parents ability to bring up children in an appropriate way and ultimately keep them safe from harm, be it physical, psychological or emotional.

The politicians who trumpeted this sleazy law, Sue Bradford, Helen Clark and the various state bureaucratic heads and b grade celebrities, with the moronic support of the National Party are embarrassingly silent about this latest turn of events.

Those in support of the bill said that nothing like this would happen, it has, and after all, the sensible and intelligent amongst us we know it was designed to stop what this father did.

Those that supported this law change unflaggingly, should be voted against in the 2008 Election.

Labour, NZ First, The Maori Party, Progressives and Peter Dunne's Motley Crew do not deserve your vote on this law change alone.

John Key must be true to his word and repeal this change to sensible parenting and put the control of parenting back where it belongs.

In parents hands.

Related reading on Political Animal:

Trevor Mallard's Anti Violence Advert