The Press reports:
Smacking referendum campaigner Larry Baldock wants a referendum, to run in conjunction with elections in 2011, on whether the results of referendums seeking repeal or amendment of any law should be binding.
The Kiwi Party leader and a leading organiser of the smacking referendum said the refusal of Prime Minister John Key to act on the result of that referendum raised questions about the abuse of executive power.
While I wish to see the law amended, and believe most of the public do also, the referendum was not a vote on repealing the anti-smacking law.
I, for one, would not vote in favour of repeal and returning to the old law.
I certainly would vote for amending the law, as outlined in the Borrows amendments in the Boscawen bill.
But the referendum did not specify that the law be repealed or amended. For Baldock’s proposal to work, the referendum would have to explicitly (instead of implicitly) state what law is to be repealed.
If we did have binding referenda, I’d be tempted to start one to get rid of the archaic criminal offence of blasphemous libel. Blasphemy should not be a crime – it should purely be an issue between a person and their church.