Key John: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Key John: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:638;Page:8867] 
JOHN KEY (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 It is fair to say that for the better part of the last 3 months New Zealand has been engaged in an immense debate about smacking and discipline in our society. It has been a bitter debate at times and in fact it has been a rather bizarre debate as well. On both sides of the debate there have been some quite extreme positions taken. In the middle of that there has been deep confusion amongst New Zealanders and they have felt fearful of some legislation that they did not understand and that they did not welcome into their homes. They deserved some protection and today in my view they got that protection. 
It has been a rather fog-filled debate but from it has emerged something quite important in our society. We have had an opportunity to define the way we see New Zealand society going what we think is important the kind of people we are the way we see our children and the way we see our future and how we as a society can move on from some statistics that would worry even the most hardened person in this debate. As a country we cannot stand back when 66000 young New Zealanders suffer abuse. Our country needs to change and we can all do that together. 
From this debate have come some pretty interesting things. Firstly I think that collectively we want to see a reduction in that violence. Secondly I do not think there is a member of Parliament—and I think there would be very few New Zealanders—who would want to see the law used to shield someone who wants to abuse his or her child. But thirdly nor do we want to see a society where we criminalise good parents for doing their job. 
Parents are doing the hardest job in the world. They have to put up with the extremes that occur and they have to do it on a day-by-day basis. They have to do it with confidence and they have to do it with support. They have to know that we as a Parliament will back them up and that the right response is not to turn them into criminals; the right response is to help them through those times and to give them the confidence that we are behind them. 
Ten days ago in a speech to the Salvation Army I reached out in a genuine attempt to see whether we could find a better solution. It was I thought a common-sense approach that allowed some definition around minor or inconsequential smacking. It was a compromise that was not perfect and neither is the compromise that we have reached today. For the record no compromise is perfect. Never in such a situation will everyone be happy. But when we have a situation where Brian Tamaki does not think it is too bad when the Police Association thinks it is a positive and well-received step forward and when others in the debate—such as Sue Bradford the promoter of the bill—seem happy then I think we have a situation where at least we have a chance of the bill going forward. 
We owed it to the parents of New Zealand to try to do it better. Yes of course we could have left what I think was badly drafted legislation which would have offered no protection to parents but for 18 months parents of New Zealand would have had to live under conditions that I do not think are fair. We would have asked the men and women of the New Zealand Police who every day go out there and protect our society against much more difficult issues than this to make a judgment call to do it on their own and to do it without the support of a Parliament that did not have the courage to tell them that it at least backed them with a reasonable degree of tolerance. 
If what has been suggested in this Parliament—and what we on the National side of the House will vote for—does not work then I for one if I am Prime Minister of New Zealand will work to change it. But I will give it a go because I think that it can work. I think we owed it to New Zealand parents to make the legislation better. We owed it to the New Zealand Police to give it a go. The National Party showed some leadership. I think the National Party caucus showed some immense strength to stand up and say that there is a better way of doing this. 
The bill could have passed with the 63 votes that it already had. It will now pass with a lot more. That will be important for one very important reason. That reason is simply that our society needs to change. It will change when it sees all of us gathering around and giving it a go. Our society will change when parents feel that they are treated with the respect fairness and honesty that they deserve. Our society will change when we all get in behind this legislation and give it a go. 
 Over the next 18 months there will be interesting times. We will get a chance to see an amendment that in my mind will work—an amendment that says that if we smack our children for something of an inconsequential nature on a basis that we would not expect to be going anywhere near a criminal conviction we will not be charged. I think it is a situation where police will feel a high degree of confidence that they have the backing of our Parliament and of the legislation. I think that having that amendment clause in the bill does make a difference. 
Is the legislation perfect? As I have said—no it is not. Is it a compromise on some parts? Yes it is. But is it better than the bill that would have gone through 10 days ago? It most certainly is. Had National not reached out and done what it did then we would have had some legislation that would have put parents in New Zealand in a very uncomfortable and a very unfair position for 18 months. Sometimes politics is best left parked at the door; this in my opinion was one of those “sometimes”.