New Zealand citizens-initiated referendum, 2009













New Zealand corporal punishment referendum, 2009

"Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"








































Results

Votes
%

Yes
201,541

7001120500000000000♠12.05%

No

1,470,755

7001879500000000000♠87.95%
Valid votes
1,672,296

7001992800000000000♠99.28%
Invalid or blank votes
12,106

6999720000000000000♠0.72%

Total votes

1,684,402

100.00%
Registered voters/turnout

56.09%






Results by electorate

New Zealand smacking referendum 2009 results.svg



  Yes     No



Source: The Chief Electoral Officer[1]

The New Zealand corporal punishment referendum, 2009 was held from 31 July to 21 August, and was a citizens-initiated referendum on parental corporal punishment. It asked:[2]



Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?



Voter turnout was 56.1%. 87.4% of votes answered 'no'. The result of the referendum was non-binding and the New Zealand government did not change the law in response to the outcome.




Contents






  • 1 Background


  • 2 Criticism regarding question wording


  • 3 Campaigns


    • 3.1 The "yes" campaign


    • 3.2 The "no" campaign




  • 4 Results


    • 4.1 Nationwide


    • 4.2 By electorate




  • 5 Aftermath


    • 5.1 Government response


    • 5.2 John Boscawen's private member's bill


    • 5.3 Binding referendum


    • 5.4 Public protests


    • 5.5 2017 Election




  • 6 Opinion polls


  • 7 See also


  • 8 References


  • 9 External links





Background


The petition for the referendum was launched in February 2007 in response to the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill, which would remove parental correction as a defence for assault against children. The petition was organised by Sheryl Savill with support from Kiwi Party's Larry Baldock.[3][4] The wording of the petition was approved by Clerk of the House David McGee on 21 February 2007.[5]


The bill, introduced by Sue Bradford, was passed its third reading in Parliament by 113 votes to 7 on 16 May 2007. Meanwhile organisations and individuals led by Larry Baldock continued to collect signatures to initiate a referendum. They fell short by about 15,500 signatures (many were invalid), and they were granted two further months to make up the difference.[6] Eventually the petition attracted 310,000 signatures from voters, surpassing the 285,000 signatures, or 10 percent of total voters, required to force a referendum.[citation needed]


In June 2008, then prime minister Helen Clark announced that the referendum would not take place alongside the 2008 election as the organisers had been hoping.[7] The decision was based on advice from the Chief Electoral Officer that holding such a referendum could lead to voter confusion. Instead, a postal ballot was selected, starting 30 July 2009 for eligible voters and closing on 21 August 2009.


In June 2009, then Prime Minister John Key said that the government would change the law if it was not working, but that he believed the current law was working well.[8]



Criticism regarding question wording


The wording of citizens-initiated referendum questions was ultimately the responsibility of the Clerk of the House of Representatives, David McGee. Under the referendum legislation, the wording of the question is required to "convey clearly the purpose and effect" of the referendum.[9]










The referendum question was interpreted by some to assume that "a smack" can form part of "good parental correction". Murray Edridge, Chief Executive of Barnardos New Zealand, claimed that the question "presupposes that smacking is part of good parental correction"[11] which he described as "a debatable issue".[12] Prime Minister John Key described the question as "ambiguous" and pointed out that it "could be read a number of different ways". Leader of the Opposition Phil Goff expressed concern that the question "implies that if you vote 'yes' that [sic] you're in favour of criminal sanctions being taken against reasonable parents – actually nobody believes that."[8]


Both John Key and Phil Goff stated that they did not intend to vote in the referendum, with Key calling the question "ridiculous".[10] The Prime Minister believed turnout would be low.[13]


Sue Bradford introduced a private member's bill, the Citizens Initiated Referenda (Wording of Questions) Amendment Bill, designed to prevent future citizens-initiated referenda from having poorly worded questions, and the National government considered adopting it.[10][14][15]


On this bill, she wrote:[14]



An example of an approved referendum question that is both leading and misleading is the NZ Referendum on Child Discipline 2009 proposed by Larry Baldock.


The question approved for that referendum "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?" is leading in that the use of the word "good" before "parental correction" makes a value-judgment which predetermines the answer. People answering the question will be drawn to answer "no" on the basis that what is "good" cannot be criminal.



Caritas Aotearoa New Zealand has made this argument:[16]



Mr Smith says the upcoming referendum will not provide clarity on the question of child discipline, because it is possible to support the 2007 amendment while voting either Yes or No to the referendum question: Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?


However, Caritas recognises that in the political context of the referendum, a 'Yes' vote is seen to be a vote for the status quo, while a 'No' vote is seen to be a vote against the 2007 amendment.


