The government's decision not to ban smacking in England was criticised by the Children's Commissioner for England, Sir Al Aynsley-Green, today.

Ministers rejected calls for a complete ban after a government review found opposition to such a move, the Department for Children, Schools and Families said.

But Sir Al said the government had missed an opportunity to protect children from violence in the home.

"Children and young people should have the same right to protection under the law on common assault as that afforded to adults," he said.

He added: "There is no good reason why children are the only people in the UK who can still be lawfully hit. They are protected from assault in most other settings.

"By not changing the legislation, we continue to send out confusing messages to parents about the acceptable use of violence across society.

"Children themselves told the government that there were more effective methods such as restricting access to toys and television," said the commissioner, who said he would continue to press for a change in the law.

"From the government's own research, we're beginning to see a sea change in attitude from younger parents and children away from smacking towards positive parenting techniques," Sir Al said.

The children's minister, Kevin Brennan, said the evidence was that fewer parents now use smacking to discipline their children.

In a statement to MPs, he said: "Whilst many parents say they will not smack, a majority of parents say that smacking should not be banned outright.

"The government will retain the law in its current form, in the absence of evidence it is not working satisfactorily."

A complete ban was hotly debated in Scotland, but the Scottish executive stopped short of an outright ban on smacking in 2003, settling for prohibiting punishment with implements like belts or slippers.

In England and Wales adults who smack children so hard it leaves a mark face up to five years in jail under the 2004 Children's Act.

At the time, ministers promised to review the law to assess whether it was working.

Section 58 of the Act removed the defence of reasonable punishment from parents and adults acting "in loco parentis" who are charged with assault occasioning actual bodily harm, wounding or grievous bodily harm, or cruelty to a child.

Mr Brennan said: "The review found that smacking is becoming a less commonly used form of discipline as more parents recognise that there are more effective and acceptable methods of disciplining children."

The minister said many organisations supported legislation to ban smacking, but insisted that section 58 had improved protection for children.

"The police have discretion to deal with cases as they consider appropriate, taking into account factors including the evidence available, the public interest and the best interests of the child.

"But there appears to be a lack of awareness across different audiences about the scope and application of the law," added Mr Brennan.

The Conservative children's spokesman, Tim Loughton, called the decision a "clear victory for common sense".

"Clearly, if any adult is responsible for abuse and violence towards a child they need to face the full rigour of the law. But there is a world of difference between that and criminalising loving parents that use chastisement as they see fit in the interest of their child," he said.

But Dame Mary Marsh, chief executive of children's charity NSPCC, said there was "no place for physical punishment of children".

She went on: "We do not agree with the government's view that the law is working effectively. Section 58 has not improved protection for children.

"We will continue to campaign for legal reform that will give children equal legal protection from assault as adults. The NSPCC is committed to helping parents find alternatives to physical punishment," she said.