KEY POINTS:
I'm not going to go over the arguments against Sue Bradford's bill - we've all heard them a thousand times. I think most of us accept that this is a well-meant piece of legislation designed to be the first baby step towards improving New Zealand's appalling child abuse statistics - but the frustration is that most of us know, too, that this flabby and ultimately unworkable bill will not make a blind bit of difference in changing the attitude of those people who beat their babies until their kids are dead.
There has been enormous opposition to this bill - some see it as social engineering, others as an unacceptable intrusion of the Government into the home, still more as ineffective waffle - and I can't for the life of me understand why the Government is now trying to get the thing through Parliament under urgency. Bad enough that the Labour MPs have been whipped into line, and what is a conscience vote for other parties is a party vote for Labour. But now we've been advised that Labour wants to see the bill passed into law after its third reading next Wednesday, prompting further outrage and fury.
I can't see why the Government wants to antagonise the electorate unnecessarily. They have the numbers to get it through - thanks to the Maori Party - so why rush it? Are they perhaps afraid that some of their own will be got at - that some of the newer MPs might be persuaded by constituents to make a brave and pyrrhic stand and vote against the bill, thus ensuring its defeat and their consignment to backbench eternity. Or is the Government banking on the fact that voters are all sound and fury, but all that hot air doesn't generally translate into action, and the sooner they get it through, the sooner the punters will forget about it and let bygones be bygones.
As a talkback host, I remember the hours and hours of airtime taken up with people complaining bitterly about the introduction of the new driver licences. Any time there was a lull in calls, all a girl had to do was muse aloud, "Are the new driver licences really going to be so bad?" and bang! All four lines lit up, and off we'd go for another hour. And yes, people have calmed down about the licences. Everyone went and got photographed without a murmur, and new generations of drivers wonder what all the fuss was about. But I suppose the voters did get the last laugh, because the National government that introduced the new licences was voted out at the next election, and National MPs have been cooling their heels in opposition ever since - nine long years.
And this same sort of overweaning arrogance may well see Labour paying at the ballot box. The Government might well believe that it has a higher authority in introducing this legislation, but to do so without engaging in consultation and education is just buying a fight. You cannot solve the problem of child abuse with one wave of a legislative fairy wand. And you're not going to stop parents smacking in moments of parental panic or frustration. I've always thought that smacking was a complete and utter waste of time, but then I have a child who always responded better to bribery and negotiation. And I only had the one. I had the time to sit and reason and explain.
Smacking might well be the bluntest and crudest implement in the parental tool box, but legislation is a pretty crude method to effect change, too.
