Monday, May 11, 2009

Christine Rankin

Christine Rankin has been apointed to the families comission. She was also a strong advocate for the repeal of the anti smacking bill. As such Sue bradford argued she was an inapropriate appointment.

I think that Sue may be right but she put her argument badly. She thinks Rankin is wrong because the anti smacking bill is a good thing - but that isa obviously disputed by the other side.

the question I as is, is the families comission supposed to be advocates for children like a union leader is supposed to be an advocate for workers. Right or wrong smacking is primarily alack of a right of the children (right to protection from it). In the same way as an employer might want the right to force employers to work overtime. If a union worker was openly advocating that bosses be able to force staff to work overtime it would be a bit odd to say the least. that would be true EVEN IF it was proven that forcing staff to work overtime was beneficial for them (afterall they get more money). Similar examples exist in law with defence and procecution.


Post a Comment

<< Home