Get documents about "Research Proposal for
Document Sample
Overseas Aid
A Qualitative and Quantitative Study
[February-March 2004]
WELLINGTON AUCKLAND SYDNEY BRISBANE
3 Collina Terrace 11 Earle Street Level One, Suite 105 Level 3, 33 Scarborough St
Thorndon Parnell 332-342 Oxford Street Southport
WELLINGTON AUCKLAND SYDNEY NSW 2022 QUEENSLAND 4215
NEW ZEALAND NEW ZEALAND AUSTRALIA AUSTRALIA
Tel: +64 4 473 1061 Tel: +64 9 373 8700 Tel: +61 2 9386 1622 Tel: +61 7 5588 0488
Fax: +64 4 472 3501 Fax: +64 9 373 8704 Fax: +61 2 9386 1633 Fax: +61 7 5588 0480
Email: umr@umr.co.nz
www.umr.co.nz
UMR Research Limited 1
Table of Contents
Page Number
I. Introduction 4
II. Executive Summary 7
III. Level of Interest and Awareness 10
3.1 Level of interest 10
3.2 Areas of interest 12
3.3 Incidence of donations 14
3.4 Knowledge of overseas aid 14
3.5 Sources of information 15
3.6 Profile of NGOs 16
3.7 Knowledge on whether Government or NGOs provide most aid 18
3.8 Knowledge of amount of New Zealand Government aid compared to other
developed countries 19
3.9 Knowledge of where New Zealand overseas aid goes 20
IV. The Case for Overseas Aid 22
4.1 General approval/ disapproval 22
4.2 Reasons for approving of New Zealand Government providing overseas aid
to poorer countries 23
4.3 Testing of arguments 25
4.4 Ranking of arguments for overseas aid by general approval/ disapproval
of overseas aid 28
4.5 Humanitarian arguments 30
4.6 Part of global community 31
4.7 Reciprocity 33
4.8 Other self interest arguments 34
V. The Case Against Overseas Aid 39
5.1 Reasons for disapproving of the New Zealand Government providing aid to
poorer countries 39
5.2 Testing of arguments against overseas aid 40
5.3 Ranking of arguments for overseas aid by general approval/ disapproval of
overseas aid 42
5.4 Priority for New Zealanders 44
5.5 The effectiveness of overseas aid 46
5.6 Monitoring of overseas aid 53
5.7 Creating dependence 54
5.8 Too big a problem 55
UMR Research Limited 2
Table of Contents (Cont.)
Page Number
VI. Criteria for Deciding Allocation and Type of Overseas Aid 56
6.1 By region 56
6.2 Types of overseas aid 60
6.3 Human rights issues 62
6.4 Disaster relief versus war-torn areas 64
6.5 Disaster relief versus long-term aid 65
6.6 Preference for direct Government overseas aid or subsidising of NGOs 68
VII. Level of Government funding 70
7.1 0.7% GNI target 70
7.2 Reasons for supporting an increase to meet the 0.7% target 73
7.3 Reasons for opposing an increase to meet the 0.7% target 75
7.4 International comparisons 77
Appendices
Appendix 1 Māori Booster Tables 79
Appendix 2 Demographic Tables 110
Appendix 3 Detailed Methodology 147
UMR Research Limited 3
I. Introduction
This study followed up on a major benchmark study undertaken by UMR in 1999.
The primary objectives of that benchmark study were to:
• identify and explore the level of knowledge and understanding New Zealanders have of New
Zealand activities in overseas aid
• explore attitudes towards overseas aid and in particular to identify the key factors driving
positive and negative attitudes towards overseas aid
• identify the major sources of information that New Zealanders use to develop attitudes towards
overseas aid
• identify any critical differences in opinion between key audiences particularly Māori, Pacific
Island and youth
• provide direction to communications strategies to improve the understanding of New
Zealanders (and key audiences of New Zealanders) on overseas aid and enhance support for
overseas aid.
The focus group question line and telephone survey used in 1999 served as a starting point for
development of the question line and questionnaire for the 2004 study. These were adapted following
discussions with CID and representatives from NZAID and the NGOs.
Significant sections of the 1999 telephone survey questionnaire were retained to enable direct tracking
of results. Some changes were made as a result of the discussions noted above and some as a result
of the qualitative research. Where changes have been made in questions these are noted in the
attached report.
As in 1999, this study consisted of qualitative and quantitative research stages.
The qualitative research stage consisted of the following five focus groups all held in Auckland. These
were:
- 1 x Māori
- 1 x Pacific Island
- 1 x youth (18-24 years)
- 1 x general public
- 1 x news followers (defined as people with an above average interest in news and current
affairs including overseas news).
The groups were undertaken from 23rd February to 1st March 2004.
UMR Research Limited 4
Some comparisons have been drawn from the 1999 and 2004 focus group discussions. Considerable
care is, however, needed when making comparisons of findings across two sets of qualitative research
even with a common facilitator.
The quantitative stage consisted of a CATI telephone survey of a nationally representative sample of
750 New Zealanders, 18 years of age and over. Interviewing was undertaken from 1st to 8th April 2004
at UMR’s centralised Auckland facility. The sample was stratified by telephone directory regions. In
addition a booster sample of Māori respondents was undertaken to bring the total Māori sample up to
300. A Pacific Island booster sample, which was undertaken in 1999, was not undertaken this time.
A full set of results from the Māori booster sample are included in Appendix 1.
The margin of error for 50% figure at the ‘95% confidence level’ for a sample of 750 is +3.6%. For the
booster sample of 300 Māori the margin of error for a 50% figure at the ‘95% confidence level is +5.7%.
Full details of the methodology of the telephone survey are included in Appendix 3.
The differences between qualitative and quantitative research should be noted. Qualitative research is
essentially about understanding and quantitative research about measurement. Qualitative research
can identify the full range of attitudes of New Zealanders on overseas aid issues, identify the intensity
with which views are held and provide an indication of the language used. Quantitative research was
necessary to establish with some certainty the extent to which views and attitudes expressed in the
focus groups were held throughout the wider population.
This report follows the structure of the quantitative survey with extensive use made of verbatim quotes
from the focus groups to add richness and context to the quantitative research findings. Text in square
brackets in the quotes indicate questions from the facilitator or provides necessary explanation of the
issue being discussed.
Some limited comparisons have been made with the following overseas studies.
(1) Americans on Foreign Aid and World Hunger; A Study of US Public Attitudes, undertaken for
PIPA. This was a telephone survey of a nationally representative sample of 901 United States
respondents undertaken from 1st November to 6th November 2000.
Full results of this survey and a number of other surveys (including those undertaken for other
organisations) are available on the PIPA website (www.pipa.org).
(3) Monitoring Public Opinion Towards Overseas Aid: Wave Two: 2001 prepared for AusAID. This
study consisted of twelve questions included in the News Poll national omnibus survey
conducted in March 2001. The study was conducted nationally amongst 1,200 Australian
respondents aged 18 years of age and over.
This study followed up an initial 1998 benchmark monitor. That monitor was used to provide
comparisons with results reported in UMR’s 1999 study.
UMR Research Limited 5
It should be noted that differences in question wording and in survey methodology means comparisons
can only be indicative.
There is a great deal of publicly available information on surveys on overseas aid and numerous
additional comparisons are possible.
A full set of demographic tables (see Appendix 2) has also been provided breaking down all results by
region, gender, age, occupation, personal income, main income earner, ethnicity, declared knowledge
of overseas aid, approval/disapproval of overseas aid and whether a donation has been made to an
overseas aid organisation in the last year. It should be noted that care is needed with results from
smaller sub-samples.
UMR Research Limited 6
II. Executive Summary
• There have not been major changes in New Zealanders level of knowledge of and attitudes
towards overseas aid since the 1999 benchmark study.
• There was a slight improvement in the overall level of support for the New Zealand
Government providing aid to poorer countries. 76% approved and 14% disapproved compared
to 71% and 18% in 1999.
• There was also a general strengthening of the arguments tested for overseas aid.
The strongest unprompted argument for overseas aid again centred on humanitarian and duty
factors. The strongest argument against remained that priority should be given to New Zealand
problems followed by perceived lack of effectiveness of aid.
In prompted testing, the level of agreement with the argument that, ‘the New Zealand
Government needs to give priority to helping poorer people in New Zealand before helping
people overseas’ again rated more strongly than any of the arguments tested for overseas aid.
• New Zealanders only remained moderately convinced of the effectiveness of overseas aid.
38% were confident that New Zealand’s non-Government aid organisations actually help
people in poorer countries and 24% were not confident. 30% were confident that, overseas aid
from the New Zealand Government actually helps people in poorer countries and 24% not
confident.
• One change since 1999 was an apparent increase in the salience of arguments that being part
of a global community meant that New Zealand should provide overseas aid. SARS and
terrorism appear to have increased a sense of global interconnectedness.
A new argument for overseas aid tested in the quantitative survey showed 59% agreement and
10% disagreement with the statement that, ‘the case for New Zealand providing aid is
becoming stronger as the world increasingly becomes a global community’.
There also appeared to be increased wariness about entangling aid with political
considerations. This clearly stemmed from discomfort with the situation in Iraq. In another new
question included in the quantitative survey, 63% of New Zealanders considered that New
Zealand Government aid should be given entirely on humanitarian grounds and 28% that
international political considerations should play some part in deciding where our aid is sent.
UMR Research Limited 7
• There was also increased awareness that most New Zealand aid goes to the Pacific region
although the timing of the Niue cyclone may have had some part in that. There was much
more discussion about African aid and the aftermath of Live Aid during the 1999 study.
• There was also increased awareness that more New Zealand aid is provided directly by the
New Zealand Government than by NGOs. In the 2004 study, 37% thought more aid was
provided by the Government and 40% more by the voluntary donations made through overseas
aid organisations. In the 1999 study, 27% thought more aid was provided by the Government
and 54% by voluntary donations.
This result was consistent with the apparent lower profile of NGO television advertising.
• 12% of New Zealanders declared they were very and a further 54% fairly interested in the
subject of overseas aid. The level of interest was similar to that recorded in 1999.
• Levels of declared knowledge were down a little on 1999 with 3% of New Zealanders surveyed
declaring they knew a lot, 31% a fair amount, 52% not that much and 14% hardly anything
about the subject.
• The major sources of information about overseas aid remained television and newspapers.
• There was an increase in support for the Pacific getting most of the overseas aid provided by
the New Zealand Government.
Given a choice of regions, 71% selected the Pacific as the area that should get most of the
overseas aid provided by the New Zealand Government. In 1999, 55% selected the Pacific.
• Of eleven options tested the top priority for overseas aid was, ‘water and sanitation’ (not tested
in 1999), followed by public health programmes and disaster relief. Of the eleven options
tested tertiary education scholarships was the least favoured.
There was little change in the ranking of the ten options tested in 1999 and 2004.
• As in 1999 there was again general support for the concept of Government meeting the target
of 0.7% of the country’s GNI for overseas aid.
61% were in favour and 25% opposed. In 1999, 58% were in favour and 26% opposed.
UMR Research Limited 8
Support also held up when respondents were provided with additional information. After being
told that the amount the New Zealand Government currently spends on overseas aid is 0.23%
of our Gross National Income, that comes to around $300 million, that the Government has
made a commitment to reach the 0.7 target by 2015 and that some European countries have
met or exceeded this target, 59% supported New Zealand reaching this target by annual
increases and 29% were opposed.
This result does, however, have to be very carefully interpreted. The focus group discussions
outlined that most respondents were working off very flimsy knowledge bases when asked for
their views on the appropriate levels of Government expenditure allocated to overseas aid. It
was again difficult to get across to some that the target applied on a per head basis and that
the absolute size of the national economy was not relevant to that calculation.
Most respondents in the focus groups, as in the 1999 study, significantly underestimated the
actual amount already being spent on overseas aid and were understandably then
consequently reluctant to endorse a much higher level of expenditure. They were also
generally unimpressed by the example of the Northern European countries. These were seen
as being bolstered by oil and EU subsidy revenues and generally as much more prosperous
countries than New Zealand.
• There is no need for any significant changes to the communications strategy recommended
after the 1999 study
The focus in making the case for overseas aid should remain on humanitarian and not on self-
interest arguments.
That case can be enhanced by making the point that we live in an increasingly global
community.
It would still be foolhardy to launch a frontal attack on the argument that aid money would be
better spent in New Zealand.
The 0.7% GNI target should continue to be presented as something New Zealand heads
towards as we can afford to do so.
UMR Research Limited 9
III. Level of Interest and Awareness
3.1 Level of interest
There was little change in the level of interest in overseas aid declared by New Zealanders.
That level of interest remained modest. In 1999, 11% declared they were very interested and a further
52% fairly interested. In 2004, 12% declared they were very interested and a further 54% that they
were fairly interested.
There were not marked variations in the level of declared interest across demographic groups. The
level of declared interest amongst males and females was similar whereas in 1999 there had been
higher declared interest amongst females.
There was also not a great deal of difference in declared interest by age although, as in 1999, the
respondents in the youth focus group showed lower levels of interest than respondents in other groups.
As in 1999, respondents in the Pacific Island focus group were the most interested in the issue.
As in 1999, there were higher levels of declared interest amongst those who had personally made a
donation to an overseas organisation in the last year or so. Amongst those who had donated, 18%
declared they were very interested and 57% fairly interested in the subject of overseas aid. Amongst
those who had not donated, 5% declared they were very interested and 50% fairly interested.
The level of declared interest amongst Māori was slightly down on 1999 levels. In this survey, 12%
declared they were very interested and 49% fairly interested.
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
How interested are you in the subject of overseas aid - that is aid provided by the NZ
Government and overseas aid organisations to poorer countries overseas?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
Very interested 11 12
Fairly interested 52 54
TOTAL INTERESTED 63 66
Not that interested 26 27
Not interested at all 10 7
TOTAL NOT INTERESTED 36 34
Unsure 1 -
UMR Research Limited 10
As in 1999 it was also evident in the latest set of focus groups that there were not high levels of interest
in the issue.
A general view would be that if they came across an article on overseas aid in a magazine that they
were reading at the dentist they would probably skim through it and might stay with a television
documentary if it captured their attention but most would certainly not go out and actively seek
information on overseas aid.
[Would you read an article on New Zealand overseas aid involvement?] It doesn’t spark any
emotion but I don’t mind skimming it. If the Government reckon they can give it, they can give
it. (Auckland, Māori, male)
[Metro, North and South, the Listener?] I’d have a read of it, at least browse through it
anyway. (Auckland, general public, male)
If you’re at the dentist and you’ve got an hour to wait before your appointment, then you’d
read it. (Auckland, general public, female)
Some noted that if there was a television documentary on the subject of overseas aid there was a good
chance that they would be watching programmes on other channels.
But if you have to put it on outside the news, most people will look at that thing and will look at
what’s on the other channel rather than focus on the aid because people will prefer to watch
something that has humour or action or something like that. (Auckland, Māori, male)
As in 1999, there was more interest on the issue amongst the Pacific Island group. They were again
more likely to be able to cite examples and discuss the impact of specific overseas aid initiatives more
than respondents in the other groups.
Coming through at a low level in the focus group discussions was some praise for the provision of
feedback on the effectiveness of overseas aid and some very mild complaints that they were not better
informed.