"In this context, we recommend a 'Yes' vote, as we believe the status quo is close to the position that we recommended to the Select Committee. However, the wording of the question is so ambiguous, many New Zealanders who support efforts to reduce violence against children, may in good conscience still feel obliged to vote 'No'. It will be hard to understand what the outcome of the referendum may mean," says Mr Smith.


He says Caritas will be writing to the Prime Minister and other relevant politicians, expressing concern that the ambiguous nature of the question will result in an outcome that cannot be understood as either supporting or opposing the 2007 amendment.




Campaigns



The "yes" campaign


Most front-line child welfare organisations, such as Plunket Society, Barnardos, Save the Children, Unicef, Women's Refuge, CPAG, Epoch and Jigsaw, believed the referendum question was misleading, and encouraged their supporters to vote "yes".[17] These organisations, along with many others, backed "The Yes Vote" campaign.[17]Māori Party co-leader Pita Sharples and Green Party co-leader Russel Norman wanted the current law retained, with Norman adding he would vote Yes.[8]



The "no" campaign


The "Vote NO" campaign website was launched on 22 June 2009.[18] The campaign was supported by Simon Barnett. ACT leader Rodney Hide said he would vote no, believing parents have the right to lightly smack their children.[8]Family First and The Kiwi Party also supported voting 'no'.



Results



Nationwide




































New Zealand citizens-initiated referendum, 2009[19]
Choice
Votes
%

Referendum failedNo

1,470,755

87.40
Yes
201,541
11.98
Invalid or blank votes
12,106
0.72

Total votes

1,684,402

100.00
Registered voters and turnout
3,002,968
56.09


By electorate



































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Electorate

Party holding seat
Yes Green tickY (%)
Yes Green tickY (num)
No Red XN (%)
No Red XN (num)

