Silly Sue and the Bradford Bill.
Where did the funding for the anti smacking conference come from? From the families commission no doubt! Sue Bradford with monotonous regularity crusades against what the NZ public has already made a firm decision on. Leave section 59 alone. We should be encouraged by the presence of the children’s commission as guest speaker, when they have already publicly stated that they have no idea what the problem is. We are all past being fooled into believing this is concern for our children, when the real motivation is changing the law to create the state parent. This is not a new idea, it is a failed idea. The same law changes were made in Sweden in 1979, and contrary to claims by some groups that the legislation is worthy of emulation the evidence and conclusion drawn by independent studies in other countries says exactly the opposite. This opens the door to parents having no rights to their children and only responsibilities determined by the state and courts. That leaves me to conclude, Ms Bradford, that the only reason for your persistence is the ulterior motive. I would again encourage reasonable New Zealanders to rally against the stupidity of state disestablishment of the family. There are children at risk in this country, but their plight has nothing to do with section 59 of the crimes act.