Organisations like Red Cross give feedback to the New Zealand public and say “look this is
where your money went to, we’ve given it to this, this and this”. That money must go from
here to the Red Cross over there. Just give feedback to the people. They put themselves on
the line, Red Cross. They even go into those war-torn countries. I think they’re a reputable
company. You see them amongst the people who are suffering. You see them there nursing
and whatever else. (Auckland, Māori, male)
We’re not told. There isn’t a lot of information about it. [No accountability. (Interjection.)] We
give the money to them and where does it go? What happens to it? (Auckland, general
public, male)
[Does the Government or organisations like Red Cross monitor the effectiveness of that
spend?] I hope so, but you don’t hear anything. (Auckland, general public, male)
UMR Research Limited 11
3.2 Areas of interest
Areas nominated when focus group respondents were pressed on what specific aspects of overseas
aid they would be interested in finding more about were:
- where New Zealand aid goes
- evidence of effectiveness
- criteria that are used to decide where aid goes
- human interest stories.
There was a broad division between those looking for harder factual information and those looking for
more heart warming stories.
[Topics about overseas aid that you’d be interested in] Why they’re giving it would be the
main reason. To have a breakdown of where it’s going by organisation. [And how valid those
organisations are, the credibility of each one. (Interjection.)] And how much actually gets
through to the people. That way there, we can then target the good organisations because
they’d have a rating I guess. Then they can just start targeting the better ones. (Auckland,
Māori, male)
All the money spent and where it is spent. (Auckland, general public, male)
Just want to see accountability, to see that you’re not just chucking money into a hole. That’s
probably why I don’t give as readily because I don’t know where the money goes. [Where is it
going? (Interjection.)] Can you guarantee me that it’s going towards something good.
(Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
It would be nice to know how every cent is spent. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
[What would you be interested in finding out about overseas aid?] How much we’d given to
each nation. If there was $10 million worth of damage in Niue and we’d given $5 million but
everybody else had only given $0.5 million, I’d be interested to find out what sort of
percentage we’d given. Maybe the contribution per year. (Auckland, general public, male)
[Anything that could make you interested?] The only thing that would interest me would be
whether it’s going to affect us here in New Zealand I guess. If the government decides to lend
money or give money, it’s obviously my money or our money. I’d like to know how much of
my money is going to somewhere else. Other than that I’m not really worried. (Auckland, 16-
24 years, male)
[What type of information would you be interested in?] For me I’d screen through it and I’d
weigh up the pros and cons of what they’re doing and what needs doing here in New Zealand.
If they gave $20 million to Iran I’d be really pissed off because they could have kept all the
schools open up North, things like that. That’s the way I feel. The kids of New Zealand are
our future. (Auckland, Māori, male)
UMR Research Limited 12
I’d be interested in the basic numbers, how much we give, how much is it per capita, how
much is it by comparison with Australia or the States, and where does it go? I’m interested for
a New Zealand focus, where does it go to? [How do they calculate the army and navy?
(Interjection.)] How much is it going to cost. In the bigger famine type picture, the aftermath
of war, some case studies of the personal thing because a lot of aid that I have read about is
enormously destructive. If someone’s had their crops destroyed for instance and you give
them food and not seed, the following year everyone’s packed up and gone home. That
person is still without the ability to grow more feed themselves. I’ve read of situations where
things are much worse after the aid people have gone. There’d be some very interesting case
studies. [We don’t see follow-ups. (Interjection.)] I suspect there’d be very bad press for the
aid agencies. (Auckland, news follower, male)
Quite often there’s more than one disaster at a time going on in the world and I’d like to see
how they qualify this disaster against that disaster. Who and how decides which is the more
worthy cause here? We’re going to let these people die because these people look more
needy. Where does that come into it? The politics of it. (Auckland, news follower, female)
Some were more interested in the impact on people being helped.
[What should a television documentary cover to guarantee your interest?] I for one would like
to see how individual people – we’re all human beings and we all have a right to have the
necessities of life and I would like to see how that money is spent so that individuals are
benefitting from the money. [Case studies of aid at work?] Yes. I would like to see children
being fed, families being helped, latrines being dug. Wherever the disaster is I would like to
see those people being helped. (Auckland, news follower, female)
I think what you were saying about change, seeing how far they’ve come. [Would you like to
see it in figures or numbers, or in personal stories?] Just how they’ve changed the people.
How they’re getting on now and what they’re doing in everyday life. How it’s changed them in
any way. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
[Other things you’d be interested in finding out?] The human story behind it. The people.
Why it’s needed and how it’s been supported. From examples rather than just talking about it
clinically would pull me in. (Auckland, Māori, female)
There’s no doubt that the personal story definitely connects you better. [They do but they
don’t give you the big picture. (Interjection.)] I wouldn’t be happy just reading a personal
story without knowing some of those other facts as well. (Auckland, general public, female)
[What else would you like to see about overseas aid?] To hear from individuals as opposed to
hearing it always from the aid organisation’s point of view. (Auckland, news follower, female)
And to see how it’s changed their lives, but again who do they pick? They could well pick
whoever’s going to make them look the best. (Auckland, news follower, female)
UMR Research Limited 13
3.3 Incidence of donations
51% of New Zealanders declared that they had personally made a donation to an overseas aid
organisation in the last year or so. The equivalent figure in 1999 was 56%.
Older New Zealanders and New Zealanders on higher incomes were more likely to declare that they
had made a donation.
38% of under 30 year olds, 49% of 30 to 44 year olds and 59% of New Zealanders 45 years of age and
over declared they had made donations.
There was also a general trend of an increasing likelihood to have made a donation by personal
income. Amongst those earning less than $15,000 a year, 44% declared that they had made a
donation and amongst those earning more than $70,000 a year, 60% declared that they had made a
donation.
46% of Māori declared they had made a donation - down from 55% in 1999.
3.4 Knowledge of overseas aid
New Zealanders declared lower levels of knowledge than in 1999.
Only 3% declared they knew a lot about the subject, 31% a fair amount, 52% not that much and 14%
hardly anything. The equivalent figures in 1999 were 6%, 34%, 46% and 14%.
The overall evidence of the results from the quantitative survey showed, however, that New Zealanders
had probably become slightly more knowledgeable about overseas aid. They were more likely than in
1999 to be aware that the Government was a larger provider of funds than the NGOs and that the
Pacific was the main area where New Zealand aid went. They were, however, slightly less likely than in
1999 to be aware that the amount the New Zealand Government provides on a per head basis was less
than that provided by Governments of other developed countries.
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
How much would you say you know about the subject of overseas aid?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
A lot 6 3
A fair amount 34 31
TOTAL A LOT + A FAIR AMOUNT 40 34
Not that much 46 52
Hardly anything 14 14
TOTAL NOT THAT MUCH + HARDLY ANYTHING 60 66
Unsure - -
UMR Research Limited 14
3.5 Sources of information
There was little change in the main sources of information about overseas aid identified in the
telephone survey.
The major source was television, followed by newspapers with overseas aid organisations and radio
secondary sources of information.
SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR OVERSEAS AID
What are your main sources of information about overseas aid?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
TELEVISION
81.1 81.7
Television (37.8%), News (39.2%), Documentaries (4.7%).
NEWSPAPERS 51.7 58.9
OVERSEAS AID ORGANISATIONS
Newsletters / Brochures from charities (7.5%), TV ads for overseas
aid organisations (6.7%), Church (2.5%),Community organisation 21.7 18.7
(0.5%), Greenpeace (0.5%), Presentations by the organisations
(0.3%), World Vision (0.3%),Tear fund (0.2%), Caritas (0.2%).
RADIO 16.8 14.9
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
Word of mouth (6.1%), Personal experience (1.1%), Worked for an
aid organisation (0.3%), Know someone who works for an aid 7.2 8.4
organisation (0.3%), From books (0.2%), Family in Samoa (0.2%),
We sponsor a child (0.2%).
MAGAZINES 5.6 8.4
INTERNET 1.4 5.9
EDUCATION
1.4 1.0
University (0.5%), Library (0.3%), School (0.2%).
NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS 0.8 0.3
MEDIA – GENERAL 0.8 -
OTHER
1.2 1.1
Workplace (0.9%), Supermarket (0.2%).
Base: 86% of respondents, those who declared that they knew a lot, a fair amount or not that much about Overseas
Aid (n=643).
NB: The percentages in parentheses refer to the April 2004 survey only. This is a multiple response question and
hence the percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research Limited 15
3.6 Profile of NGOs
Red Cross again topped the rankings of top of mind mentions of overseas aid organizations. Its profile
was, however, much less dominant than in the 1999 benchmark study. In the benchmark survey it
received 33% of top-of-mind mentions with CCF on 16% and World Vision on 12%. In 2004, Red Cross
received 23% of top-of-mind mentions with World Vision on 21% and CCF now down on 4%.
The Save the Children Fund was stable on 8% of top-of-mind mentions with UNICEF up from 5% to
8%.
As noted, care is needed in comparing findings from sets of qualitative research but there was a clear
impression from the 2004 focus groups that NGO TV advertising was making less impression on
respondents than in 1999.
In a similar question in the 2001 AusAID survey, Red Cross (16%) received the most first mentions
followed by World Vision (13%), UNICEF (12%) and Care Australia (9.5%).
AWARENESS OF OVERSEAS AID ORGANISATIONS SEEKING DONATIONS FROM
NEW ZEALANDERS – FIRST MENTIONS
Which overseas aid organisations seeking donations from New Zealanders are you aware of?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
Red Cross 33 23
World Vision 12 21
Save the Children Fund New Zealand 8 8
UNICEF 5 8
CCF 16 4
Corso 6 2
Tear Fund - 2
OXFAM New Zealand 2 2
Caritas - 1
The Salvation Army 1 0.5
Amnesty International 0.4 0.5
Fred Hollows Foundation - 0.4
UNESCO - 0.4
CARE - 0.4
VSA - 0.3
Other 3.6 3.3
UMR Research Limited 16
AWARENESS OF OVERSEAS AID ORGANISATIONS SEEKING DONATIONS
FROM NEW ZEALANDERS
Which overseas aid organisations seeking donations from New Zealanders are you aware of?
Please tell me as many as you can remember:
APRIL 2004
%
First Mention Total Mentions
Red Cross 23 36
World Vision 21 35
Save the Children Fund New Zealand 8 17
UNICEF 8 17
CCF 4 12
Tear Fund 2 6
Corso 2 5
OXFAM New Zealand 2 4
Amnesty International 0.5 3
The Salvation Army 0.5 2
Fred Hollows Foundation 0.4 2
Caritas 0.7 1
Greenpeace 0.1 1
World Wildlife Fund 0.3 1
VSA 0.3 1
Leprosy Foundation - 1
World Health organisation 0.1 1
UNESCO 0.4 0.5
CARE 0.4 0.5
Barnardos 0.1 0.5
Famine Relief 0.1 0.4
Other islands in Need 0.3 0.3
United Nations 0.3 0.3
UNHCR 0.1 0.3
Churches / Missionaries 0.1 0.3
IHC 0.1 0.3
International Need 0.1 0.3
Trade Aid - 0.3
World Water Fund - 0.3
International Monetary Fund - 0.3
NB: Total mentions are multiple responses and hence the percentages do not add to 100%.
Agencies that had 0.1% (n=1) total mention were not displayed.
UMR Research Limited 17
3.7 Knowledge on whether Government or NGOs provide most aid
New Zealanders were fairly evenly divided on whether more aid was provided by the New Zealand
Government or by voluntary donations made through overseas aid organisations.
40% thought that the voluntary donations were larger and 37% Government aid.
This was a clear turnaround from the 1999 survey when 54% thought more aid was provided through
voluntary donations and 27% by the Government.
As in 1999, declared levels of personal knowledge about overseas aid proved no guide to a more
accurate answer on the question. Amongst those who declared they knew a lot or a fair amount about
overseas aid, 38% thought the Government provided more and 39% that more was provided by
voluntary donations. Amongst those who declared they knew not that much or hardly anything about
overseas aid, 37% thought the Government provided more and 40% that more was provided by
voluntary donations.
There was a major turnaround in the Māori numbers on this question. In 1999, 62% thought more aid
was provided by New Zealanders and 20% the Government. Now 41% consider voluntary donations
provide more and 31% the Government.
MORE NEW ZEALAND OVERSEAS AID PROVIDED DIRECTLY BY GOVERNMENT OR
BY DONATIONS THROUGH OVERSEAS AID ORGANISATIONS
Do you think more New Zealand overseas aid is provided directly by the New Zealand
Government or by the voluntary donations made through overseas aid organisations?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
Provided by New Zealanders 54 40
Provided by Government 27 37
Both (volunteered) 6 6
Unsure 13 17
NB: The wording for August 1999 was: Do you think more New Zealand overseas aid is provided directly by the New
Zealand Government or by the donations made by New Zealanders through overseas aid organisations?
Some in the focus groups clearly still had a view that the money provided through the NGOs was a
larger source of funding than the Government.
The Government contributes more when it comes to a big disaster like Niue but on a regular
ongoing basis the Government doesn’t contribute unless it is a one-off kind of disaster, so in
terms of regular things it’s World Vision and Red Cross. (Auckland, general public, female)
You hear that the Government today donated X amount of dollars whereas Red Cross and all
the others don’t come out and say “we did this, we did that”. You know they’ve done it, you
know they’re doing stuff there all the time but they don’t shout out. The Government’s really
quick to jump up and say “we’ll give them a couple of million dollars”. [Point scoring.
(Interjection.)] Where did the money go to? Who got it? (Auckland, general public, male)
UMR Research Limited 18
I think it would be more like CCF and those ones. They’ve pretty much got more people
involved rather than the government which is taxpayers’ money. [But that involves the whole
country. (Interjection.)] I reckon it’s more the people like organisations. (Auckland, 16-24
years, male)
3.8 Knowledge of amount of New Zealand Government aid compared
to other developed countries
21% of New Zealanders surveyed thought the New Zealand Government provided more aid on a per
head of population basis than other developed countries, 32% that it was abut the same and 28% that it
was less than other developed countries.
There was again not a great deal of difference in the answers given on this question amongst those
who declared they knew more about overseas aid.
Younger New Zealanders and New Zealanders on higher personal incomes were more likely to
consider that New Zealand provided less than other developed countries.
AMOUNT NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PROVIDES COMPARED
TO OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
Do you think that the amount of overseas aid provided by the New Zealand Government on a
per head of population basis is greater than, about the same as or less than that provided by
governments of other developed countries?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
Greater 18 21
About the same 28 32
Less 35 28
Depends (volunteered) 1 1
Unsure 19 18
NB: The wording for August 1999 was: Do you think that the amount of overseas aid provided by the New Zealand
Government on a per head of population basis is greater than, about the same as or less than that provided by other
developed countries?
UMR Research Limited 19
3.9 Knowledge of where New Zealand overseas aid goes
Most New Zealanders were aware that most aid goes to the Pacific region. There was greater
awareness than in 1999 although that may be attributable to the respective timings of the Niue cyclone
and Live Aid.