Informal votes
Invalid votes
Turnout

Total


11.98
201,541
87.40
1,470,755
10,421
1,685
56.09

Auckland Central

National
29.20
5,898
69.69
14,075
223
14
45.78

Bay of Plenty

National
7.32
2,210
92.27
27,844
122
9
66.75

Botany

National
9.13
2,206
90.49
21,874
93
8
57.04

Christchurch Central

Labour
16.63
3,476
82.66
17,283
149
60
50.22

Christchurch East

Labour
10.87
2,751
88.59
22,418
136
66
58.97

Clutha-Southland

National
7.25
1,942
92.39
24,754
97
34
62.94

Coromandel

National
8.32
2,490
91.25
27,307
130
5
66.16

Dunedin North

Labour
19.86
4,065
79.02
16,173
230
10
50.54

Dunedin South

Labour
11.51
3,243
87.74
24,729
213
22
62.32

East Coast

National
8.84
2,130
90.72
21,859
106
26
59.32

East Coast Bays

National
10.24
2,742
89.24
23,907
141
17
59.63

Epsom

ACT
18.74
4,752
80.37
20,384
228
10
52.71

Hamilton East

National
13.41
3,169
85.82
20,276
182
14
55.14

Hamilton West

National
9.78
2,365
89.80
21,710
102
14
55.38

Helensville

National
9.19
2,574
90.41
25,327
114
17
61.12

Hunua

National
7.19
1,963
92.38
25,223
119
13
63.17

Hutt South

Labour
15.60
3,527
83.64
18,912
173
45
53.01

Ilam

National
15.15
3,832
84.00
21,242
214
76
55.89

Invercargill

National
7.55
2,023
92.09
24,685
97
6
60.13

Kaikōura

National
8.42
2,407
90.95
26,008
181
15
64.95

Mana

Labour
16.86
3,738
82.31
18,251
185

51.75

Māngere

Labour
17.15
2,432
82.33
11,677
74

38.49

Manukau East

Labour
15.81
2,532
83.63
13,396
91

40.47

Manurewa

Labour
11.87
1,946
87.70
14,376
70

44.25

Maungakiekie

National
15.73
3,567
83.72
18,985
125

50.41

Mount Albert

Labour
23.08
4,898
75.92
16,112
212

47.83

Mount Roskill

Labour
13.91
3,132
85.57
19,274
117

50.38

Napier

National
9.34
2,514
90.12
24,251
146

61.42

Nelson

National
15.33
4,122
83.95
22,572
192

59.47

New Lynn

Labour
15.66
3,799
83.66
20,294
164

54.65

New Plymouth

National
8.73
2,351
90.81
24,446
124

60.25

North Shore

National
14.78
4,153
84.45
23,736
217

58.79

Northcote

National
13.84
3,447
85.39
21,268
191

55.57

Northland

National
8.74
2,390
90.67
24,805
163

63.23

Ōhariu

United Future
19.88
4,980
78.97
19,779
288

54.85

Ōtaki

National
10.56
3,035
88.71
25,487
209

61.82

Pakuranga

National
9.47
2,608
90.12
24,814
113

60.91

Palmerston North

Labour
11.74
2,917
87.40
21,718
215

57.44

Papakura

National
8.44
2,037
91.15
22,006
99

57.57

Port Hills

Labour
18.29
4,616
80.66
20,354
263

56.77

Rangitata

National
7.59
2,320
92.02
28,118
119

64.45

Rangitīkei

National
8.05
2,127
91.42
24,153
140

63.82

Rimutaka

Labour
11.75
2,926
87.68
21,830
141

57.24

Rodney

National
8.96
2,735
90.50
27,621
164

66.09

Rongotai

Labour
29.34
6,370
69.43
15,073
267

47.64

Rotorua

National
7.86
1,990
91.66
23,209
123

59.81

Selwyn

National
10.12
2,928
89.30
25,832
168

65.23

Tāmaki

National
14.47
3,910
84.74
22,906
214

56.96

Taranaki-King Country

National
7.26
1,907
92.41
24,267
86

64.36

Taupō

National
7.29
2,033
92.30
25,723
113

61.84

Tauranga

National
8.54
2,515
90.99
26,789
139

63.85

Te Atatū

National
10.89
2,480
88.64
20,193
109

54.45

Tukituki

National
9.45
2,530
90.03
24,116
140

60.71

Waikato

National
7.00
1,832
92.54
24,215
120

64.46

Waimakariri

Labour
7.97
2,355
91.61
27,071
125

64.33

Wairarapa

National
8.60
2,456
90.79
25,920
174

62.65

Waitakere

National
12.40
2,706
87.07
19,007
116

53.89

Waitaki

National
7.63
2,434
91.76
29,277
196

65.90

Wellington Central

Labour
36.04
7,697
61.94
13,229
432

44.04

West Coast-Tasman

National
11.72
3,171
87.67
23,716
164

62.84

Whanganui

National
8.12
2,159
91.44
24,303
115

60.83

Whangarei

National
9.17
2,572
90.32
25,337
143

61.60

Wigram

Progressive
12.42
3,023
86.89
21,150
167

54.39

Hauraki-Waikato

Labour
10.71
1,188
88.86
9,854


34.36

Ikaroa-Rāwhiti

Labour
10.10
1,194
89.40
10,573


36.14

Tāmaki Makaurau
Māori
12.21
1,481
87.22
10,579


34.15

Te Tai Hauāuru

Māori
11.17
1,362
88.25
10,758


37.36

Te Tai Tokerau

Māori
10.70
1,344
88.77
11,148


37.87

Te Tai Tonga

Māori
14.40
1,791
85.40
10,580


38.86

Waiariki

Māori
8.77
1,026
90.77
10,617


36.58


Aftermath



Government response


Prime Minister John Key promised to bring forward the planned review of the law.[20]



John Boscawen's private member's bill


By coincidence, Government coalition and ACT MP John Boscawen had a private member's bill legalising smacking drawn from the ballot less than a week after the referendum. Prime Minister John Key said his National Party would vote it down, with the Labour Party and Green Party also opposed making it likely to be lost after the first reading of the bill.[21] In September 2010 the Bill was in fact defeated 115–5 on its first reading in Parliament.



Binding referendum


Dissatisfied with the government's response, the Kiwi Party has put forward another referendum to make referendums legally binding.[22] The question "Should Parliament be required to pass legislation that implements the majority result of a citizens initiated referendum where that result supports a law change?" was approved by the Clerk of the House on 17 December 2009.[23] However, the petition failed to gain sufficient signatures and subsequently lapsed.



Public protests


A protest against prime minister John Key's response to the referendum was held on Saturday, 21 November 2009 in Auckland. The New Zealand Herald estimated that between 4,000 and 5,000 people attended.[24]



2017 Election


On 24 March 2017 it was reported that New Zealand First and Winston Peters will take to the election a policy of repeal the anti-smacking law passed by the last parliament despite overwhelming public opposition. They went on to state that they will not enter any coalition or confidence and supply agreement with a party that wishes to ignore the public’s clearly stated view in a referendum on that issue after the New Zealand general election, 2017[25]



