Smith Nick: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Smith Nick: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:638;Page:8857] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 This solution that Parliament has come to is a win for families and it is a win for common sense. I think it is good that in an area as sensitive in law as relationships between parents and children we have come to a wide base of parliamentary support for the law as it is to be. I think it is important though that Parliament reflects on how we have come to this point. When Parliament adjourned 4 weeks ago the Government had the numbers. The Government had tried to jerry out either putting this bill through as it was under urgency or looking at it being adopted as a Government bill. We repeatedly heard the Prime Minister and other Ministers say that the bill without this amendment was just fine. 
What has changed? I will tell members what has changed. The leader of the National Party John Key gave a very thoughtful speech to the Salvation Army saying that this was not good enough. All New Zealanders I think and this Parliament want law that makes it plain that the abuse of kids is wrong and that this country has a very real problem in respect of abuse but we do not wish the light smack by a parent of a child for correctional purposes to be a crime. When John Key gave that speech he suggested the very specific word that is in this amendment—“inconsequential”. When he proposed that amendment the Prime Minister and the Labour Party bagged it and the mover of this bill rebuffed those proposals. 
What has really changed the minds of Labour members is the continuing polls over the adjournment showing Labour going down the toilet. Let us be honest about what has changed Labour’s mind. Remember when we went away 4 weeks ago the law as it was at that stage out of the select committee was absolutely right and would not be changed. That is what Steve Chadwick and other members were saying in the debate in this Chamber 4 weeks ago. What has happened? I commend all those New Zealanders who protested. I attended a very energetic protest in Nelson at which a large number of people came out and said: “Look this law as Sue Bradford and Labour are proposing leaves open ordinary New Zealanders who discipline their children with a light smack with the risk of being prosecuted.” They wanted that stopped. They have achieved that and rightly so. 
It would have been really easy for John Key. We read the same poll results. We know that Labour is taking a hiding out there in middle New Zealand for its ideological view on this issue. This bill did need to be amended and it would have been so easy for John Key to play the politics on that. But no. I think this debate and this amendment show the leadership that we have from John Key. He is a person who is more interested in getting the law right than playing political games. Indeed it is a very rare day when the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition have a joint press conference and agree on law as sensitive as this. It is probably the most heated political issue this year—one that has been to National’s political advantage—but John Key has said it is important that the law be put right. I think that in this Parliament and on this issue we have indeed seen the leadership skills of John Key for which the people and particularly the parents of New Zealand should be thankful. 
I think every New Zealander wants the law to be plain that where there is abuse parents are rightly prosecuted but that for the purposes of correction and parenting parents should be able to issue a light smack and that is exactly what this amendment will provide for. 
I say in conclusion that this is a victory for democracy. Finally the Government has had to listen to all of those protests up and down New Zealand all those letters to the editor and all those editorials. I particularly commend the  
Dominion Post  
of Tuesday for a superb editorial that said that we did need to get some honesty in this debate and that we did need to get some amendments. I suspect that when the Prime Minister saw the logic of that argument she took up John Key’s initiative and provided for this amendment. We now have a law on which there can be some settlement and a law in which New Zealanders can have confidence that a light smack is OK but abuse is not.