REGIONS WHERE MOST NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT AID GOES
To which of the following regions do you think MOST New Zealand Government aid goes?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
The Pacific 60 77
Africa 19 10
Asia 7 5
Europe 2 1
South America 2 -
Unsure 11 7
NB: August 1999 question was: Which one of the following areas do you think MOST New Zealand Government aid goes
to?
New Zealanders thought Africa and then Asia were the regions that received the next largest amount of
aid.
REGIONS WHERE MOST NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT AID GOES
And which region do you think gets the next largest amount of New Zealand Government aid?
AUG 99% APR 04
%
THE MOST THE NEXT THE MOST THE NEXT
AID LARGEST AID LARGEST
Africa 19 30 10 44
Asia 7 31 5 30
The Pacific 60 11 77 9
South America 2 8 - 4
Europe 2 9 1 3
Unsure 11 10 7 10
Base (Next Largest): 93% of respondents, those who nominated a region that the most of New Zealand’s Government Aid
goes to (n=697).
NB: August 1999 questions were: Which one of the following areas do you think MOST New Zealand Government aid
goes to? And which area do you think gets the next largest amount of New Zealand Government aid?
Most in the focus groups were also aware that Government aid mostly went to the Pacific Islands.
I’m pretty sure it mainly goes to the Pacific Islands. If there’s a big crisis somewhere, maybe
they’ll make money for that. I think the Government funding would only go to the Pacific
Islands. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
UMR Research Limited 20
I think for the Island countries we give a lot more aid other than monetary. We don’t give a lot
of money to possibly the Pacific Island countries but we give a lot of support, i.e. infrastructure
and just helping them sort the countries out in that respect. The money we probably send to
African countries and some Asian countries. [I really don’t think we do. (Interjection.)]
[Examples of giving non-money aid to other countries] Solomon Islands, we’re sending troops
over there to help peacekeep. I lived in Fiji for three years and there were a lot of Kiwis and
Australians running a lot of businesses, just running the country almost. They just helped the
national people. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
Some considered that most aid went to Africa.
I think more like to Somalia and places like that. It’s not until something like a tornado hits the
Island countries, then they start to concentrate on that. New Zealand tends to turn towards
that and then back once they’ve finished with that. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
[Where does aid go?] Somalia, they’re always on TV. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
A small number also thought that most of our New Zealand Government aid went where the United
Nations directed or to the trouble spot of the time.
I think it’s where the United Nations focuses their attention at the time. If it is a cause that the
United Nations is involved with, New Zealand tends to get on board and helps out. But there’s
a million other places that need our help. There always will be, there always has been, that
we don’t get involved with. (Auckland, news follower, female)
The New Zealand Government and what it’s involved in overseas care and aid of troubled
spots around the world, Afghanistan being one of them and Iran and Iraq, all those. We tend
to go in as a country more as an aid giver and help rebuild and get those countries back on
their feet. [Is that an appropriate role for us as a country?] Yes. We’re useless as an actual
army or any kind of a fighting force. We don’t have the resources, we don’t have the
manpower, we’re only little. We are more valuable I think to the world in general in a support
role and we do it well by all accounts. (Auckland, news follower, female)
UMR Research Limited 21
IV. The Case for Overseas Aid
4.1 General approval/ disapproval
A decisive majority of New Zealanders (76% to 14%) again generally approved of the New Zealand
Government providing overseas aid to poorer countries around the world.
Support for aid had strengthened a little from 1999 when 71% generally approved and 18% generally
disapproved.
Support was high across all demographic categories.
Māori support was also up on August 1999 when 66% generally approved and 25% generally
disapproved. Now 73% approve and 19% disapprove. The respondents in the Māori focus group were
still the most likely to contend strongly that overseas aid funding should instead be spent to alleviate
social problems in New Zealand.
GENERALLY APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PROVIDING
AID TO POORER COUNTRIES
Do you generally approve or disapprove of the New Zealand Government providing aid to poorer
countries around the world?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
Approve 71 76
Disapprove 18 14
Both (volunteered) 5 3
Neither (volunteered) 2 1
Unsure 4 6
In the AusAID 2001 survey, 85% approved and 11% disapproved of ‘Australia giving foreign aid to poor
countries around the world’.
In the PIPA survey, a 0-10 scale was used to ascertain views on ‘foreign aid, the assistance that the
United States gives to other countries’ with 0 being very bad, 10 being very good and 5 being neutral.
The 0-4 total was 31%, 35% had a neutral opinion (point 5 on the scale) and the 6-10 total was 31%.
UMR Research Limited 22
4.2 Reasons for approving of New Zealand Government providing
overseas aid to poorer countries
The major reasons given by telephone survey respondents for generally approving the New Zealand
Government providing aid to poorer countries again centred on humanitarian reasons.
This included that ‘we have an obligation and a responsibility to help’ and ‘if people need help we
should give it to them’.
This was followed by a view that New Zealand could afford to provide aid and that there was an
international responsibility to do so.
Care is needed in comparing analysis of open-ended responses across surveys but there did appear to
be a greater emphasis on international responsibilities than was the case in 1999. This difference was
also apparent in the focus group discussions.
** See table on following page.
UMR Research Limited 23
REASONS FOR APPROVING OF THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
PROVIDING AID TO POORER COUNTRIES
Why do you approve? What are your reasons?
APR 04
%
HUMANITARIAN / DUTY
We have an obligation / responsibility to help (15.2%), If people need help we
should give it to them (15.1%), I see the need (4.9%), It’s a Christian thing to do
(3%), Victims of Disasters (3%), There’s a huge gap between rich and poor in the
world (2.3%), We should stop people from starving (1.6%), Everyone in the world
deserves water / food / life (1.6%), Improving their standard of living (1.1%), 55.1
Humanitarian grounds (1.1%), Victims of war (1.1%), Starving children (0.9%), It’s
important to try and make the world a better place (0.9%), The Government should
help (0.7%), Someone has to help them (0.7%), I don’t like seeing suffering (0.5%),
They need medical help (0.5%), Children there need our help (0.5%), Sick children
(0.4%).
NEW ZEALAND CAN AFFORD IT / GENEROUS COUNTRY / NEW ZEALAND IS
MORE FORTUNATE
We have enough and should share (12.4%), We’re in a better state than other
countries (8.1%), We can spare the money (7.2%), Developed countries should 39.4
help undeveloped ones (5.3%), We need to support each other (3.2%), Generous
country (1.4%), New Zealand is more fortunate (1.1%), We are lucky to be self
sufficient (0.5%), Because we can afford it (0.2%).
INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
Richer countries should share wealth with poorer ones (10.3%), We should do our
share to help the international community (7%), We should help countries who
22.6
can’t help themselves (2.5%), We should promote world development /
improvement (1.9%), We can’t ignore the problems of other countries (0.5%), We
need to lead by example (0.4%).
DEVELOP SELF-SUFFICIENCY IN POOR COUNTRIES
Develop self-sufficiency in poor countries (3.7%), Poor countries can’t get started
otherwise (1.6%), Help self sufficiency by training and skills (1.2%), Help develop 9.3
education (1.2%), Help develop medical care (1.1%), Help develop infrastructure
(0.5%).
OTHER COUNTRIES WOULD HELP NEW ZEALAND IN THE SAME SITUATION 6.7
QUALIFIED APPROVAL
Followed up so it reaches the people (1.8%), Also fix New Zealand’s problems
3.5
(0.9%), Give but not to the detriment of New Zealand (0.4%), Not to people who
can help themselves (0.4%).
HELP NEEDED - SPECIFIC
3.4
Our Pacific neighbours (3.2%), Refugees (0.2%).
PROVIDES STABILITY
Reduces the threat of war / terrorism (1.1%), Provides global political stability 1.6
(0.5%).
BENEFITS NEW ZEALAND
We may get trade benefits in return (0.9%), It will benefit NZ in the long term 1.1
(0.2%).
3RD WORLD COUNTRIES ARE EXPLOITED BY THE WEST 0.7
FEELS GOOD TO HELP OTHERS 0.5
Base: 76% of respondents, those who declared that they approve of the Government providing aid to poorer countries
(n=571).
NB: This is a multiple response question; percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research Limited 24
In the 2001 AusAID survey, the major reasons given by those who approved of overseas aid were that
it, ‘helped look after people in need/ less fortunate’ (47%), ‘Australia is wealthy, can afford it’ (25%)
‘humanitarian/ morally right’ (20%) and ‘Australia/ Government obligations/ responsibility’ (11%).
4.3 Testing of arguments
In prompted testing of arguments in favour of the New Zealand Government providing aid, the most
powerful was a new one included in the 2004 survey that sought to capture ‘part of the global
community’ arguments for New Zealand aid. This line of argument came through more strongly in 2004
qualitative research than in 1999.
59% agreed (22% strongly) and 10% disagreed that, ‘the case for New Zealand providing aid is
becoming stronger as the world increasingly becomes a global community’.
The next powerful argument was that, ‘New Zealand has a responsibility to provide what help it can to
people who are living in poverty overseas’. 57% agreed (28% strongly) and 19% disagreed with this
argument.
There was, as in 1999, generally lower support for the arguments for aid based on self-interest.
UMR Research Limited 25
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID - STATEMENT TESTING
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
APRIL 2004
%
1, 5,
TOTAL TOTAL
Strongly 2 3 4 Strongly Unsure
AGREE DISAGREE
Agree Disagree
The case for New Zealand providing aid is
becoming stronger as the world increasingly 22 37 59 29 7 3 10 2
becomes a global community.
New Zealand has a responsibility to provide
what help it can to people who are living in 28 29 57 23 13 6 19 1
poverty overseas.
If New Zealand provides overseas aid we will
be more likely to receive help in the future if we 19 27 46 29 14 10 24 1
ever need it.
Providing overseas aid will help New Zealand’s
16 29 45 36 11 7 18 1
long term trade prospects.
Overseas aid can help increase political
stability throughout the world and reduce the 20 24 44 26 16 12 28 2
threat of war and terrorism.
Providing overseas aid will help win New
17 26 43 33 15 8 23 1
Zealand friends overseas.
UMR Research Limited 26
There was overall a general strengthening of the arguments in favour of overseas aid since 1999. The
biggest improvement was for the argument, ‘providing overseas aid will help New Zealand’s long-term
trade prospects’. There was a 16% net improvement (comparison of the total agree minus total
disagree) for this argument.
The one argument where opinion did not move was that, ‘the overseas aid can help increase political
stability through the world and reduce the threat of war and terrorism’. While the exact effect cannot be
ascertained it does not appear that adding of ‘and terrorism’ to this argument in 2004 had much impact
on opinion.
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID
- STATEMENT TESTING COMPARISON
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly
do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
AGREE DISAGREE AGREE DISAGREE
New Zealand has a responsibility to provide
what help it can to people who are living in 52 24 57 19
poverty overseas.
If New Zealand provides overseas aid we will
be more likely to receive help in the future if we 43 28 46 24
ever need it.
Providing overseas aid will help New Zealand’s
37 26 45 18
long term trade prospects.
Overseas aid can help increase political
stability throughout the world and reduce the 44 28 44 28
threat of war and terrorism. *
Providing overseas aid will help win New
37 31 43 23
Zealand friends overseas.
* In the August 1999 survey this statement did not include the words “and terrorism”.
The PIPA survey showed strong prompted agreement amongst United States respondents for
arguments based on moral obligation and trade advantage.
79% agreed (35% strongly) and 21% disagreed (9% strongly) that, ‘the United States should be willing
to share at least a small portion of its wealth with those in the world who are in great need’.
65% agreed (29% strongly) and 32% disagreed (15% strongly) that, ‘the world economy is so
interconnected today, that in the long run helping third world countries to develop is in the economic
interest of the US. Many of these countries will become trading partners that buy our exports, so
eventually our aid will pay off economically’.
Other results from the PIPA study showed support for moral and political stability/ trade arguments for
the overseas trade in the United States. 69% found the argument, ‘given the high level of wealth in the
industrialised countries, we have a moral responsibility to share some of this wealth to reduce hunger in
the world’ convincing and 29% found it unconvincing.
UMR Research Limited 27
64% found the argument, ‘because the world is so interconnected today, reducing hunger in the world
ultimately serves US interest. It creates more political stability, and by promoting economic growth
helps create more markets for US exports’ convincing; 33% found it unconvincing.
4.4 Ranking of arguments for overseas aid by general approval/
disapproval of overseas aid
A comparative rating of the level of strong agreement for arguments for overseas aid amongst those
who generally approved and disapproved of the New Zealand Government providing New Zealand aid
to poorer countries overseas showed, as in 1999, that the biggest difference was on the count of
whether, ‘New Zealand has a responsibility to provide what help it can to people who are living in
poverty overseas’.
UMR Research Limited 28
RATINGS OF ARGUMENTS FOR OVERSEAS AID BY WHETHER APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF OVERSEAS AID
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
1 = Strongly Agree 1 = Strongly Agree
Approve of Disapprove Approve of Disapprove
Overseas of Overseas Difference Overseas of Overseas Difference
Aid Aid Aid Aid
New Zealand has a responsibility to provide what
help it can to people who are living in poverty 31 5 26 33 6 27
overseas.
The case for New Zealand providing aid is
becoming stronger as the world increasingly - - - 25 10 15
becomes a global community.
Overseas aid can help increase political stability
throughout the world and reduce the threat of war 21 5 16 24 11 13
and terrorism. *
If New Zealand provides overseas aid we will be
more likely to receive help in the future if we ever 21 8 13 22 10 12
need it.
Providing overseas aid will help win New Zealand
14 7 7 19 10 9
friends overseas.
Providing overseas aid will help New Zealand’s
14 7 7 18 10 8
long term trade prospects.
* In the August 1999 survey this statement did not include the words “and terrorism”.
UMR Research Limited 29
4.5 Humanitarian arguments
There were again very strong arguments from focus group respondents supporting New Zealand
providing overseas aid because it was the right thing to do.
There were related arguments that there is a moral obligation for a country that was well off to help
those who were less well off and/or in distress.
It was noted by respondents that giving in this way made people feel good about themselves.
We should all help each other, countries, etc. Some countries are in real serious need of
assistance from somewhere, somehow. Children are dying and going hungry in countries.
(Auckland, Māori, female)
We have to believe we want to create a better world. Save lives. Help people in need,
international co-operation. Support friendly nations. Create a better world. Neighbours and
associates. (Auckland, general public, male)
The positives are that it helps others and it gives them hope. It helps our conscience.
(Auckland, general public, male)
If the country can’t help its own people and we can do something to ease suffering there, then
we should just purely because we can ... I think expertise help by sending doctors and
engineers is a better form of help than sending food and money. You know exactly where it’s
going then and also helping them to help themselves rather than just giving them handouts.
