Opinion: In my View - Think again, minister

Minister for children Beverley Hughes recently explained why the Government supports 'reasonable punishment' as a defence for smacking (The Minister's View, 6 November). I was disappointed with her familiar portrayal of this position. There is no respect for children in their routine humiliation and hurt through the many 'mild smacks' that result from a 'commonsense view' that smacking should not be a crime.

Confusion took over as the minister referred to last year's consultation on the effectiveness of the 'reasonable punishment' (section 58) amendment to the Children Act. She claims that most parents surveyed 'would not support a ban (on smacking)'. But 588 out of the 831 parents who took part called for such a ban. That's 70 per cent of parents: a resounding majority.

The minister suggests that children have benefited since the government 'tightened the law in the Children Act'. But the consultation analysis says: 'Respondents generally felt that section 58 of the Children Act 2004 had made little positive impact on children, families and those working with them.' It is also disingenuous to imply that the Government is complying with the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, when the relevant UN committee recently called on them to 'prohibit as a matter of priority all corporal punishment in the family, including through the repeal of all legal defences'.

Beverley Hughes says that under a ban, 'a mother who gives her child a mild smack on the hand... could end up facing criminal charges'. Yes, a minor assault would technically be a crime. But minor assaults on adults are not prosecuted and the same would be true of those on children - though it doesn't make them acceptable. Children have a right to live without violence and to equal protection from it.