A little more on s59's repeal
Further to my post on the weekend about the appeal of repeal, a reader emailed me with the list of MPs that Family First* is targeting their lobbying efforts toward. If the forces against the Bill think these are the wavering parliamentarians, then those for the Bill should definitely get their views in these ears too.
Labour - presumably people who might be convinced to vote against
Clayton Cosgrove, Sue Moroney, David Cunliffe, Damien O'Connor, Harry Duynhoven, Mahara Okeroa, Mark Gosche, David Parker, George Hawkins, Mita Ririnui, Dave Hereora, Ross Robertson, Darren Hughes, Dover Samuels, Winnie Laban, Maryan Street, Nanaia Mahuta, Paul Swain
(Labour are whipping MPs to vote in favour of this Bill, so for an MP to vote against would probably mean major ructions)
NZ First
Brian Donnelly, Barbara Stewart, Doug Woolerton
United Future
Peter Dunne
National - presumably people currently voting for
Paula Bennett, Simon Power, Jackie Blue, Katherine Rich, Paul Hutchison
You can find contact details for all of these MPs here.[PDF]
The Family First list also included the Maori Party but I can't see them going back on their promise to support Sue Bradford's bill now. I do wonder about the potential of Labour's Maori MPs voting against, given that it could provide them with a point of difference with their Maori Party opposites in contested Maori seats in 2008, but I suspect no Labour MP won't break ranks. Tim Barnett, Labour's Senior Whip, is not only highly respected (and by many sides of politics) he's also clearly very good at his job. He must be pretty glad he doesn't have to herd Taito Philip Field anymore!
Many of those on the Labour list surprise me (particularly Maryan Street), but it comes with no shock, not even a sliver of an eyebrow raised**, to see the usual suspects for conservatism: Cosgrove, O'Connor, Hawkins, Robertson, Duynhoven and Samuels.
I have no idea why the National MPs who are voting against have decided that way but I note that both Jackie Blue and Paul Hutchison are medical doctors and Katherine Rich has little children (I think she had one just before or after she was elected?). Has anyone asked John Key his views? Other than where he'll put his actual vote? Links in comments most welcome.
It seemed like this vote was all sewn up last week, with the Maori Party's announcement they would cast 4 in favour, but now it's seeming less secure. Which I guess was the point of Field's attempt at filibustering, so at least he's achieved one thing as an independent, even if it's not something I like much.
*Who you might expect to be against violence towards children, but they are Pro-Smack.
** Except perhaps sardonically. I do love a good sardonic arched eyebrow.
9 comments:
Interesting to see Labour Junior Whip Darren Hughes on the list. Lucky for Helen Clark that neither Maharey nor Goff are on it, or she might have a leadership challenge on her hands.
Labour may lose Barnett soon as he's standing for the Christchurch mayoralty, in what should be a hideously ugly fight against bloody Bob Parker. It's a shame, he's been a very good MP.
If I were on, y'know, the Other Side, I'd be singling out Rich because of her liberal voting record on conscience issues. There always seems to be some possibility of prising her away from the Party Line, possibly because she appears to have a mind of her own.
I think some of that list is a little hopeful! The Bill will pass.
Ghet - Barnett is not standing for Mayor of Christchurch...
See: http://tonymilne.blogs.com/i_see_red/2007/03/barnett_isnt_st.html
Oh, thank f**k for that. I mean, I do hope somebody manages to put up a candidate against Parker and the Bulldozer King who actually knows what he's doing, but Barnett's doing a lot of good where he is.
Looking at hansard, the swing votes are Dunne, Woolerton and Donnelly - and given the numbers, only one of them is necessary for the bill to pass.
I've already written to the swing MPs, and I encourage everyone else to. If you want your views to count, you have to speak up for them.
I think you are mistaking violence with smacking. It is a very fine line, and you cannot paint every parent who has given their kid a clip round the ears as a violent "offender" which is what Clark and co are doing.
Why is this a necessary law when we have far more important problems to address? Especially when Helen herself said banning smacking is trying to deft human nature.
Clint, Clint, Clint, I would really like to see you back up your assertions and attacks with actual evidence. No where have I seen Labour MPs claiming that anyone who has given their child a clip around the ears is a "violent offender". I look forward to you furnishing this thread with relevant URLs.
I'd also note, although of course it's a side issue, that I know someone whose father was fond of clipping his children around the ear. Pity about the burst eardrums. One person's clip is another person's head trauma.
Hughes is on it because he sits on possiblythe most marginal seat in the country wiith a slimm 220 vote majority. Its predominantly a working class or beneficaries or retired demograph and he knows that this issue, which is primarily an angst ridden middle class liberal wank, will cost him votes next time. Having slashed a 7700 vote majority to four fiths of fuck all last time means he will be sweating like - well you know the epithet. He actually doesn'seem like a bad bloke (same with Nath Guy)
Josh
Thanks for that explanation Josh - I seem to recall a time when people were astounded that Hughes won the seat first time around at all, given his youth and inexperience at Parliamentary politics. It will certainly be interesting to see what happens in Otaki in 2008, especially if the boundaries change at all.
Post a Comment