(Auckland, general public, female)
[Reasons why we should give aid?] I just think as a country as a whole we are strong enough
to give money to help neighbouring countries like we don’t have a reason not to. (Auckland,
16-24 years, female)
[Case for overseas aid?] We’re better off than a lot of the rest of the world. To make
unfortunates’ lives better. Building infrastructures of countries to allow them to stand on their
own two feet. (Auckland, news follower, female)
All people are humans and they need to be treated as such and helped in adverse
circumstances. We’re all well off in New Zealand compared to some other places in the world
and can give help where it’s needed. People feel good when they know that they’ve helped
others. We get something personally from it when we know that we have helped other
people. (Auckland, news follower, female)
Helping disasters. Those worse off. Sudden crises. We can always find the dollar. New
Zealand is better off than many. New Zealand is a good world citizen. It’s a good use of our
armed forces. (Auckland, news follower, female)
International citizen. People in need. Relatively New Zealand is very wealthy so it’s moral to
share your good fortune. I think there’s an issue in helping relieve the unforeseeable misery
like things that happen like major earthquakes and lots of people trapped in buildings. These
are things that could very definitely happen here. I’m thinking of the dog rescues, there’s a
national team of people who will go into those places, and similarly with the floods and
cyclone relief in the islands. It’s your duty. (Auckland, news follower, male)
UMR Research Limited 30
In central Africa the life expectancy for women is 42. [She’s more interested in whether she’s
going to get AIDS or not. (Interjection.)] In my viewpoint we are in a position to give a certain
amount of money in aid. In general in New Zealand life is so good. (Auckland, news follower,
male)
People always help with natural disasters. The feel good because we do like to give, whether
it be time, money, food, support. We give whatever we can. There are a lot of other countries
out there who need help regardless. (Auckland, general public, female)
4.6 Part of global community
Focus group respondents also argued that being part of a global community was a strong reason
justifying New Zealand providing overseas aid.
A component of this argument was that New Zealand had international obligations. This was
essentially a variation on the moral/ humanitarian arguments for aid.
I think we have an obligation as part of the international community to contribute to disasters
around the world, especially in our part of the world. (Auckland, Māori, male)
[Arguments for New Zealand providing overseas aid] Just to help the world, those in need, so
that we can be more aware of the world around us and not just isolate ourselves within our
own country because if we can help others, then we can also help ourselves. You become
more passionate in a sense. If you give help to others and we need help here, you’re more
inclined to help them too. (Auckland, news follower, female)
It all boils down to that global arena. We’re part of it so we should always give a hand here
and there. (Auckland, Māori, female)
We’re part of a global community. Humanity in terms of supporting others. There are many
that live with far less than we do. (Auckland, Māori, female)
Should give it to help others who are in trouble or travesty. I thought it would also help New
Zealand become part of the world community. It doesn’t isolate us by saying “that’s not our
problem, we don’t want to get involved”. It also has a feel good factor to it like you’re actually
doing something to help someone else. (Auckland, general public, female)
Basically there’s a human moral obligation to look out for people less fortunate than
yourselves. Also with globalisation or the world becoming more connected, it’s important not
to just ignore certain parts because so much everything’s going to affect each other and
there’s not going to be just these little isolated cultures. They’re going to be part of our
problem too. Connected with that is when people are in trouble they’re going to have these
problems and diseases are going to come up and they’re going to have wars and stuff and it’s
just going to cause more problems, so if we can help them out before they have to take such
desperate measures, then maybe we can prevent some disasters happening in the future.
(Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
UMR Research Limited 31
As a member of the United Nations – I know the US has made a mockery of that anyway but
shouldn’t we all be contributing and then hopefully everyone else in the United Nations will
contribute. It promotes a sense of moral obligation internationally. (Auckland, 16-24 years,
female)
The change from 1999 was a much stronger sense that the international interconnectedness provided a
case for overseas aid. Respondents noted SARs, terrorism and increasing overseas travel in this
context.
Things have happened internationally: SARS, the Asian bird flu, terrorism. We’ve become
global. When SARS was going on, there was medical help and advice. We were clearly
involved in that international community. (Auckland, news follower, male)
Basically it may help us in the future. If we help somebody, then somebody might help us if it
comes to fruition I guess. On the globalisation thing, the world is becoming one so a kind of
equality, try and help to get everybody on the same level, would probably help. [In what
way?] On things like war and disease, prevent the disease from spreading. SARS was a
great case. If we can knock it out worldwide we don’t have to worry about it. It’s not going to
come here, it’s not going to go to Australia, it’s not going to go wherever. Definitely.
(Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
It’s still important that we try to keep some sort of control over the terrorism because it will
come to New Zealand sooner or later. If giving aid to these countries is going to help by
getting them back on their feet, then it’s better to do that. (Auckland, news follower, female)
It gives you that personal link. I travelled a lot through Mexico and South America when I was
younger and I wouldn’t hesitate to give aid there because I’ve got that link. I’ve been there,
I’ve seen it, I’ve spent time with the people. So it is that personal feeling. (Auckland, news
follower, female)
It’s more and more a global community because of the way people travel now, the way that
we interact more with people on the internet. You’re just talking to people. I have a lot of
foreign people come through my home and stay with me. I enjoy it. Once upon a time 10-15
years ago I would never have had the opportunity to have all these people in my home. [How
does that link in as a reason to provide aid?] Because I think that we get to know these
people and I understand them. I have a lot of Koreans come and stay with me, students and
they’re amazed to learn that New Zealand helped Korea 50 years ago in the war against
North Korea. We went and help them and they are just so elated when we get out the books
and show them that this is what we did. We helped them. They have an affinity. (Auckland,
news follower, female)
[Case for providing aid] We all live in the world and need to help our fellow human beings.
We’ll improve the world’s wellbeing if people could have better lives. It’s a basic human right,
I believe, to have food, shelter, warmth and education. What goes around comes around.
Giving help to others has a positive effect on the giver as well as the recipient. Giving aid
could help the environment by taking away the need to degrade countryside and wildlife in
order for people to eke out an existence or a living. [What ‘goes around comes around?’] If
we help other people and if we do need them to help us, then it may not necessarily come
from those countries but from other countries. [More likely to be helped if we’ve given] Yes
although I don’t believe you should give things and expect something in return but I think a lot
of the world operates that way. [How important is the environment?] I think it’s extremely
important because you see, especially in African countries – I mean I don’t know whether it
would stop it because with a lot of people it’s pure greed but certainly like with the African and
UMR Research Limited 32
India and places like that with the tigers, they’re killing them because they want to sell their
fur. The same with elephants. Cutting down the trees for farms. [Can overseas aid stop
somebody killing endangered species?] I think if there’s a famine it would stop people having
to turn to that as a resource. (Auckland, news follower, female)
I’d like to see the aid – I’d love to travel the world everywhere and have no fear of anything.
I’d love to go see the world, see every bit of the world, every country of the world and have no
fears. So definitely in that respect, it’s a personal thing but I’d say the majority of people are
like that. Possibly a fear factor. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
4.7 Reciprocity
Some focus group respondents contended as in 1999 that there was a case for aid because it meant
that others would help New Zealand when we were in need.
The reciprocation could be that they know that New Zealand contributes and it should just be
a thought. It doesn’t necessarily have to be money or them having to give us material things.
It could just be the thought that they know that we’re a caring giving country. (Auckland,
Māori, male)
The act of giving. It does reflect on people individually and the country. Just to give and not
ask for anything in return, and hopefully getting something back in return I guess from the act
of giving. You’re supposed to give out once and it comes back tenfold but it doesn’t always
happen that way. The contributions being in line with other countries like the global thing
again. Recognition of being a caring country. (Auckland, Māori, male)
[‘Citizens of the world?] It’s a global community. That pertains also to if we help them they’ll
help us. (Auckland, news follower, female)
It’s the to and fro thing. If we help others and we have a time of need, in theory they should
be helping us. [Is that likely if we help Somalia and Niue and places like that?] It would be
nice if it was. [They could send some boat people to do the mopping up. (Interjection.)]
(Auckland, general public, male)
To be part of the big nation, to be in there with them and getting in so when we’re going down
the second time, they say “oh there’s our mate, we better go and help them” but not because
they can scratch our back because we don’t give them aid but at least we’re there, being
onside, walking with them. Even though we’re a small fish, they’re the big one, but at least
we’re there. Because we’re so small we do need these allies so we’ve got no money but we
still – to me I’d rather them give money to help. Everything else was agreed, the big picture,
all that sort of thing. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
In some cases this expectation was so vague as to barely have any self interest element. In
discussions some who identified reciprocity as a reason for aid specified that there should definitely not
be any formal arrangements on that basis.
It’s just one of those odd things that happens like you give somebody a car and the family
uses it and then one day you may be walking down the street and they pick you up in the car.
You’re not giving them a car just so that when you’re walking down the street, you expect
them to pick you up every time. (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
UMR Research Limited 33
As long as they’re not feeling like they owe you so they let you exploit them. [Don’t they owe
us something? (Interjection.)] In a sense but you can’t just like rip them off. (Auckland, 16-24
years, female)
Even when you do a favour for a friend, you don’t say “give it to me back right now” but in turn
– [Saying “if I need it in the future, will you give it back to me?” (Interjection.)] Yes pretty
much. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
[Okay to give aid and maybe something might come back?] I agree with that within reason.
[What’s going too far?] Just expecting it back really. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
4.8 Other self interest arguments
As in 1999, arguments in favour of overseas aid based on the self interest of New Zealand only came
through at a very low level in the focus groups and often only after prompting.
Respondents cited public relations advantages, the possibility of trade and New Zealand developing
expertise in disaster relief.
I think offering is one of the crucial things because now communications can be so instant and
there are organisations which are quite immense like the Red Cross, they can send messages
very quickly what help is needed so as long as we can offer. It doesn’t necessarily have to be
taken up. I don’t mean to say that’s a backhanded way of not giving but we should be
prepared to show that we are always willing to help. Otherwise we can’t complain if New
Zealand isn’t shown on the map somewhere. (Auckland, news follower, female)
It’s our global image. (Auckland, Māori, female)
I don’t think of that. I think of like famine and nature taking its course. People ... think why did
they want to give give give. Don’t talk about it, give it, give with a good heart. Famine is
nature taking its course, it’s not the people. [Sometimes it’s not nature. (Interjection.)]
(Auckland, Māori, female)
[Reasons why New Zealand should provide overseas aid] If anything can happen to New
Zealand it would be nice to know that we have people out there who will give back to us,
overseas. [Do you think that would happen when most aid goes to poor places?
(Interjection.)] [We don’t give aid to the ones who are going to scratch our backs.
(Interjection.)] [In those cases it just puts our country on the map. (Interjection.)] (Auckland,
Pacific Island, female)
Humanitarian reasons, public relations, reciprocal agreements to help us. I think
strengthening alliances is a good reason for New Zealand help, especially in the Pacific
region. They may be small islands but they cover a huge area. I know that New Zealand
relies on its alliances in the Pacific for things like the Whaling Commission. It pays for them to
have the Pacific nations on their side because they’ve got votes. It helps there, and it just
makes sense that if you help a fledgling economy, the chances are it will grow faster with a
little bit of help than it would if you just let it struggle along. The only thing that could end up
with trouble, look at the Solomon Islands. [Public relations advantages?] I suppose it’s again
putting yourselves on the map. It’s the way we’re perceived overseas. [Kind people.
(Interjection.)] (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
UMR Research Limited 34
[Any self-interest motive in giving overseas aid?] To get a country up and running, there’s the
possibility you can have a trade relationship with them. (Auckland, general public, female)
See why we’re helping them, you can see what their needs are, rather than just continuing
doling out more money. I just thought that it might also help us to learn like if a disaster
happens overseas and we go and help them, then if the same type of disaster happens here
then we know how to handle it. [Send people over?] Yes. We don’t actually have that many
disasters. If a huge disaster happens here, are we going to be able to cope and know what to
do so by going and helping other countries we can actually inform ourselves and help if it
happens here. (Auckland, news follower, female)
There was overall amongst many focus group respondents an obvious sense of discomfort about New
Zealand providing overseas aid on the basis that we secured benefits.
There was a view that any such benefits should be secondary to a humanitarian motivation.
Humanitarian grounds. Often because it’s urgent. If there’s no time to think too much about it
but get the help out there. Desperate people. People are desperate so you just move quickly.
Time is of the essence in that situation. It’s the right thing to do when someone’s in need
because you would hope that when we’re in need that someone may stand up for us too. I
just put as a last thought, an afterthought, that it puts us on the map. (Auckland, Pacific
Island, female)
[Building friendships and allies, diplomatic reasons, is that a reason for providing aid?] I don’t
think it’s a reason but it sits at the back of your mind. [It’s not the main reason. (Interjection.)]
It shouldn’t be one of the reasons for giving aid. (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
[Sending engineers into Iraq, some would argue that’s designed to appease the United
States. Is that a valid reason?] If that’s the only motive then absolutely I think it’s the wrong
reason. (Auckland, news follower, female)
You can’t get around it. They had to be part of it. [It’s probably a side-effect. (Interjection.)]
It’s unrealistic to think that it’s not going to happen. (Auckland, news follower, female)
Some argued that providing aid on this basis was more appropriate for super powers than for New
Zealand.
I find that more with countries like America, that kind of attitude. I don’t find that with New
Zealand though. As you say it was evident with the Iraqi conflict and New Zealand still chose
to think it over. They didn’t allow countries like that to bully them into things, although
sometimes I think we don’t have a choice. As a small country we don’t have a choice. I don’t
think their main motivation would be to do things like that but I think sometimes you have to
strategise. You have to do things for those reasons. I don’t think New Zealand is really about
just that. I think maybe if they were cornered into that kind of thinking, that would come, but
not the first thought. I don’t think our country’s like that. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
[Pure humanitarian motives versus potential self-interest ones, is it valid to have those
motivations?] If you’re a big power but not New Zealand. (Auckland, general public, male)
UMR Research Limited 35
[America want to keep say Pakistan as a country on their side, is that a reason to provide
aid?] Part of the war against terrorism. Personally that’s what America does do. They go
and build all these things but you know that the underlying is what they’re really after. But I
still think the country is benefitting from it. They’re getting the roads, the food, the help, but
you know that they want at least more than what they want. But the people, the local people,
are getting the help. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
In prompted discussion on whether it was appropriate for New Zealand to provide aid to Iraq to improve
the relationship with the United States, some took what they saw as a realistic position.
I think we have to because we are such a small country and we rely so much on everyone
else. If we upset anybody by not going with them and then they say “we’re not going to buy
your sheep, we’re not going to buy your meat”, what are we going to do with 30 million sheep?
(Auckland, general public, male)
We need them. In the 1945 World War it proved – without the big guns we could easily have
gone but we do need them so if that means currying up, I would do – I think that the
government for their own political reasons or whatever, but I actually feel glad that they did
something because personally, even though I hate that Bush, I wouldn’t like to think that if
anything happened they weren’t going to come and help us, and my family live there.
(Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
I think it’s fair enough. We missed out on the trade agreements with America but by doing
this, we still took our stand but then we compromised a bit and won back a bit of favour. I
think it’s good to be on good terms with the biggest power in the world. [No problem with
using a bit of aid to help that out every now and then. (Interjection.)] If it was hurting people I
think it would be wrong but if it’s helping the Iraqi people, it’s like winning on both counts.
(Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
As a very small country financially and economically we’re absolutely at the mercy of larger
countries and I think it’s good for us, on the one hand, not to become part of the aggressive
force that made, in my opinion, quite a serious mistake going in there, but on the other side of
the coin we can’t get the ire of those major allies up too badly. It’s important to New
Zealanders to protect our trade. It’s our standard of living and our ability to give further aid,
things like free trade agreements with the States. (Auckland, news follower, male)
We have to be practical. We can’t be too out on the edge, altruistic as far as giving aid. We
can’t be too soft-hearted about it. Soft-hearted with ourselves, saying “aren’t we great doing
this”. That’s why I think it should all come out in the open so that there are not other people –
I shouldn’t say politicians scheming. They’re thinking “we’ll benefit by trade if we do this and
this” and everybody else is thinking “oh good we’re helping”. We should have a united view
on why we give aid and we can only do that by there being lots of discussion and lots of
information and people being frank. (Auckland, news follower, female)
Some noted in general discussion on whether aid was appropriate, for instance, in providing support to
pro-Western countries in volatile regions that this could backfire.
[Argument: help keep a government in there that’s aligned to the West] In five years’ time
when that government does fall, are you seen as a supporter of the former government?
(Auckland, general public, male)
UMR Research Limited 36
You’ve got to be very careful that you don’t get the situation where it’s the old bite the hand
that feeds you situation. You give them aid, they get on their feet again and it does go to the
wrong places because really once it’s in another country you don’t have that much control any
more. (Auckland, news follower, female)
[Is that a valid reason for where countries send their aid?] The United States is exceptionally
cynical about its aid. Al Qaeda has definitely come from refugee camps. That’s where it’s all
grown up and I suspect that’s why the point was going on there. The Afghan refugees who
were pouring out of the country, they were in purgatory situations in refugee camps. That’s
where the extremism comes from, from those extreme situations they lived in. [They were
supported by America to begin with. (Interjection.)] I don’t know whether you can correctly
channel that aid to do that. Certainly countries like Indonesia and things, if they’re going to go
completely off the rails, it’s like the whole place will turn into a melting pot of terrorists and so
in that respect if you – I think aid is the wrong channel for that. Trade would be better than aid
in that respect. (Auckland, news follower, male)
Some argued that it was just plain wrong to provide aid if there was any kind of ulterior motive.
[Get votes for stopping whaling?] Unfortunately there is a lot of politics in it worldwide. I don’t
think that will ever go away. [Is there anything wrong with that?] That’s where it comes down
to the ulterior motive thing. “We’re only going to help your dying people in the country so long
as we get this out of it.” (Auckland, news follower, female)
I think kissing butt is pretty crappy really. I’d say there’s probably other ways we can go about
getting trade agreements which is what this whole thing was all about, us sending them over
to get some trade agreements. Australia, anyway, came out better than us because they
were first into bed with the Americans. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
If I knew that our Government had something like that, I’d feel dirty. [Blood money sort of
thing. (Interjection.)] I wouldn’t feel at all proud. [Not comfortable with that] (Auckland,
general public, female)
I don’t think it’s fair to go in and help someone with an ulterior motive. You’re offering aid,
then you’ve got to offer it freely. (Auckland, news follower, female)
It shouldn’t be conditional. All well and good if it happens eventually but you can’t expect it.
(Auckland, news follower, female)
I think aid is done badly for that. Governments giving power stations to small economies and
then having that power feed the embassy and there’ll be a long-term loan tied to that. That’s
very bad, very immoral. [Do you think conditions are often attached to aid?] Very much. [I’m
sure they are, especially from America. (Interjection.)] Or the World Bank, all that sort of
thing, they have terrible conditions. [What sort of conditions are there?] The World Bank aid
comes along and they’ll tell countries how their economy must be run, that they must have
democratic elections even if they’ve got an uneducated population. (Auckland, news follower,
male)
I’m sure America’s so-called aid in the Middle East is all conditional. (Auckland, news
follower, female)
UMR Research Limited 37
Given a choice 63% of New Zealanders surveyed thought that New Zealand Government aid should be
given entirely on humanitarian grounds and 28% that international political consideration should play
some part. There were differences by age and gender on this issue.
Younger New Zealanders (those under 30) were more likely to take the pragmatic position with 52%
considering aid should be entirely humanitarian and 36% that international political consideration should
play some part. Amongst New Zealanders 60 years plus, 70% considered that aid should be entirely
humanitarian and 25% that international political consideration should play some part.
Females were also more likely to consider that aid should be entirely humanitarian, 68% took this view
and 22% that international political considerations should play some part. Amongst males, the
equivalent figures were 59%; 34%.
INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Do you think New Zealand Government Aid should be given entirely on humanitarian grounds
or do you think international political considerations should play some part in deciding where
our aid is sent?
APR 04
%
Entirely humanitarian 63
International political some part 28
Depends 4
Unsure 5
In the AusAID survey respondents were given a choice on whether the more important reason for
overseas aid is Australia’s moral responsibility or Australia’s long-term interest.
53% plumped for ‘Australia’s moral responsibility’ and 35% for ‘Australia’s long-term interest’.
UMR Research Limited 38
V. The Case Against Overseas Aid
5.1 Reasons for disapproving of the New Zealand Government
providing aid to poorer countries
As in 1999, the overwhelming reason given by those who generally disapproved of the New Zealand
Government providing aid to poorer countries was that the funding would be better spent in New
Zealand.
The next most important reason cited was that aid would not be effective.
REASONS FOR DISAPPROVING OF THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
PROVIDING AID TO POORER COUNTRIES
Why do you disapprove? What are your reasons?
APR 04
%
MONEY BEST SPENT IN NEW ZEALAND
Look after our own backyard / charity begins at home (62.1%), There is poverty in New
Zealand (17.5%), Health system needs more money (9.7%), Use the money for education /
student loans (6.8%), We need to decrease unemployment (2.9%), Help the police / stop 113.4
violence (2.9%), Disaster relief in New Zealand (2.9%), Waiting lists (1.9%), Homelessness
(1.9%), We need more money for road / traffic problems (1.9%), Help the elderly /
pensioners (1.9%), Increase low salaries (1%).
MONEY MAY NOT REACH THOSE WHO NEED IT
Don’t know where the aid is going / doesn’t reach those who need it (8.7%), Aid goes into
the pockets of “fat cats” and corrupt governments (6.8%), Aid doesn’t get to the people 20.3
(1.9%), If they can buy bullets they can buy food and medicine (1.9%), Aid agencies have
big expense accounts (1%).
EACH COUNTRY SHOULD SOLVE THEIR OWN PROBLEMS
These countries should sort themselves out (4.9%), Some people have lots of money while 5.9
most have nothing – needs to be distributed (1%).
NO RETURN TO NEW ZEALAND
When we had our floods no one offered to help (2.9%), We don’t receive anything back in 5.8
return (2.9%).
AID CREATES DEPENDENCY
2.9
Aid creates dependency (1.9%), Aid stops countries from being self sufficient (1%).
THE GOVERNMENT SPENDS TOO MUCH MONEY ON AID 1.9
WE SHOULDN’T GIVE AID TO OIL PRODUCING COUNTRIES 1
ONLY GIVE AID BECAUSE USA / AUSTRALIA TELL US TO 1
HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES NEED TO BE SORTED OUT FIRST 1
THE POPULATION IN THESE COUNTRIES GROWS TOO FAST 1
THE MONEY COMES BACK TO US THROUGH CONTRACTS 1
IMMIGRANTS ARE COMING TO NEW ZEALAND AND BRINGING THEIR PROBLEMS
1
WITH THEM
Base: 14% of respondents, those who declared that they disapprove of the Government providing aid to poorer countries (n=103).
NB: This is a multiple response question; percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research Limited 39
The AusAID survey also showed that arguments that Australians should come first dominated reasons
given by those who disapproved of overseas aid.
Primary reasons were ‘address problems at home first/ clean-up own backyard’ (26%), ‘should look
after Australians first’ (25%), ‘aid money should go to Australia/ better spent at home’ (23%), ‘people in
Australia are living in poverty’ (14%) and ‘Australia has unemployment’ (5%).
The next powerful arguments related to lack of effectiveness – ‘money not reach people who need it’
(8%) and ‘funds are mis-used/ corruption’ (3%).
5.2 Testing of arguments against overseas aid
As in the 1999 benchmark study the most powerful argument against overseas aid tested in the survey
was that New Zealanders should come first. There was 67% agreement (including 45% strong
agreement) and 10% disagreed that, ‘the New Zealand Government needs to give priority to helping
poorer people in New Zealand before helping people overseas’.
Again, as in 1999, this rated stronger than any of the positive arguments tested. Comparison of the
most intense level of agreement (point 1 on the 5 point scale running from strongly agree to strongly
disagree) for the different arguments underlines this point. 47% agreed (24% strongly) and 15%
disagree that, ‘most overseas aid is swallowed up by administration costs and corrupt overseas
politicians’. The highest rating for a positive argument was the 28% strong agreement for, ‘New
Zealand has a responsibility to provide what help it can to help people who are living in poverty
overseas’ – 17% below the 45% strong agreement for the argument that New Zealand should come
first.
The next powerful argument, as in 1999, centred on a perceived lack of effectiveness of overseas aid.
There was 43% agreement (including 17% strong agreement) and 22% disagreement with a new
argument tested in 2004 that, ‘trade is more effective than aid in helping poorer countries overseas’.
There was as in 1999 a strong rejection of the argument that, ‘there is not point trying to help people in
the third world as the problem if international poverty is so big – it will never change’. 17% agreed and
63% disagreed (39% strongly with this argument).
UMR Research Limited 40
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID - STATEMENT TESTING
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
APRIL 2004
%
1, 5,
TOTAL TOTAL
Strongly 2 3 4 Strongly Unsure
AGREE DISAGREE
Agree Disagree
The New Zealand Government needs to give
priority to helping poorer people in New 45 22 67 23 7 3 10 -
Zealand before helping people overseas.
Most overseas aid is swallowed up by
administration costs and corrupt overseas 24 23 47 33 11 4 15 5
politicians.
Trade is more effective than aid in helping
17 26 43 33 16 6 22 2
poorer countries overseas.
New Zealand is not wealthy enough to help
poor people overseas as well as in New 14 14 28 27 21 22 43 2
Zealand.
There is no point trying to help people in the
third world as the problem of international 8 9 17 19 24 39 63 1
poverty is so big - it will never change.
UMR Research Limited 41
There was overall a general weakening of the arguments against overseas aid. The biggest change
was a 17% net movement (comparison of agree minus disagree) for, ‘New Zealand is not wealthy
enough to help poor people overseas as well as in New Zealand’.
Of the four arguments tested the only one that strengthened (a slight net 2%) was that, ‘most overseas
aid is swallowed up by administration costs and corrupt overseas politicians’.
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID - STATEMENT TESTING
COMPARISON
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly
do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
AGREE DISAGREE AGREE DISAGREE
The New Zealand Government needs to give
priority to helping poorer people in New 72 11 67 10
Zealand before helping people overseas.
Most overseas aid is swallowed up by
administration costs and corrupt overseas 46 16 47 15
politicians.
New Zealand is not wealthy enough to help
poor people overseas as well as in New 39 37 28 43
Zealand.
There is no point trying to help people in the
third world as the problem of international 22 56 17 63
poverty is so big - it will never change.
The PIPA study also showed the strength in the United States of the argument that priority should be
given to local interests.
There was 84% agreement (including 65% strong agreement) and 14% disagreement (including 3%
strong disagreement) with the statement, ‘taking care of problems at home is more important than
giving aid to foreign countries’.
5.3 Ranking of arguments for overseas aid by general approval/
disapproval of overseas aid
The comparative rating of the level of strong agreement for arguments against overseas aid amongst
those who generally approved and disapproved of the New Zealand Government providing aid to
poorer countries overseas showed that the biggest differences were on, ‘the New Zealand Government
needs to give priority to helping poorer people in New Zealand before helping people overseas’ and
‘New Zealand is not wealthy enough to help poor people overseas as well as in New Zealand’. These
were also the most polarised arguments in 1999.
UMR Research Limited 42
RATINGS OF ARGUMENTS AGAINST OVERSEAS AID BY WHETHER APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF OVERSEAS AID
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
1 = Strongly Agree 1 = Strongly Agree
Approve of Disapprove Approve of Disapprove
Overseas of Overseas Difference Overseas of Overseas Difference
Aid Aid Aid Aid
The New Zealand Government needs to give
priority to helping poorer people in New Zealand 39 89 -50 36 87 -51
before helping people overseas.
New Zealand is not wealthy enough to help poor
10 55 -45 6 54 -48
people overseas as well as in New Zealand.
Most overseas aid is swallowed up by
administration costs and corrupt overseas 18 50 -32 17 53 -36
politicians.
Trade is more effective than aid in helping poorer
- - - 13 37 -24
countries overseas.
There is no point trying to help people in the third
world as the problem of international poverty is 9 18 -9 4 26 -22
so big - it will never change.
UMR Research Limited 43
5.4 Priority for New Zealanders
As in 1999 the strongest argument against providing overseas aid that emerged in the focus groups
was that New Zealanders should take priority.
There were also individual cases of respondents who declared that they had a policy of not providing
aid to charitable organisations if they were not operating within New Zealand.
[Amount of aid that New Zealand gives as a country] I think we give too much. We spend a
lot of time looking out overseas but we never ever worry about what’s happening here.
(Auckland, Māori, female)
[Case against providing aid] That we should help our own country and our own needs first
before we help another country because how can we offer help to others when we don’t help
ourselves. (Auckland, news follower, female)
New Zealand has issues that it needs to sort out on its own doorstep and we need to be
mindful of our debt levels, both internal and internationally. (Auckland, news follower, female)
Same thing. My father always said to me when I was a kid “always take care of what’s in your
own background before looking into somebody else’s”. Is the money getting to the
places/people who are the most in need of it? Are we teaching them to be self-sufficient in
the long run? (Auckland, news follower, female)
[Is it important for government to spend money on overseas aid?] I think we’re more
important. They should concentrate more on our country. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
I’d rank it very very lowly at the present time. Things could change but at the moment with the
roads in Auckland and things like that, they’re just way more important to me right now.
(Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
[Where would you rank spending on overseas aid in terms of priorities for the government?]
It’s pretty much down the bottom. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
Personally I would rather see New Zealand perfect. It’s not perfect and it could be.
(Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
I might be the wrong person to say this and I might be hated here but personally – I mean I
was building churches in Africa and my personal thing is to give no aid to no country overseas
until our country – the problem is sorted out in our country because you could give $10 million
away to help other people but there’s people here that need it more first. That’s how I feel.
(Auckland, Māori, male)
It all boils down to what’s needed. If they’re throwing money away willy-nilly then I don’t see it
as a priority. Same thing again it always boils down to is what about our own country?
(Auckland, Māori, female)
I’d rather not donate overseas. I’d rather see it in the community here. Charity begins at
home. (Auckland, general public, male)
[Negatives?] We don’t always know where the money goes. We need to help our own people
in our own country sometimes. We’re only a little country and we can’t afford to be giving and
giving, giving and giving. (Auckland, general public, female)
UMR Research Limited 44
Maybe we have to look at the benefit of the aid that we’re giving versus the benefit if we gave
it in New Zealand. (Auckland, general public, male)
[Level of interest in overseas aid?] The only trouble is I’d probably be more interested in what’s
happening in my own country and what aid they’re giving to our own people first. When it comes to
overseas it’s kind of secondary but I would always hope that your homeland would have the first – and
then of course you’d always help out so and so, you’d hope that people from your own countries get the
help first and then it works out from there. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
Some justifying this line of argument drew attention to social problems in New Zealand.