Opinion polls



















Source
Date
Sample

Green tickYYes

Red XNNo
Don't know/won't vote

TVNZ/Colmar Brunton[26]
3 August 2009
1000
13%
83%
5%


See also




  • Crimes Act 1961, the Act that was amended


  • Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007 the amending Act

  • Crime in New Zealand

  • Corporal punishment in the home



References





  1. ^ Pede, Robert (25 August 2008). "Citizens Initiated Referendum 2009 – Final Result" (Website). Ministry of Justice. The Chief Electoral Officer. Retrieved 25 August 2009..mw-parser-output cite.citation{font-style:inherit}.mw-parser-output q{quotes:"""""""'""'"}.mw-parser-output code.cs1-code{color:inherit;background:inherit;border:inherit;padding:inherit}.mw-parser-output .cs1-lock-free a{background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Lock-green.svg/9px-Lock-green.svg.png")no-repeat;background-position:right .1em center}.mw-parser-output .cs1-lock-limited a,.mw-parser-output .cs1-lock-registration a{background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/Lock-gray-alt-2.svg/9px-Lock-gray-alt-2.svg.png")no-repeat;background-position:right .1em center}.mw-parser-output .cs1-lock-subscription a{background:url("//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/Lock-red-alt-2.svg/9px-Lock-red-alt-2.svg.png")no-repeat;background-position:right .1em center}.mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration{color:#555}.mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription span,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration span{border-bottom:1px dotted;cursor:help}.mw-parser-output .cs1-hidden-error{display:none;font-size:100%}.mw-parser-output .cs1-visible-error{font-size:100%}.mw-parser-output .cs1-subscription,.mw-parser-output .cs1-registration,.mw-parser-output .cs1-format{font-size:95%}.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-left,.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-wl-left{padding-left:0.2em}.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-right,.mw-parser-output .cs1-kern-wl-right{padding-right:0.2em}


  2. ^ 2009 Citizens Initiated Referendum, Elections New Zealand.


  3. ^ Collins, Simon (1 November 2008). "Campaign targets pro-smack petitioners". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  4. ^ Collins, Simon (23 February 2007). "Petition offers voice against Bradford bill". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  5. ^ New Zealand Gazette, 1 March 2007.


  6. ^ "Smacking petition falls short". The Dominion Post. 29 April 2008. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  7. ^ Trevett, Claire (26 June 2008). "Smack referendum next year, says Clark". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  8. ^ abcd "Key, Goff won't vote on smacking referendum". The New Zealand Herald. 16 June 2009. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  9. ^ Citizens Initiated Referenda Act 1993, section 10.


  10. ^ abc Trevett, Claire (23 June 2009). "Key sees merit in Greens' referendum bill". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  11. ^ "Anti-smacking debate goes to referendum". 3 News. 15 June 2009. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  12. ^ "Nine-to-Noon", Radio New Zealand National, 16 June 2009.


  13. ^ Young, Audrey (17 June 2009). "Big two coy on smacking vote". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  14. ^ ab "Citizens Initiated Referenda (Wording of Questions) Amendment Bill". Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand. Retrieved 21 July 2009.


  15. ^ "Bradford introducing bill on referendum wording". The New Zealand Herald. NZPA. 17 June 2009. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  16. ^ "Caritas says child discipline referendum will not provide clarity", Press release, 15 July 2009.


  17. ^ ab "The Yes Vote (Campaign website)". Retrieved 10 June 2009.


  18. ^ "Vote NO Referendum Website Launched", Family First Press Release, 22 June 2009.


  19. ^ "Final Result by Electorate for the Citizens Initiated Referendum 2009 on the question "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"". Elections New Zealand. 25 August 2009. Retrieved 3 October 2009.


  20. ^ Young, Audrey (25 August 2009). "PM: Smacking law review gives parents 'comfort'". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 30 October 2011.


  21. ^ Audrey Young (27 August 2009). "Key scuttles move to change smacking law". The New Zealand Herald.


  22. ^ The Kiwi Party (5 September 2009). "New petition will be launched says Kiwi Party". Scoop.co.nz.


  23. ^ "CIR question approved by the Clerk". Scoop.co.nz. 17 December 2009. Retrieved 9 February 2010.


  24. ^ "One arrest as thousands join 'March for Democracy'". The New Zealand Herald. Auckland. NZPA. 21 November 2009.


  25. ^ https://www.familyfirst.org.nz/2017/03/nz-first-repeal-of-anti-smacking-law-welcomed/


  26. ^ "Poll finds smacking OK with most Kiwis". One News. 3 August 2009. Retrieved 30 October 2011.




External links




  • Elections New Zealand – 2009 Citizens Initiated Referendum

  • The Yes Vote campaign

  • The Vote No campaign









Popular posts from this blog

Italian cuisine

Bulgarian cuisine

Carrot