Monday, August 24, 2009

Political doublespeak? Fear of losing face?

Cabinet agrees to ensure smacking parents not criminalised

Parents who lightly smack their children should not fear being treated like criminals, Prime Minister John Key said today.

Mr Key took a series of proposals to Cabinet today following Friday's resounding referendum victory for opponents of the 2007 child discipline law change.

Preliminary results found 87.6 per cent of those who voted ticked no to the question: "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

Mr Key said he would not ignore the referendum and Cabinet had agreed to ask police and Child Youth and Family to review their procedures to ensure good parents were treated as Parliament intended.

click here to read the rest of the report ...

But the government won't change the law and light smacking is still a criminal offence ... so what does this mean? "We" agree the law was mistake but will not back down so as not to lose face?

Model Kartika released - for now

Model Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno, who was scheduled to be caned this week for drinking beer, has been released. Three religious department officers came to her house in Sg Siput on Monday and took her away in a van. But they returned after about 30 minutes and said they had received “instructions from higher powers” to release her, AP quoted Kartika’s father, Shukarno Abdul Muttalib, as saying.

Click here to read the rest of the report.

Released FOR NOW .... so what does this mean? Cane her later when the story is no longer "hot" because "we" can't change the ruling without losing face?



Five Kelston Boys High schoolboys banned for 10-16 months following a brawl in their first 15 rugby match with Auckland Grammar will appeal the length of their suspensions.

Kelston Boys High principal Steve Watt said the appeals were being launched on the grounds that the penalties were manifestly excessive and the disparity with those handed to four Auckland Grammar students amounted to a miscarriage of justice.

While the appeals were being launched by the five individuals, the school would pay the costs.

Click here to read the rest of the report.

I wonder what will happen with this appeal? How will the obvious injustice be handled so as not to "lose face"?

No comments:

Post a Comment