If you look at the health system I feel the resources are a bit overstretched in New Zealand.
The waiting lists, doctors are leaving. (Auckland, general public, male)
I’d rather see the money go into our healthcare and education system. (Auckland, news
follower, female)
Look at the women rallying to get the mammograms down to 40. That’s a lot of money.
(Auckland, news follower, female)
[Strong enough to give money] We have debt as well and we have our own problems. We
don’t have a perfect health system or an education system or anything like that. (Auckland,
16-24 years, female)
They’ll give aid to the islands for the storm. If they’re a part of the New Zealand like
Rarotonga, the Cook Islands, I’ve got no problem with that, but that money could go towards
the hospitals here and the schools and the stuff that we really need. (Auckland, Māori, male)
Some cited the need of those affected by the central North Island flooding.
Is the money getting to where it’s supposed to go? New Zealanders’ needs come first. I was
appalled when I heard that Helen Clark was going to give $20,000 initially to the flood victims
down there and I thought that’s going to go a long way. This is New Zealand. We need to be
helped first and she’d already given goodness knows how much to Niue. I know that she’s
rethinking that now but we need to look after our own people first. (Auckland, news follower,
female)
The only thing I don’t like about the aid, they don’t let you know who got what, how much is
sent on buildings. They ask for money and the people give but you don’t hear where the
money went. Now our country is in trouble, especially parts of our country where people have
lost their homes which is true, they need help from us to help them, the farmers. That’s
thousands of dollars they’ve lost and that’s for each farmer. They’re the backbone of our
country, I believe, the farmers. Who is going to help them? They need us to help them.
(Auckland, Māori, female)
We have got people here on the poverty line. Houses that weren’t insured last week were
swept away. What are they going to live in? It was on the news tonight. The Government
are doing it well. We can’t give everybody a new house. (Auckland, general public, male)
UMR Research Limited 45
Some pointed to New Zealand’s overseas debt as a greater priority for funding than overseas aid.
We’ve still got an overseas debt, I worry about that. This is the accounting side of me coming
out. I worry about the overseas debt that we’ve got and here we are giving money and I’m
thinking “what about our overseas debt?” because one day somebody’s going to say no more.
That’s one of the things that I’m a little bit concerned about giving money when we should be
worrying about here and our overseas debt. When I say here, I don’t mean to say that we’re
running around poor, but there are problems here that need to be looked at like education to
me here is going downhill. It used to be up here but now we’re going downhill and I think we
should be giving aid first to ourselves before it goes. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
5.5 The effectiveness of overseas aid
New Zealanders are not particularly convinced about the effectiveness of overseas aid whether
provided by non-Government organisations or by the Government.
As in 1999, they are more convinced about the effectiveness of non-Government aid.
38% in total are confident (including 13% who are very confident) and 24% are not confident that, ‘New
Zealand’s non-Government aid organisations actually help people in poorer countries’. 34% have a
neutral response to this statement and 4% were unsure.
30% in total are confident (including 8% who are very confident) and 24% are not confident that,
‘overseas aid from the New Zealand Government actually helps people in poorer countries’. 43% took
a neutral position in response to this statement and 3% were unsure.
UMR Research Limited 46
EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT AND NON-GOVERNMENT AID
Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you are very confident and 5 not confident at all, how confident are you?
APRIL 2004
%
5, Not TOTAL
1, Very TOTAL
2 3 4 Confident at NOT Unsure
Confident CONFIDENT
All CONFIDENT
That New Zealand's non-Government aid
organisations actually help people in poorer 13 25 38 34 17 7 24 4
countries
That overseas aid from the New Zealand
Government actually helps people in poorer 8 22 30 43 15 9 24 3
countries
UMR Research Limited 47
There was almost no change in the degree of confidence in the effectiveness of non-Government aid
between 1999 and 2003 and a slight increase in confidence in the effectiveness of Government aid.
EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT AND NON-GOVERNMENT AID COMPARISON
Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you are very confident and 5 not confident at all, how
confident are you?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
TOTAL TOTAL NOT TOTAL TOTAL NOT
CONFIDENT CONFIDENT CONFIDENT CONFIDENT
That New Zealand's non-
Government aid organisations
37 24 38 24
actually help people in poorer
countries
That overseas aid from the New
Zealand Government actually helps 28 28 30 24
people in poorer countries
NB: The non-Government question in August 1999 was: That New Zealand’s non-Government overseas charities actually
help people in poorer countries.
The AusAID survey showed that 63% of Australians rated the aid provider by non-Government
organizations and charities as effective (including 25% who rated it as ‘very effective’) and 20% as not
effective enough or not effective at all.
53% rated the aid provided by the Australian Government as effective (including 12% rating it as ‘very
effective’) and 29% as not effective enough or not effective at all.
It should be noted that those results are not directly comparable as the Australian respondents were
working off a 4 point scale which pushed respondents to a positive or negative position rather than a 5
point scale with the possibility of providing a neutral response.
It was also evident in the New Zealand focus group discussions that many respondents were highly
sceptical about the effectiveness of overseas aid.
Some doubted whether it worked at all or reached the people it was intended to help.
I think it’s a fundamental issue myself as to whether that is a worthwhile thing to do, whether
that type of aid does any good for the recipients, whether it does any good for the country,
whether there’s actually any value at all to the recipients. (Auckland, news follower, male)
With the money that as a country we send over, are we positive that it reaches them in the
first place and if it all goes there and where it goes after it’s got to the country like if it goes to
a richer part of the country or a part of the country that needs it. (Auckland, 16-24 years,
female)
If we were sent feedback from it, they’d probably find that we wouldn’t be happy with what’s
happening with that feedback and we wouldn’t give anything. (Auckland, Māori, female)
UMR Research Limited 48
My only concern was the distribution of funds to the targeted areas and are they hitting their
targets. (Auckland, Māori, male)
[Concerns] There’s too many causes to give to. You’re not always sure where the money’s
going to go, whether it’s actually going to reach the people that need it. Probably need more
money spent on New Zealand problems like homelessness and hospitals. Also I think people
should learn to help themselves. (Auckland, general public, female)
I do feel sometimes that the money that you put into World Vision or whatever it might be, one
doubts sometimes how much actually ends up where it’s supposed to end up. (Auckland,
news follower, female)
Some respondents also questioned whether funding for overseas aid ended up in the pockets of corrupt
overseas Governments.
[Concerns about New Zealand giving overseas aid] I wonder if it’s bailing out irresponsible or
corrupt governments. Aid going to the wrong people and basically not knowing where it is
going. (Auckland, Māori, male)
Some of these countries have been getting aid for so long that they’ve now got organisations
that will come in and take the aid. Crime organisations or warlords, they’ve got it all sussed
out. They know when it’s coming in, when to pick it up. (Auckland, Māori, male)
The countries that have the disasters or the famines, you look at the government and how
wealthy they are. You worry about giving the donations or helping because it might go
somewhere else. [Do you think it’s widespread?] That’s what I think. (Auckland, general
public, female)
Even if you know that the money you’re spending is going to food, you don’t know that the
food isn’t just sitting in a warehouse while there’s some kind of military coup going on and the
food just goes off and goes to waste. Even if you know where the money is going in terms of
going to food or to hospitals or whatever, you don’t know that it’s actually getting there. [Do
you think that a lot of money is wasted?] A lot of times it’s not because of some plot but
simply because the country that you’re giving the aid to is in such strife and so much trouble
that they haven’t got the infrastructure to properly distribute the tools you’re trying to give
them. (Auckland, general public, female)
Or the government of the country that the children are in dire need of. Governments like in
Kenya or Somalia or wherever, who knows that they’re actually giving that to the villages.
They could be spending it on presidential palaces or whatever. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
Others questioned whether it was swallowed up in administration and advertising costs.
I don’t think that would matter as long as you know it’s going to help someone but how do you
know it’s not going to like advertising? (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
In organisations 40-50% at least gets spent on the administration. [The amount of advertising
they do. (Interjection.)] (Auckland, news follower, male)
UMR Research Limited 49
There were some low estimates when respondents were asked what proportion of the donated dollar
would get through to those who needed help.
I would say 60% gets through. (Auckland, general public, male)
I’d say less than 50% actually reaches the target but there’s no transparency. (Auckland,
general public, male)
It does make a difference because otherwise we wouldn’t do it. People wouldn’t be
volunteering their time and their efforts. If I had to put a figure on it, I’d say 20% or less
actually reaches the people who you think you’re giving the money to. (Auckland, general
public, female)
Probably less than 50% reaches the target. (Auckland, general public, male)
Doesn’t the world revolve around money so maybe 40%, who knows? I don’t know if they’re
non-profit organisations, things like CCF and World Vision. You’ve got to pay wages, you’ve
got to pay people to work for CCF, they’ve got to pay for advertising. Maybe they get cheaper
rates on television or something but I don’t know so maybe 40%. (Auckland, 16-24 years,
male)
In this context one respondent approvingly cited a charitable organisation that positioned administration
costs as only being paid out of interest received on donations.
I give monthly, I support a blind boy in India who is at school and my A$40 a month feeds him,
clothes him and educates him, gives him two new sets of clothing every year. [Do you know
the money goes to him? (Interjection.)] Yes I do because I know people who administer it.
The organisation that does it, the money that they run their administration costs on is taken
from the interest. You pay a month in advance. All the money paid a month in advance is
invested. [Who is that through?] Asian Aid. It started in America, has come to Australia, and
they only support children in Thailand, Nepal and India. (Auckland, news follower, female)
Some questioned whether aid could be effective given cultural differences or whether aid would
adversely impact on local cultures.
It’s kind of horrible but there’s too many people in the world anyway so like in one sense, how
can we try and help everybody when the world can’t really sustain everybody anyway. But on
the flipside of that, maybe if we help people and educate them, they’ll have a lower birthrate
and there’ll be less people so that cancels that out. Also you have to be careful that the aid
that we’re giving is appropriate to their culture. If we go into a country and we give them some
money and conditional on that we make them adopt democracy, like you can’t force people to
just change their mind like that. You have to consider what’s been in their culture for
hundreds of years. Maybe we should, rather than just bowling in and having a big war like in
Vietnam and stuff, we should think about it a bit more and make sure that the aid we give is
appropriate. The United States can’t expect every other country to be like them just because
they say so. The world works better with people on different levels, with countries on different
levels, so they just have to think about what they’re doing. Also another reason is related to
that. You can’t just give people a handout. You have to help them help themselves and
consider their culture and teach them ways to be successful on their own terms, keeping their
culture intact because I think diversity is important as well. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
UMR Research Limited 50
[Can assist in the development of an economy which can later trade with you?] I think that’s a
fair enough reason as long as we don’t expect the people in that country to become like us. I
don’t mean to say that we are superior but we can’t try to alter their lifestyle, their morality,
their religions and everything else just because we give them aid. (Auckland, news follower,
female)
I think sometimes when we go in, culturally I’ve done that once myself and I came home and
thought that was a waste of time. I was a cultural mismatch and I actually didn’t understand
these people at all and here I was meant to be the expert and really I wasn’t. Even though I
know my field, but I wasn’t an expert in their culture. (Auckland, Māori, female)
In prompted testing on the value of aid given to improve the international environment there were some
doubts that it would either reach those in need and consequently change their behaviour or whether aid
would actually end up having an adverse impact on the environment.
[Giving aid to improve international environment an appropriate reason] It is an appropriate
reason but I think it’s highly unlikely to work in many of the regions. I guess only on the very
bottom level are the subsistence people who are actually catching the tigers or the rhino or
whatever it might be. [It’s not necessarily wildlife, it’s also the ecosystem. (Interjection.)]
[Teach them to do it hydroponically instead of in the ground. (Interjection.)] They’re
government initiatives anyway. The very poorest people who are killing the animals or cutting
down the rainforests, that aid is unlikely to get to them anyway. (Auckland, news follower,
male)
I also worry about if we go in there to help them, do we end up actually doing worse like do we
put in buildings or do we put in things that use electricity or whatever – that’s all the
environment. If we go in and help them to better their lives and help the environment when in
fact we’re hurting it – (Auckland, news follower, female)
Some based their doubts about the effectiveness on overseas aid on hearsay or actual anecdotes.
There were some relating to Niue. Mentions of Live Aid were far less frequent than in 1999.
[Ever given donations towards overseas aid?] To be quite honest I think it’s quite dodge.
My sister’s mates, they were both sponsoring a child and they ended up having the same
photos and the same everything for the same child. Two people had the same kid. Every
time I see that I just switch the channel. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
I’ve heard that the money doesn’t actually go to the child that you get given. Basically you
get given a picture of a child and then basically the money gets pooled together and gets
sent to a village to help them sort the village’s problems out, rather than the particular child
that you’ve given. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
You know those clothes that you put in the basket and it says it’s going for overseas help. I
actually literally thought that I gave clothes in there and it goes overseas, I thought that.
Then it just happened I met someone who worked in the place where those clothes are
gathered. It’s in Mangere. She said they’re sorted out and they sell them. The workers get
first dibs for nothing. They pick out what they like. [See someone wearing your clothes?] A
funny thing, I went to the flea market and she was. It was a frock that my mother made and
sent for me from the States so I knew it was mine. I walked into the flea market and she
walked past me. I knew, I thought I’d put that in their clothes bin and here’s this girl walking
past. I nearly tapped her but I didn’t want to embarrass her. (Auckland, Pacific Island,
female)
UMR Research Limited 51
I don’t know if you remember about 15 years ago, the guy who was the leader of the band
called Boomtown Rats, Bob Geldof, he raised millions of Live Aid or whatever it was. When
he took that money and all the supplies over there and saw what was stolen and what actually
got through, he said on TV he will never ever raise money for that sort of thing again because
for every million dollars maybe a couple of thousand dollars actually got through that wasn’t
stolen and it just wasn’t worth him doing it. He’s never done it again since. (Auckland, Māori,
male)
We got the reports but they never really got substantiated that there was aid sitting on the
dock at Niue or something and it wasn’t getting evenly distributed to the people that most
needed it. There was nothing really ever got followed up on. (Auckland, general public, male)
In Niue wasn’t there an issue about some of the aid sitting on the government representative’s
front lawn? (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
The first containers that went over, they were sitting on the Deputy Prime Minister’s lawn for
two days before the stuff was handed out but people were out of water, out of food. Why
didn’t they give it out straight away? Why did they wait? (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
[Where does aid go to?] You don’t really know because if you don’t get any feedback on it,
you don’t know what you’re giving your money to. I remember one of my cousins was giving
$1 a week. She knew where it was going it. She was getting letters and she kept on doing it.
After they hit a certain age it actually stopped but she was still giving money but she didn’t
know who to. Same with Dad talking about the aid, he remembered a mate going overseas
and seeing all the food just lying on the floor. It wasn’t going anywhere. [Was that in recent
times?] About 10 years ago, but my cousin is still giving the dollar but she doesn’t know
where it’s going but she still does it. (Auckland, Māori, female)
There are also cases cited by Pacific Island respondents of examples of what they saw as effective
examples of our overseas aid.
