KEY POINTS:
Legislation that would restrict parents' right to smack their children looks set to pass its second reading.
Green MP Sue Bradford's amended bill, which is expected to come up for debate tomorrow night, would remove parents' rights to discipline their children by hitting them.
Parents would only be
allowed to use "reasonable force" to prevent harm to a child, deal with offensive behaviour, or stop a child harming others.
Prime Minister Helen Clark today voiced her support for the bill, which was amended by a select committee, especially in light of a recent Unicef report showing high levels of child mortality and abuse in New Zealand.
She said: "There's been a lot of work done on it with the Law Commission. I just don't think it's credible in this day and age with the Unicef report showing that our children face the worst safety conditions in the world not to support."
Labour senior whip Tim Barnett later confirmed the party's 49 MPs would vote to keep the bill alive.
As well as the six Green MPs, five National Party MPs are expected to support the bill at its second reading, along with Progressives leader Jim Anderton, United Future leader Peter Dunne and a clutch of New Zealand First MPs.
However, after that its passage could get more complicated.
National MP Chester Borrows is proposing an amendment that would define reasonable force as light smacking as long as it did not cause anything other than "transitory or trifling" injury such as redness or stinging.
But Ms Bradford today said if Mr Borrows' amendment was successful she would withdraw the bill ahead of its third and final reading as she did not wish to define a level of force against children as acceptable.
Such a definition would amount to "state-sanctioned violence".
Opponents of the bill today pulled out the stops to sway MPs.
Pro-smacking lobby Family First delivered MPs an open letter signed by 1200 New Zealanders, including prominent sports people and broadcasters, calling for the rejection of the bill.
Spokesman Bob McCoskrie said it would outlaw large numbers of law abiding parents.
If MPs wanted to reduce child abuse and deaths they would be better off tackling key factors such as family breakdown, substance abuse and poverty.
Ms Bradford's bill was partly sparked by cases where parents successfully defended assault charges -- some involving the use of whips and cords -- using Section 59 of the Crimes Act, which allows the use of reasonable force in disciplining a child.
Mr McCoskrie said the group could only find 18 cases where the legal defence of reasonable force had been used in the past 12 years -- seven of which were successful.
He said the size of the problem did not warrant outlawing thousands of parents who smacked their children in a controlled and loving way.
Ms Bradford said she did not believe the bill would lead to a rash of prosecutions by police.
Children's Commissioner Cindy Kiro today reiterated her support for the bill, while For the Sake of our Children Trust director Christine Rankin said it would potentially penalise good parents.
- NZPA
