Pillay Lynne: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Pillay Lynne: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:637;Page:8033] 
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
: 
 I want to introduce a little bit of calmness and common sense into this argument by explaining—and I think that is what he requested—to the member Bill English the amendment from the Justice and Electoral Committee. 
Basically I think it would be fair to say a number of members of the select committee would have preferred straight repeal of section 59 as would have the myriad organisations that submitted to us in support of the bill. But to their credit they accepted the amendment not because it was absolutely essential but because it gave reassurance to parents. The silly nonsense going out from the National Party members from members of the media and from other people was that parents would be arrested and prosecuted for minor acts of violence. So it was the intention of the select committee supported by the non-governmental organisation sector—and we are very appreciative of that—and also with the assistance of the Law Commission to create an amendment that gave clarification to people and therefore gave reassurance to good parents in New Zealand and still kept our children safe.  
The previous speaker Bill English—when I could understand what he was saying; he was shouting a lot—actually argued that Chester Borrows’ amendment was more sensible. Chester Borrows’ amendment goes against what modern parents are learning today with the SKIP programme. [ 
Interruption 
] I say to members opposite that they should cut the hysteria and settle down; they should stop being bullies. This legislation reinforces the SKIP programme. The nanny programme on television has taught people about this issue and they are very receptive. They say that yes the SKIP programme is great. This legislation reinforces that programme. 
This bill will give reassurance and I thank everybody who was part of making that happen: all the organisations that give so much advice and support to parents in our country the Law Commission and the majority of members on the Justice and Electoral Committee. 
We often hear National members in this Chamber talking about unions. That is another group they like to whip up saying what terrible people from the dark ages union members are. In particular National members take a few swipes—if members excuse the use of the word “swipes”—at the engineering union. I want to talk about one of the organisers of this union who spoke with me a couple of days ago and told me about the attitude of fitters to this issue. These fitters many of them middle-aged said they were not worried about the bill and that of course they would not get arrested for minor acts. They said that people do not hit their kids nowadays; they just put them in time out or take their iPods from them. That attitude was from quite a conservative section of our society. 
So if the concern from the Opposition benches is genuine I want to try to reassure those members in some way. But the cynical side of me thinks their concern is not genuine. I think that they are deliberately misleading the public in New Zealand and that what they are doing is reprehensible. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No the member may not say “deliberately misleading”. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: What can I say Mr Chairman? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: It is understood that the member should not have said it. 
LYNNE PILLAY 
: The Opposition members are creating misunderstandings out in the public with the words they are speaking so frequently so passionately—and so hysterically in fact. I think that if we take a breath and read this amendment bill then we will know that it gives reassurance to people. It gives reassurance to the good parents in New Zealand—along with the police who do have prosecution guidelines—and we know that people will not be criminalised under this bill.