Monday, August 24, 2009

Lucia Transcript of interview this morning with John Key on smacking law

This is pass 2 of transcribing the interview with John Key on smacking derailing Parliament that I talked about yesterday. Still fixing it up. Updated 25 Aug, 2pm.

MH: Meanwhile, the Prime Minister's with us, good morning!

JK: Good morning

MH: Are you going to ignore the 88%?


JK: [Audible breath in] Ah, well, no, I think
[obviously thrown before getting into the prepared speech]
what I am going to do is take to Cabinet today a series of
proposals I think can give parents an
increased levels of confidence
I've always said that if the law doesn't work
then I would change it
important that we make sure that we can understand clearly
without bias whether
the law is working or not
so, you know, I think you can't ignore
when such a large number of New Zealanders
express their view didn't necessarily say
they wanted the law changed
and that they said quite clearly
they thought that if they smacked a child
in a minor or inconsequential
way that should not be something that sees them hauled
before the courts or their children taken off them
nor do I believe that would ever be the case
I think the current statistics support
that view that I hold

MH: Yeeessss... but they would disagree with you the public, wouldn't they?
I mean you say the law works [JK saying something in the background that I can't make out] but you said it doesn't. Why are you right and they wrong?

JK: He said ... No, I don't think that's absolutely right
They said is, and that was the question, wasn't it
could you lightly smack a child

MH: Well, not it wasn't, it wasn't
it wasn't in there at all
anything about changing the law at all and I would suggest to you
if it was about changing the law, you would have got the same result

JK: (Audible inbreath heard) Maybe ...
but look you know as I've said
before, um, if you look at the statistics
the law has worked
um in the last sort of
year when it comes to
it comes to the situation of whether they've been
um complaints made about smacking
they've been 33 in the calendar year of 2008
of which there was one which proceeded to a prosecution
it was ultimately withdrawn

MH: Yeah, but you're making parents criminals
that's what people get upset about you know
I don't happen to smack my kids but I am a criminal
if I do and that's what's wrong with the law and that's what
88% of people suggest to you

JK: Well, what I'm going to ensure is that's
not the case and what I will tell you now is that's not the case at
the moment as I say there were 33
where there were complaints about smacking
one that almost lead to a prosecution
it was withdrawn
in the same time period 83,000 complaints
about domestic or family violence
I think we need to put it into perspective, my view
the law isn't perfect, but
put in there a compromise to ensure that in practise
that's what's actually important [laughing heard in the background]

MH: [incredulous tone] This, John,
this sounds like a complete muddle, the law's not perfect
just toss it out, what's the big deal about it

JK: Well [clears throat] you have to have a look at
through an enormous process that ah would
completely derail parliament, it's not as simple as people

MH: [More incredulous] Derail Parliament?

JK: [Stuttering] It would arguably be
an extremely explosive issue going back the other way

MH: With who?

JK: A whole lot of people.

MH: Like who?

JK: A whole lot of people.

MH: Like who?

JK: Well, like a lot of peo..

MH: You could pass it by lunchtime!

JK: I don't think that's actually right

MH: Who would, who would object to it?

JK: Well, it's a free vote, potentially

MH: Well, not it's not

JK: Well..

MH: It doesn't have to be

JK: Potentially it could be

MH: wouldn't be because you've got the numbers in the house
You could change this by lunchtime today

JK: Ah, well not by lunchtime today

MH: Ok well by 3 o'clock..
come on ..

JK: The law could be changed, there's no argument about that
my point to you is that, in in practise at the moment
the law is working, now
that doesn't mean that we can't put in additional safeguards
and that would be the process that I would support at this time

MH: Alright, fair enough, let's deal with other stuff ...


Related Link: Audio File ~ NewsTalkZB
Right-click on file, Save As, change extension to .wma and start listening at about 40.50

1 comment(s):

squaredrive said...

"that, ah, would completely derail parliament"
Clearly John Key has been playing with Michael Cullen's trainset....hehe

"It would arguably be an extremely explosive issue going back the other way"
What, is John Key getting the Taleban to mind his kids? Behave little Johny, or you'll get a grenade sans pin?

Key has clearly declared himself a social liberal, and true believer in Sue Bradford's social causes. He also voted against strengthening marriage in 2005-2008 Parliament, but apparently that wouldn't derail the place...

Time to reform Parliament, so the beggars can't ignore the public.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.