Ballot on smacking spurned

Related Links

Bill over referendum questions

Relevant offers

Politics

MPs' travel bills leap during election Remedial work for navy's problem ship Wait for new oil law before awarding permits, Govt urged TVNZ included in police Electoral Act investigation Sea law 'an environmental risk' Govt defends 50c an hour minimum wage lift Maori queue-jumping for SOEs raised More claims about PM's man and doco funding Peters demands apology over Whanau Ora row The week in politics

New rules may be considered for citizens-initiated referendums.

Prime Minister John Key and Labour leader Phil Goff said yesterday they would not vote in the postal ballot on child discipline, criticising the wording of the referendum.

All registered voters will be sent a ballot paper asking them: "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

The referendum was organised by pro-smacking lobby groups that opposed the law change two years ago removing Section 59 from the Crimes Act, which provided a defence of "reasonable force" for smacking.

Goff said he would not vote because the question was so poorly worded.

"I think the question is absolutely the wrong question," he said. "The question implies that if you vote `yes' for it, then you are in favour of criminal sanctions being taken against reasonable parents. Nobody thinks that.

"To vote against it implies that you think the current law isn't working as people thought it would work. I believe it is working as we anticipated it would work.

"No parents are being taken to court or prosecuted for reasons of light smacking of their children. I think that many New Zealanders, including myself, will probably look at that question and say there is no way we can answer [in a way] that expresses our feelings."

Key said he would not vote.

The question was "a bit ambiguous and could be read a number of different ways".

It "might make sense" for new rules to be drafted governing the questions that could be asked, Key said.

Under the Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993, anyone can force a referendum on any issue if they collect signatures representing 10 per cent of the voting public. The act has almost no limitations on the question asked. The only stipulation in the law is that the question be "clear in its purpose" and that it be answered "yes" or "no".

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said he would vote "yes" in the referendum, but he also called for a law change.

"There needs to be less ambiguity around the question and clearer direction to the Clerk of the House," he said.

Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia said she would be voting "yes", but she thought the referendum was a waste of money.

ACT leader Rodney Hide said the referendum was not a waste of money, and the public would be "bitterly disappointed" by the attitude of Key and Goff. Hide said he would be voting "no".

The referendum question was approved by the Clerk's Office more than two years ago, but a spokeswoman said yesterday the Clerk had little say in what was put to voters.

The Clerk had sought public feedback on the original question, which was then changed slightly. The original question was: "Should a smack within the context of positive parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

- © Fairfax NZ News