The communicator

Child discipline referendum chief petitioner Sheryl Savill is described in today’s Dominion Post as:

a “communicator” for a conservative critics say Right wing evangelical organisation, Focus on the Family.

But elsewhere in the article, the Dominion Post states:

Ms Savill, 40, has asked petition organisers not to give her contact details to the news media…

Seems the “communicator” doesn’t want to communicate right now, and has run off to hide from the media somewhere in the United States.

Anyway Sheryl, if you read this blog, you can still pull the plug on your stupidly worded referendum costing New Zealand taxpayers another $6 million. You’ve got until this Friday. Remember, only 18% of New Zealanders think progressing it is a good use of taxpayers’ money.

7 thoughts on “The communicator

  1. Still at it toad? Knickers in a twist but continuing to slug away, Good on you. Must be a speights in it for your effort.

    18% is a bigger vote then what the Green party gets at any election.

    She is not hiding, she is on holiday, your spin she is hiding.

    She followed due process in collecting the signatures as required by law, they were verified as correct, so by law (and we know that the greens always abide by the law) the referendum must be held.

    Amazingly enough you dont hold the previous prime minister to account for not holding the referendum at election time where the cost would have been insignificant.

    Could it be that the Green party would not have been flavour of the month at the last election if the referendum had been run in conjunction with it?

    I was under the impression that the clerk of the house or some official of that rank actually sets the question. Not the organisor.

    Actually the question is very straight forward and quite simple to answer. “Stupid” is your spin again, ALL the people I talk to can read and understand it very easily.

    And yes it is a good use of tax payers money. For if the referendum swings one way or the other, it will be very clear what the peoples intent is.

    So what are you so scared off? I thought you would welcome this democratic process.

  2. McCroskie and his crew just can’t seem to get their hot-heads around putting together unambiguous statements! McCroskie said, of the-not-very-savvy-Sheryl-Saville, “I’m not going to comment on her parenting practice. All I know is that she is supporting the law change.”
    Which law change was that Bob? The one we’ve just had perhaps?? So unclear, but it’s hard to get your story straight when your head’s on wrong!

  3. Gerrit if the question is very straight forward and simple to answer how should someone vote if they dont think smacking is part of good parenting but dont think it should be criminal?

  4. Oh, and is she is refusing to make her contact details available to the media as public interest in the referendum peaks, I would say she is in hiding.

    This one looks a bit like John Key’s “unavoidable family commitment” on the evening of the Mt Albert byelection.

  5. And yes it is a good use of tax payers money. For if the referendum swings one way or the other, it will be very clear what the peoples intent is.

    lol. I’d say this is clearer:

    If you were two people, one of whom always tells the truth and the other whom always lies and I asked the second one if the first one would be telling the truth if he said smacking should be legal, what would they say?

  6. easy toad, vote no.

    If you dont think a smack is good parenting, dont smack. Simple. Individual responsibility.

    Why criminalise it?

    Now I understand the fact that people who have assaulted kids hide behind the S52(?).

    But surely that is for the Judge/Jury to decide when the Police bring these cases to court. Assault is never a smack.

    Miond you when you have a child saying that if you smack them they will report the parent to the teacher, we counter this by putting the fear of god into them that they will get taken away from their home, family, friends, school, etc. and live in a strange house with strange people and go to a different school with kids that they dont know.

    Parents dont actually need to smack, just sow seeds of doubt that their safe little world will be disrupted by a big bad person who will taken them away to a naughty kids place.

    I guess that type mental smacking is also bad for the kids.

    The again if it is an empty threat, it wont work either.

    Glad my kids are all grown up and we can hand grand children back to their parents!

  7. Ari,

    Majority rule is a simple form of democracy that we currently have in New Zealand.

    If you want true democracy, get out of my life and dont tell me what to do. Consult me on what you see is a better way and persuade me to your view point, dont lecture me.

    That is real democracy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s