[Any cases where aid has been helpful in the Pacific?] I think in that Samoan one it was very
productive. I know a lot of people who went over from here and they went to assist. People
would go over and just cook for the helpers, for the workers, things like that. I know
personally of people who actually did it, stopped what they were doing and went over and
helped. [Was that on their own initiative?] A lot of it was mainly coming from local churches
sending people out, not so much from the big organisations. These were people who were
from a lot of local churches who knew people over there, knew of families, so they’d be friends
of families that were in the islands that were suffering, so family and friends here would gather
around and see who could go from here. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
[Does any go for longer-term programmes?] There is in Samoa ... Samoa/New Zealand
police. They had an aid programme where in the last four or five years, groups of Samoan
cadets come to New Zealand, sponsored ... then they graduate and go back to Samoa.
Likewise with air pilots as well in the last 25 years ... my cousin’s a pilot and Air New Zealand
sponsored a number of people through the Government and then they train them, likewise
with education, specialty teachers. A lot of New Zealand teachers, they go and teach in
colleges now. ... [How well does that work?] From my personal view, for my cousin it’s been
good ... law, order and education ... once they’re misguided they tend to flow in that direction
... with New Zealand help and aid, they get back on track in what they have to do. The
education there tends to stabilise on a certain level and they don’t, they might try but they
don’t go a step higher whereas with information and aid from New Zealand, the quality of
education now in Samoa is getting better and better and better. Thirty years ago kids from
UMR Research Limited 52
Samoa came to New Zealand for school ... because of the education standard. Now with the
... New Zealand Government aid in education, the kids who come from Samoa to New
Zealand start at the same level so the aid education-wise from New Zealand has worked out
well for Samoa. (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
5.6 Monitoring of overseas aid
There was, as in the 1999 study, clearly little knowledge amongst focus group respondents on whether
the effectiveness of overseas aid provided by the New Zealand Government was being monitored.
Most very tentatively thought it would be.
I get the impression that they don’t just sort of drop it at the port and toodle off. (Auckland,
general public, female)
If there has been a report done, it’s not easy to find. (Auckland, general public, male)
[Do you think the effectiveness of the aid is monitored?] I would hope so. (Auckland, Pacific
Island, male)
They should be so the public know where it’s being spent. (Auckland, Pacific Island, female)
[Monitoring programmes in place?] I hope so. I don’t know for a fact but I’d hope that the
Government has something in place. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
Wouldn’t it be wrong not to? (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
Some contested whether monitoring would be taking place.
Why should they monitor that? They don’t monitor anything else that the money gets spent
on? (Auckland, news follower, female)
[Giving aid to Niue for the cyclone, do they go in and see what happened to that aid later?]
No because they have cyclones a while ago in Niue where the buildings got demolished and
we gave out a whole lot of money to Niue, the New Zealand Government did, and they didn’t
go back until a few years later and they’d built buildings in the same place as they’d built last
time and they all got wiped out again this time. There was no thought put into how the money
was spent to rebuild so I don’t believe it is monitored properly. [Perhaps our representative in
Niue will be able to tell us this time. (Interjection.)] They’ve made the same mistakes
basically. (Auckland, news follower, female)
UMR Research Limited 53
5.7 Creating dependence
A number of focus group respondents argued that providing aid on a regular basis to poorer countries
just created a reliance on that aid.
Countries relying on aid too much which upsets their whole economics like some of the
African countries, that’s all they do is just live on aid and now it’s upset the whole balance of
the country. The Middle East is not that bad yet but some of the countries in Africa are pretty
bad. Like I said, these organisations know when it’s coming. It’s like an industry in itself.
(Auckland, Māori, male)
It comes back to my concern about dependency and helping New Zealand more than we help
other countries. I think there’s better longer-term projects in New Zealand need money more
than long-term products overseas. I’d just worry that the countries we were giving long-term
support to would just get dependent on that money. (Auckland, general public, female)
[Negatives?] Who receives it and who sorts it out at the other end? How do you determine
how much aid you give? What’s enough? Just the flipside of helping fledgling economies
was drawing a line between helping them out and making them dependent on your aid. So
instead of helping them, all you’ve done is turned them into a country that doesn’t really rely
on its own resources and just waits for the aid to come along. A welfare state. [How big a
problem do you think that is?] Big. Just speaking say from when my parents came to New
Zealand to raise their kids and send money back to Samoa, it just seemed to us as kids that
all of a sudden our relatives in Samoa didn’t seem to have the motivation to look for work.
They just relied on the money my parents were sending. (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
Definitely on that last one you can’t just – what’s the saying: give a man a fish, feed him for a
day; teach a man to fish, feed him for a year or whatever. You can’t just give them stuff
because they’re going to expect more. You feed a seagull, you give it a little bit and it just
wants more. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
I don’t agree with that because I think that a lot of these aid agencies actually go in there with
humanitarian interests at heart and they’re there to help the individual. I’m all for that and I
would like to see how our aid transforms people’s lives but I would like to see those people
being taught to stand on their own two feet and pick up the pieces and the aid agencies
gradually receding out of their lives again so that they’re not forever dependent. (Auckland,
news follower, female)
It depends on what country and how the people react to it and how often they’re getting it.
Like in Europe it’s good, they react and get back on their feet again. In Africa it’s really poor.
(Auckland, Māori, male)
[Other criteria for choosing countries?] How long they’ve been given aid. I know Africa has
been given aid for longer than I’ve been alive. (Auckland, Māori, male)
Some of the African countries are poor because they’ve become that way. We’d just keep
throwing money down the drain. (Auckland, Māori, male)
UMR Research Limited 54
5.8 Too big a problem
There were also arguments made in the focus groups that the scale of problems requiring overseas aid
was too big and never-ending.
When is enough enough? Countries with famine, you say it’s part of nature that it happens
but it just seems like sometimes it’s a cycle that keeps on happening and how often can you
give and give and give because it’s just going to keep on happening. If it’s not getting there –
that comes in with the children as well. I’m not saying that if you’re in a famine country you
can’t have children but it comes back to that bringing children into that situation. I don’t know
how they can combat that but that’s thoughts that I have and sometimes I wonder why you
would want to bring a child into it but then I understand that that’s the only lifestyle they’ve
ever had so that’s why they do it. It doesn’t mean anything. They don’t know what could be
better. That troubles me sometimes. (Auckland, Māori, female)
Also where is the funding coming from? That’s always a concern for me. Where does all this
money come from, or where is the money for the aid coming from? Where is it going to
specifically? [In terms of where it’s coming from, what’s your concern there?] How much of
my money is being poured into the aid basically. Where’s it all come from? Where is it going
specifically? Is it going to where I’ve been told it’s going through the media, and will it actually
help solve the problem? If we are to do all this aid or whatever, is it really going to help?
Some of the problems that are out there are pretty damn big and are we going to make any
difference at all? (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
UMR Research Limited 55
VI. Criteria for Deciding Allocation and Type of
Overseas Aid
6.1 By region
New Zealanders overwhelmingly prefer that the Pacific region gets most of the overseas aid provided
by the New Zealand Government.
Given a choice of the Pacific, Africa, Asia, Europe and South America, 71% plumped for the Pacific,
14% for Africa, 3% for Asia and 1% for South America.
This Pacific preference was more marked than in 1999 when 55% selected the Pacific, 16% Africa, 6%
Asia, 4% South America, 3% Europe and 0.1% for Europe.
AREAS THAT SHOULD GET MOST AID FROM
THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
Which of the following areas do you think SHOULD get MOST of the overseas aid provided by the
New Zealand Government?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
The Pacific 55 71
Africa 16 14
Asia 6 3
South America 4 1
New Zealand (volunteered) 2 1
Anywhere that needs it most (volunteered) 1 1
All of them should be evenly spread (volunteered) 1 -
Europe 3 0.1
None (volunteered) 4 3
Unsure 10 6
UMR Research Limited 56
AREAS THAT SHOULD GET MOST AID FROM
THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
And which area SHOULD get the next largest amount of New Zealand Government Aid?
AUG 99% APR 04
%
THE MOST THE NEXT THE MOST THE NEXT
AID LARGEST AID LARGEST
Africa 16 30 14 37
Asia 6 26 3 27
South America 4 11 1 10
The Pacific 55 11 71 8
Europe 3 7 - 4
Anywhere that needs it most
1 1 1 2
(volunteered)
New Zealand (volunteered) 2 - 1 -
All of them should be evenly spread
1 - - -
(volunteered)
None (volunteered) 4 5 3 4
Unsure 10 9 6 8
Base (Next Largest): 91% of respondents, those who nominated an area that most of New Zealand’s Government Aid
should go to (n=684).
Confronted with the choice of overseas aid going to people in the greatest need of help no matter
where that is or providing aid to the Pacific region New Zealanders thought that aid should go to people
in the greatest need.
64% selected the ‘greatest need’ option and 30% ‘people in the Pacific region’. This margin was not as
marked as in 1999 when 71% selected the ‘greatest need’ option and 22% ‘people in the Pacific
region’.
ADDITIONAL AID TO GO TO THOSE IN GREATEST NEED OR PEOPLE
IN THE PACIFIC REGION
If additional New Zealand Government funding was made available for overseas aid do you think
it should go where people are in the greatest need of help no matter where that is or should it go
to people in need in the Pacific region?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
To people with greatest need 71 64
People in Pacific region 22 30
Neither 2 2
Both 2 2
Unsure 3 2
UMR Research Limited 57
It was evident in the focus group discussions that some thought that New Zealand had a very clear
responsibility for the Pacific Islands.
Just on that one with the islands though, we give a lot but the government have a fund for
that. It’s our responsibility to look after these islands and we will still give on top of that,
mainly because family are here I guess. So in a sense we don’t really need to give to the
islands because the government can do that for us. (Auckland, Māori, male)
I don’t think any country is perfect. I just think we’re more aware of it because we’re so close
to them like physically. They’re our neighbours. [The islands, not Africa. (Interjection.)] And
we’ve also got a lot of people who move over here. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
But it’s helping the people so they become autonomous. Occasionally there are times, when
there’s been disasters in the islands, I always support that because they’re like family. That’s
a part of us and usually you see something come from that because these are stories that
they often follow up and you see what they helped to replace. (Auckland, Māori, female)
Just the general Pacific I would say. [Is that the most important place for us?] Yes. They’re
our neighbours. (Auckland, Māori, male)
It’s like your own little community. You look after your community. (Auckland, Māori, female)
It’s just part of our culture. South Pacific. (Auckland, Māori, male)
[Niue] I didn’t think that was an issue at all. I would think it was an issue with Iraq and some
of the other maybe African countries or something like that but Niue I didn’t have any issue
with money going elsewhere. (Auckland, general public, female)
I think it’s our duty in the South Pacific. From my perspective I think the world would be a
better place if everyone looked after those who were close to them. I can’t necessarily see
there’s much sense in flying to Afghanistan for an earthquake when Europe is much closer but
certainly the South Pacific is very much a duty. (Auckland, news follower, male)
The case was made that New Zealand aid to the Pacific region would be more effective because we
had close links with the region and could see whether aid initiatives were working.
Within the Pacific region excluding Australia and New Zealand, spread it financially. Better
equipped. In the case of the Pacific, everybody’s looking at New Zealand. If they look to
Tonga or Fiji they’re going to get the same answer so New Zealand’s the obvious one to get
the answers. We can’t basically say no. Everybody in New Zealand understands the type of
aid needed in the other countries. When it comes to actually giving aid New Zealand is a
prime example because there are Samoans, Polynesians in New Zealand and when they say
“we need aid for Niue”, the Niue population in New Zealand know exactly what they need to
do. (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
The good thing about New Zealand is because of the mixed population here, when aid is
asked, everybody knows that there’s a good reason why they’re asking for that. Whereas if
you go to other places like America and you ask for aid, it’s a different attitude. New
Zealanders seem to be a lot more, population-wise, close-knit to know where and when and
how much. [We’re all intermarried. We’ve got family in every place. (Interjection.)] [Does
that make a case for aid to the Pacific rather than Africa?] In think in the long run, yes it
would. I wouldn’t say no to anyone, say a certain country in Africa needed it. The population
as a whole most probably would but again with the questions asked about the aid. We won’t
just readily give it. It will be like everybody here has discussed. We’ll ask where is it going,
who’s getting it and why and when and so forth. (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
UMR Research Limited 58
[How confident are you that money does actually get through?] My old school used to help
our sister school in Fiji and we used to have charities and stuff, and that would go over there
and we’d see how they’d progressed. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
During discussions on the percentage of GNI that should be allocated for overseas aid respondents
were informed that the Northern European companies were the most biggest donors on a per head
basis. For some that enhanced New Zealand’s responsibility towards the Pacific region as they
considered Scandinavian countries were not likely to be aware of problems in this area.
It would be interested to see where they’re putting the money because if they’re not giving
money, nobody else might be. It’s kind of our thing to step in and help the undeveloped
countries around us because they might not even feature in the minds of Denmark, Norway
and the Netherlands. So maybe our money should be going where the other people’s money
isn’t. [And for you that’s the South Pacific?] Yes. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
I would doubt that Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands and Sweden are actually sending
money to the Pacific so I think that the localisation of aid definitely should be kept in the
vicinity of your country. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
The principle that neighbouring countries should be primarily responsible for aid led some to
questioning whether New Zealand aid should go to countries if wealthy neighbouring countries were not
helping. One respondent also argued that New Zealand aid should go to Asia ahead of Africa because
of our closer links with that region.
When you actually go to Africa and you see all those problems happening there, you find that
there’s hardly any other African country will help them and there’s a lot of wealthy countries in
Africa that don’t even bother helping their own. (Auckland, Māori, male)
It comes back to it depends where it’s going to. You could be spending money or whatever to
a specific country that needs it but it also depends on if they’re going to be helping
themselves. I would like to know if their surrounding countries are helping them as well, not
just relying on European money. (Auckland, Māori, male)
We know the Pacific is not all that wealthy so I’m happy to give it. Some of the Asian
countries are not all that wealthy but then they’re surrounded by a lot of wealthy Asian
countries. (Auckland, Māori, male)
I would say Asia more than Africa. It’s so huge and they have natural disasters a lot. It’s a
massive country. We have a lot of Asians in this country. We have a lot of Thais. It’s that
personal link thing again. [But how do you feel that Asia’s doing on their own in general?
(Interjection.)] Probably a lot better than we are. (Auckland, news follower, female)
UMR Research Limited 59
6.2 Types of overseas aid
Water and sanitation (tested for the first time in the 2004 survey) emerged as the top priority of eleven
options tested in the telephone survey.
87% regarded water and sanitation as a high priority compared to 81% for public health programmes in
second place and disaster relief (78%) third.
Of the eleven options tested the lowest priority was assigned to tertiary education scholarships.
