That is a great policy. It is a shame your commitment to the individual's right to not be killed is inconsistent.

At the Forum on the Family you said that the adverse economic, social and emotional consequences of unplanned pregnancies led you to conclude that abortion was not murder.

Given that murder is unjustified homicide, the only way economic, social and emotional consequences could provide any rational reason for denying that an act is murder is that you either believe that the avoidance of adverse economic, social and emotional consequences justifies killing people; or, you think we can define who is and is not human on the basis of whether doing so has adverse economic, social and emotional consequences. Hardly the liberal position ACT claims to champion regardless of whether it is popular.

I fail to see how anyone who seriously considers that economic, social and emotional consequences of letting someone live determines whether or not killing them is murder can honestly tell us that they believe that the state should protect innocent people. As soon as such people are economically, socially or emotionally disadvantageous to the state the very logic you utilise commits you to taking away their rights.

Your comments at the Family First Forum motivated me to write this blog entry: Abortion is Illiberal

This aside, keep up the good work. I have great respect for the majority of your ideas. All the best with Epsom and the list vote.

Matt

Not that I'm convinced the above comment bears anything but extremist relevance...

This policy is brilliant. The average hard-working citizen is nothing but a plaything for violent offenders these days, and I for one would love to feel safe again. Not that it will ever be feasible to leave things unlocked and unattended like the silly days of old before I was born, but it would be nice to be able to feel safe in your own home, in your own car, in your own neighbourhood.

Furthermore, I believe that this policy will impact other crime by its sheer scare-factor for wrong-doers; I'm willing to bet rates of robbery, petty theft, fraud and car crimes (wow, this one rings close to home right now for me) will drop once this is in place.

I say good on you. Bring on a safer, happier, more secure NZ.

Hi Rodney,

I'm privileged to have read most of your book about our Department of Inland Revenue "The Power To Destroy", which, I must say, I will not recommend to anyone not of a strong disposition.

While I agree with the push for "sensible sentencing" and the "3 strikes" concept, I'm struggling with how:

1. The CRIMINAL gets significantly better treatment than the victim: for example, the gang member who, with his "mate", ran over a 16 year old Hawkes Bay lass and then finished the job by kicking her to death simply because she refused to have sex with them. He is in jail, but apparently his "rights" have been "abused" and he is trying / has tried to get many thousands of dollars in compensation from the government.
2. There is no longer personal responsibility in our society and, as a result, there can be no accountability. In this environment, I'm teaching my children there are outcomes in each decision they make. Sometimes, the outcomes will be good and sometimes not. I'm also trying to teach them to take responsibility for their actions when the results are not good. It's difficult when, at every turn, society and the government contradict this.

When will the Department of Inland Revenue be considered in the same light as a recidivist violent offender who has repeatedly and intentionally causes the death of innocent people?

This also goes for those social policy elements that fall under the Department like the Child Support Agency (CSA). It also speaks to groups like WINZ and CYF[alis].

Early in this new century, a Child Support person committed suicide and all the bleeding hearts came running.

Not one ounce of consideration was given to the 500,000+ children whose ABSOLUTE RIGHT to be raised by both of their parents is ABUSED every day by every staff member in the CSA.

There are about 300,000 parents afflicted with the CSA along with all of their children.

As public servants, these people have a DUTY OF CARE to the people affected by the legislation they administer. This is not just ONE PARENT. Nor is it ONE PARENT and their children. Rather it is BOTH PARENTS and their children.

That the government pays such a high benefit for the Sole Parent Social Security Benefit (aka the DPB) does NOT mean that same government can double-dip by taxing the parent not receiving the DPB.

A Child Tax?

When general taxes (income and GST) pay for ALL benefits, the government is breaking their very own laws by then TAXING many, many people TWICE in order to recover these DPB benefit payments. That's double-dipping and, in theory, that's not allowed.

How much longer is this virulent CHILD ABUSE going to continue?

How many more MUMS and DADS will bereft their children by taking their own lives before something changes?

How long will it be before our government take responsibility for actively DE-FATHERING and DE-MOTHERING New Zealand children?

77 coffins is impressive.

The message was very clear and, in my eyes alone, one that is no longer acceptable.

However, it is but the tip of a very, very large iceberg that covers a great deal of abuse by many Public Servants in New Zealand.

Under our current fascist leadership (The Anti-Clark and her queer worshippers), society will become even more and more dangerous.

I trust your good intentions will bring an even better outcome. Garth deserves a medal. More than that he deserves to see his efforts bring about a positive change in our society.

As a previous comment noted "Bring on a safer, happier, more secure NZ" - just do it promptly.

Please, people, could you keep it short. (You can always post again).

I do not think there is any point in railing against abortion. Especially from men!

We humans have a duty to be responsible parents.

It is for the woman to decide whether she can cope with a child.

And that's that!

And for the man to be very, very careful about whom he impregnates so that we can have less of this hassle about the father's rights. Take responsibility for your own affairs if you are a man!

So it all comes down to personal freedom to be responsible.

Your policy fucken sucks. Target poverty and then you'll decrease the crime rate you fucken moron.

This country is going to regret the day you got your little Hitler arse into Parliament. You're a fucken jerk.

I wish to dispel the notion that poverty is the main factor behind crime. I am a N.Zer who has moved to Tasmania (Australia'a poorest State). Tasmania also has Australia's lowest crime rate. Many people do not lock their cars when shopping. In the two nearest towns/cities where I live (Ulverstone and Devonport), the streets are spotless. I have not seen any street sweepers, people simply do not litter. There is a small shop, service center near where I live. There are petrol pumps around the side. People fill up with petrol and then go inside to the grocery counter. There is no data link outside, you simply advise the person behind the till as to how much you put in. No one rips them off.