Sue Bradford - our first political assassination?

**Hinny** · 2nd September 2009, 06:29

Originally Posted by Mr Merde

She is highly unpopular in the country and has had her bill lamblasted by 88% of the peopler that bothered to vote.

The referendum did not have very much to do with her bill.

I doubt this point was understood by the majority of people who voted.

That would be why the proponents concocted such a stupid meaningless question.

Get over it people, NZ had a child abuse problem - the worst in the developed world in fact.
This change is an attempt to deal with that problem, and rightly so too !

**James Deuce** · 2nd September 2009, 07:54

Originally Posted by Hinny

Get over it people, NZ had a child abuse problem - the worst in the developed world in fact.
This change is an attempt to deal with that problem, and rightly so too !

NZ has an ethnically biased poverty issue that needs dealing with. Child abuse stats will improve if that is addressed.

**Swoop** · 2nd September 2009, 07:57

Originally Posted by Hinny

The referendum did not have very much to do with her bill.

Really? What else caused enough of the population to get pissed off and call a referendum then?

**Hinny** · 2nd September 2009, 08:46

They were misguided plonkers.

**idb** · 2nd September 2009, 09:03

The new law was pointless and divisive and removing it now that it's in place would also be pointless and divisive...just leave it there.

**short-circuit** · 2nd September 2009, 09:12

Originally Posted by idb

The new law was pointless and divisive and removing it now that it's in place would also be pointless and divisive...just leave it there.

Wasn't aware anyone (including National) ever actually had any plans to the contrary

**idb** · 2nd September 2009, 09:18

Yep, but I'm not addressing the politicians.

**MisterD** · 2nd September 2009, 10:27

Originally Posted by Hinny

Get over it people, NZ had a child abuse problem - the worst in the developed world in fact.
This change is an attempt to deal with that problem, and rightly so too !

Bollocks. NZ has a child abuse problem, this bill was always about Sue Bradford trying to impose her warped values on New Zealand society...there will be two responses from parents:

1) They'll carry on as they were ignoring the law (I'm in this group) which is fine for now 'cos our PM says it's ok to ignore the law.

2) They'll simply give up trying to discipline their kids at all, this is where the excrement will hit the rotating cooling blades in about ten years time...yeah the law's working all right...

**Winston001** · 2nd September 2009, 10:41

Originally Posted by MisterD

2) They'll simply give up trying to discipline their kids at all, this is where the excrement will hit the rotating cooling blades in about ten years time...yeah the law's working all right...

Implicit in this statement is the requirement to hit kids. Why??

Here is a Cambridge Dictionary definition of discipline - to teach someone to behave in a controlled way.

You don't have to hit people to teach them good behaviour.

**Mully** · 2nd September 2009, 12:04

Originally Posted by Winston001

You don't have to hit people to teach them good behaviour.

It's not a matter of having to hit them. It's just good fun.

(p/t BTW, calm down)

**Trudes** · 2nd September 2009, 12:53

Originally Posted by MisterD

Bollocks. NZ has a child abuse problem, this bill was always about Sue Bradford trying to impose her warped values on New Zealand society...there will be two responses from parents:

1) They'll carry on as they were ignoring the law (I'm in this group) which is fine for now 'cos our PM says it's ok to ignore the law.

2) They'll simply give up trying to discipline their kids at all, this is where the excrement will hit the rotating cooling blades in about ten years time...yeah the law's working all right...

You do realise of course that several other MPs over the years attempted to have similar Bills introduced but they were never drawn from the ballot, Bradford wasn't the first and she wouldn't have been the last. I believe that it was because of the political make-up of Parliament at the time, the increase of media attention on child abuse and homicide and the increasing pressure from the UN and child welfare advocacy groups from NZ and overseas to change the law that this Bill was drawn, considered and eventually passed.

**Hinny** · 2nd September 2009, 18:42

Would I be right in saying that here is a case where Sue Bradford has one up on John Key, - Actually brought a bill before the house and had it adopted.

**MisterD** · 2nd September 2009, 19:10

Originally Posted by Winston001

Implicit in this statement is the requirement to hit kids. Why??

Here is a Cambridge Dictionary definition of discipline - to teach someone to behave in a controlled way.

You don't have to hit people to teach them good behaviour.

The point I was making, is that there are a lot of parents out there who are muddling through with no help or guidance and whose only idea of discipline is smacking...I'm absolutely convinced that a large number will simply chuck the whole thing in the "too hard" basket and basically stop parenting completely.

Like I said on another thread we had on the same subject, kids need three things:
1) Love
2) Boundaries and
3) Consequences for crossing those boundaries

The problem is why too many kids don't get items 1 & 2, not how most parents choose to apply item 3...

**MisterD** · 2nd September 2009, 19:12

Originally Posted by Trudes

You do realise of course that several other MPs over the years attempted to have similar Bills introduced but they were never drawn from the ballot, Bradford wasn't the first and she wouldn't have been the last. I believe that it was because of the political make-up of Parliament at the time, the increase of media attention on child abuse and homicide and the increasing pressure from the UN and child welfare advocacy groups from NZ and overseas to change the law that this Bill was drawn, considered and eventually passed.

Yes I do realise that, Maharey was the last before Bradford, I think...why anyone takes the slightest bit of notice of the UN is completely beyond me..