MP pledges to force smacking ban
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk/7248919.stm Version 0 of 1. A senior Labour MP says the law on smacking children in England and Wales is unworkable, and plans to propose a ban in defiance of the government. Kevin Barron said the current law, which allows light smacking, does not improve children's behaviour. He is spearheading moves by Labour backbenchers to force an amendment to the Children and Young Persons Bill. Their preferred strategy is to appeal to the government's chief whip for a free vote, they say. At present in England and Wales, under the Children Act of 2004, a lighter smack or 'reasonable chastisement' is permitted. The right to smack But an adult who smacks a child so hard that it leaves a bruise or mark can face up to five years in jail. Mr Barron, the MP for Rother Valley and chairman of the Commons health committee, told BBC Radio 4's PM programme: "we can't have a situation where it depends on what the mark is... or whether it's against the law or not." "Quite frankly, we need to say that hitting a child teaches them to act out on emotional impulses", he added. We need children to be nurtured and taught to manage their behaviour properly. I don't think this 'reasonable chastisement' actually does that." He is among 50 Labour MPs who have written to colleagues asking for their support. They are confident of securing the backing of double that number when the bill comes before the Commons next month. Children should have the same legal protection from assault as adults. Greg Pope MP Forty-seven Labour MPs rebelled against the government in 2004 but were unsuccessful in their attempt to force through a ban. Chief whip Geoff Hoon has said he will decide on a free vote after gauging the mood in the parliamentary Labour party. Labour MP Greg Pope said: "Nobody is in favour of frivolous prosecutions, for example against the harassed mum in Tesco's. But children should have the same legal protection from assault as adults." Ministers are thought to be concerned that a ban will be perceived as 'nanny state' tactics. |