Yes. Absolutely. Children need protection. That's what this is all about. What we don't want is to have them hit, slapped, kicked and punched, which is what happens in real life.
Our legal system operates on the principle of discretion. Police have discretion. Prosecutors have discretion. Parents and teachers have the defence of necessity.
I'd like you all to think for one minute about the life of a group home worker, the life of a youth care worker, the life of a nurse in a personal care home and the lives of people who work in child care. None of them fall under section 43. They cannot claim that defence, yet they, every day and all day, are using force.
They dress people. They move people. They lift people. They carry people. They feed people. They impose force upon people for their care and protection. That is completely legal, and there are many defences.
They aren't dragged into court. How often do you hear about child care workers being dragged into court because they put a snowsuit on a child or they pulled a child away from something dangerous? That is care and protection. That is not what section 43 is about.
Section 43 comes from an 1860 decision in a case where a schoolmaster killed a student. He beat the child with a stick for two hours. The only reason that came to court was the child died. That would otherwise have been fine. He set the limit at killing the child, and we're fortunately moving that yardstick.