UMR Research Limited 60
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority do you think the following options for
providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means the option of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
APRIL 2004
%
1, TOTAL 5, TOTAL
Very High 2 HIGH 3 4 Very Low LOW Unsure Depends
Priority PRIORITY Priority PRIORITY
Water and sanitation 68 19 87 7 3 3 6 - -
Public health programmes 49 32 81 12 4 2 6 1 -
Disaster relief 51 27 78 15 4 2 6 1 -
Support for pre-school and primary education 33 33 66 23 7 3 10 1 -
Improving human rights 35 29 64 21 9 5 14 1 -
Improving the position of women in society 29 28 57 28 9 4 13 2 -
Improving adult literacy 23 32 55 31 10 3 13 1 -
Help with rural development 23 30 53 30 12 3 15 1 1
Help in ensuring more efficient Government 19 26 45 28 15 9 24 3 -
Assistance to improve trade 15 29 44 34 15 6 21 1 -
Tertiary education scholarships 15 23 38 35 17 9 26 1 -
UMR Research Limited 61
There is little change in the rated priorities for the ten options tested in common in 1999 and 2004.
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID COMPARISON
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How
important a priority do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use
a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means the option of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low
priority.
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
HIGH LOW HIGH LOW
PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY
Public health programmes 77 10 81 6
Disaster relief 79 9 78 6
Support for pre-school and primary education 65 13 66 10
Improving human rights 63 15 64 14
Improving the position of women in society 53 17 57 13
Improving adult literacy 50 19 55 13
Help with rural development 56 14 53 15
Help in ensuring more efficient Government 37 30 45 24
Assistance to improve trade 42 21 44 21
Tertiary education scholarships 41 30 38 26
NB: Water and sanitation was not included in the August 1999 survey.
6.3 Human rights issues
28% of New Zealanders surveyed agreed (14% strongly) and 43% disagreed (19% strongly) that, ‘New
Zealand should not provide aid to overseas countries with poor human rights records.
NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE AID TO OVERSEAS COUNTRIES
WITH POOR HUMAN RIGHTS RECORDS
Using a scale 1 to 5 where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly
do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
- New Zealand should not provide aid to overseas countries with poor human rights records.
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
1, Strongly agree 16 14
2 15 14
TOTAL AGREE 31 28
3 29 27
4 21 24
5, Strongly disagree 16 19
TOTAL DISAGREE 37 43
Unsure 3 2
UMR Research Limited 62
Some of the focus group respondents argued that aid should not go to countries with poor human rights
records on the grounds that it was more likely to be misappropriated by a corrupt Government.
You get places like Zimbabwe where the whole economy has fallen over so a certain amount of
aid will go into that. [But that’s dictatorship though. You’re supporting a dictator by sending aid
there. For every dollar worth of food you send there, probably five cents of it gets through. I’ve
lived and worked there. I’ve seen what happens. (Interjection.)] (Auckland, Māori, male)
Same with Zimbabwe. You wouldn’t send it there simply because – you take a country that was
one of the richest in Africa to one of the poorest. You’re just throwing money away. (Auckland,
Māori, male)
So long as the aid is not going to the Government. [But where does it go? North Korea is a
classic example, a country that cannot feed itself and yet it’s a despotic government which is
happy to keep their people in famine. (Interjection.)] (Auckland, news follower, female)
It’s no good the money going to places where you know that the Government’s keeping it for
themselves. [It’s got to be productive. (Interjection.)] Or that the Government is making no effort
to help their own people. If they’re making no effort then – (Auckland, Māori, male)
It’s easier to monitor the distribution of funds or goods or whatever if the Government is reliable
and not corrupted. (Auckland, general public, male)
You just can’t trust where your money’s going to go. (Auckland, general public, female)
Just take the example of Saddam with the embargo and all the foreign aid that ended up in his
bank account. (Auckland, general public, male)
I have a philosophical issue with giving aid, depending on the type of aid, in that it lets the
country’s own government off the hook and they don’t actually develop systems that are
sustainable for maintaining their own future. There are African countries and so on that just solely
rely on aid to feed their people and they’re not actually developing real – [The money that should
be used for feeding their people they’re spending on guns and then they’re using our aid to feed
their people. (Interjection.)] They’ve got completely unsustainable governmental systems. While
the aid is there they haven’t got any motivation to really change their whole system. It’s a catch
22. (Auckland, general public, female)
Others argued that the degree of suffering should be the key aspect in determining where aid goes and that
people should not be penalised because of their form of Government.
[Should we be giving to poor countries that have good human rights records, or should we just
give to the countries with greatest need and our neighbours regardless?] I mean if there’s
countries that aren’t democratic and have poor human rights, then they’re probably the countries
that we probably need to focus on and help them, but in a country that’s not trying to help them
either aid might not help. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
That’s the thing with Zimbabwe. I wouldn’t give it to the government of Zimbabwe in a million
years but I would want a hell of a lot of aid to go to the people of Zimbabwe if I knew it was going
to be used properly. (Auckland, general public, female)
UMR Research 63
It would be a factor but at the end of the day you’ve got people no matter what and they don’t
have a choice sometimes where they’re living and if there’s a major disaster I can’t see
withholding aid because those poor people are born in that country. (Auckland, news follower,
female)
I can’t see the humanitarianism in withholding aid because those poor people were born in the
wrong country. (Auckland, news follower, female)
[Aid withheld to Iraq and Zimbabwe?] How many innocent people in Iraq suffered because of it?
A lot of them are women and children who have no control over what’s happening. (Auckland,
news follower, female)
6.4 Disaster relief versus war-torn areas
Some focus group respondents outlined that they had a greater level of comfort providing aid to areas
suffering from natural disasters rather than from war.
There was some opposition expressed in this context to New Zealand providing any aid to Iraq.
There’s a difference between natural disasters and war. I think personally I’d be probably more
likely to give to the natural disaster. [And somewhere that’s part of the Pacific region too.
(Interjection.)] (Auckland, general public, female)
[Is it better for aid to go into war zones or natural disasters?] I prefer natural disasters. If it’s a
war zones that’s where you see people like the engineers to help rebuild. That is what they’re
trained for. (Auckland, news follower, female)
Also I like the idea that we help disastrous (sic) countries or countries that get into trouble like that,
but I don’t like that we have to go and clean up after other people’s wars. Everyone has wars and
then we go and help them. (Auckland, news follower, female)
And plus with Iraq no matter what’s going on over there, I’d feel much more comfortable if New
Zealand had nothing to do with it at all. I don’t want any links between Iraq and New Zealand.
(Auckland, general public, female)
[Situation in Iraq, most powerful countries in the world would like other countries to pitch in and
give them assistance. Is that a reason to do so?] Well, how did the problem get started? Why
should we be cleaning up America’s mess where they’ve bombed the houses into oblivion? Why
should we rebuild their houses? (Auckland, general public, male)
One respondent noted that the safety of aid workers should be a factor.
I think also for me it would determine what country. You wouldn’t want to be sending aid into
Somalia knowing that your boys or women who work over there are going to get shot just for
helping out someone who had something happen. (Auckland, Māori, male)
UMR Research 64
Others argued that the need of people caught in war-torn areas was so great that aid should be provided.
Humanity. Because of famine which is not the fault of the people but nature. Nature is doing a lot
of damage like floods. We should help people. It’s nature taking its course, not the fault of the
people. [What if it was the fault of the people?] No, no. That’s my honest opinion, no ... like it’s
war-torn. The old people have lost their home and the children like what Bush done. That’s how I
think of it. That’s not the people’s fault. They’re just all these little people and they’re getting
caught in the middle of all the violence in these war-torn countries. (Auckland, Māori, female)
[Countries posing a current security risk?] Sometimes that’s where it’s most needed, like if you
take Iran or Iraq. If that’s not a security risk I don’t know what is. They need money. (Auckland,
Māori, male)
6.5 Disaster relief versus long-term aid
In focus group discussions on this issue, respondents when forced to a choice mostly came down in favour
of skewing aid towards longer term projects. This certainly did not mean that they did not support aid being
provided for disaster relief.
A number noted how critical disaster relief could be.
I think it’s more important to get people out of disaster really straight away. Let the bigger
countries like America deal with long-term – that would be the theory. (Auckland, general public,
female)
[Examples longer term aid - building irrigation scheme, schools, providing teachers] I think we can
help with that but it’s not necessarily something that should stop you from giving to the disasters.
(Auckland, news follower, female)
I was in American Samoa when the cyclone came through there and so we had a whole lot of aid
come through. We all needed that instant aid because there was no water, no nothing, no
electricity, no food. (Auckland, news follower, female)
One respondent argued that the allocation of aid between disaster relief and longer term projects would
depend on where it was being sent.
I think you have to look at whereabouts in the world the aid is required. If it was somewhere in the
Pacific, you know that they’re going to get it and there’s a Government there. They’re going to
need more than likely a disaster or emergency help. They’re not going to need the long-term
assistance. [I think we know that they can get back up again. (Interjection.)] Whereas if we’re
sending aid to Africa, if there was a massive catastrophe in Africa, all we could really do is provide
that natural disaster relief. We’re in no position as a country to assist them run their country. [Too
small. (Interjection.)] I think if you look at it from that perspective it’s a lot easier to decide where
they’re funding and how to do it. (Auckland, Māori, male)
UMR Research 65
Respondents frequently noted their approval of projects that did build capacity. A number noted that it was
better to provide a fishing line than fish and similar adages.
[Does aid make a difference?] I think it does but I have friends who work for Tear Fund and they
talk about giving money to set up businesses and then the business, once it’s thriving in a
community, giving back so another business can grow when it’s that kind of aid. (Auckland,
Māori, female)
[Emergency relief sent to Niue] It’s important but it’s not a long-term thing. You hope that we
could maybe now go “can we sort Niue out and help them out so next time we don’t have to dish
out every time”. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
[Relief versus long-term aid] Longer term because then they can help themselves when they
have a disaster if they’ve got the money. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
I think if you’re going to donate food it has to be an initial thing, like if there’s a drought or a flood
or something and all the food has gone, then maybe food initially but that has to be very short
term, otherwise they’ll just rely on it. (Auckland, Māori, male)
Emergency relief to start off with. If they’re in dire straits, then you send out for your emergency
crew but you expect to have a couple left over for a couple of months after that’s been fixed up,
just to get the infrastructure back up and running. Once that’s done, then bring them back home
again. Otherwise it ends up being a permanent handout where they don’t ever come back.
(Auckland, Māori, female)
I suppose long-term aid isn’t a real problem so long as it’s going into the right areas because it
might be that the emergency aid gets through the initial problem and then you still have the
ongoing problems. I don’t think the money should be spent on food and things like that. It should
be spent on training or giving the people the ability to get up and start working again rather than
sending food over or continuing to send money over as handouts. It needs to go into the
infrastructure. A spade and a packet of seeds, so to speak. (Auckland, Māori, male)
Long-term effectiveness as well rather than just here’s us handing out a lot of food parcels to
these people today. Six months from now why didn’t they give a spade where it would really help.
(Auckland, general public, male)
No use giving them a tractor if they don’t know how to drive it. (Auckland, general public, female)
Instead of buying them a bag of rice to eat, buying them the grains to sow so they can become
self-sufficient and yet they’re still advertising because 20 years later they’re still in famine. What’s
going wrong? What’s the point in giving because it’s not getting out at the problem. (Auckland,
general public, female)
I suppose it comes down to the old saying: give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach him to fish,
feed him for life. (Auckland, general public, male)
UMR Research 66
Instead of giving money I’d rather donate a soccer ball or something and let them get good at
soccer and maybe make a living for themselves. [Soccer balls wouldn’t be much comfort if they
had nothing to eat. (Interjection.)] They’d still have recreation though. They’d still be hungry but
at least they’d have something to play with. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
There was a related preference expressed for providing assistance in the form of personnel rather than
direct grants of food or money.
If you’re going to send aid to an overseas country I think you need to see qualified people go there
to show the people how to help themselves. Not just give them food. If you send people over
there to help dig wells to get water and they can learn to irrigate and grow crops but just to keep
giving it to them, they want handouts. [Giving in other ways, not just money. (Interjection.)]
(Auckland, Māori, male)
If that’s the problem in the country then there’s other things but rather than just sending money for
food or sending sacks of food or whatever, actually setting up programmes or infrastructure and
stuff, i.e. sending over a team of world experts on farming or whatever and going over there and
setting up – teaching them how to dig wells and plough. [Help them to help themselves.
(Interjection.)] Definitely rather than sending them big sacks and sacks of potatoes and rice and
they all just come to a foodbank and fight each other over the food which was what we saw on TV
in Iraq. People just came in and took what they could get because they couldn’t eat. I’d rather
see teams of Kiwis or Aussies or whatever actually going in, being there and helping them to help
themselves. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
It’s the same thing when they were talking about actually sending people over to teach them with
the aid. If you can provide money or food or whatever, but actually send people who are in the
know to actually help them get back on their feet, that would be the best way. (Auckland, Māori,
female)
[What aid is most effective?] I think when the government sent the army up to the Solomons, that
helped out immensely because they were there to help and they were there to do the work. What
you saw on TV there, there wasn’t a lot of money going in. It was all help so that’s probably the
difference. Take away the money. There was no food going in there either because they know
how to live off the land and live off the sea so it was more infrastructure and law. You could see it
on the TV what was actually happening. (Auckland, Māori, male)
I suspect that that sort of money is far more effective – I give to a little charity called Water for
Survival, very small, and all they’re doing is send advisers to places to get decent water. It’s a
long-term project and the take-up is far better than lorries coming in with tanks of water.
(Auckland, news follower, male)
The same thing with the people I knew working for CORD in Albania doing exactly the same thing,
supplying irrigation to them, building their toilets, showing them how to use them, doing the
education side of it. That’s definitely long term. (Auckland, news follower, female)
UMR Research 67
6.6 Preference for direct Government overseas aid or subsidising of
NGOs
In limited discussion in groups there was not a clear preference on this issue. This is certainly not an issue
on which respondents had developed views.
Those who thought that the NGOs should be subsidised cited their perceived greater experience and
expertise on the ground and thought it removed a bureaucratic or political component.
[Best for New Zealand Government to give aid directly, or better if the government provided
assistance to the NGOs?] I think they’d have to seriously look at whether their own aid-giving is
being monitored well enough compared to whether the NGOs is. Who has got the better system?
(Auckland, news follower, female)
I’d say the charities because the people that are in charities, the majority of them would be more
honest than the people in politics. (Auckland, general public, male)
I think they know what they are doing. They have been into all these places for a long long time.
[And made an industry out of it and they don’t want to see it disappear. (Interjection.)] I just think
that they do a tremendous amount of good and they know where the needs are and they know
how to administer it. [Better than a government would?] Better than our government would.
(Auckland, news follower, female)
The Red Cross would have the people on the ground and the local infrastructure to do something.
(Auckland, general public, male)
They’ve got more experience really. [The people who speak the local lingo. (Interjection.)]
(Auckland, general public, female)
[Better that the government provides the aid, or better for the government to provide assistance or
support to NGOs to go and do the work?] (Latter) that removes any political – no doing it for
another reason. It takes away from the political motives. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
I’m stuck on the fence a bit because to me the NGOs, I don’t know if they’re non-profit
organisations – I would say that they actually make money and so for that fact I would almost say
for the Government to do it but being a true blue Kiwi I would rather see the Government providing
assistance to the NGOs to try and sort that out while the government worries about everything
here. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
Those who favoured the aid being directly provided by Government thought that the NGOs should stand-
alone and that Government aid would be more effectively monitored.
I don’t think there should be any subsidising of private organisations by the Government. They’re
international organisations so they should be stand alone if they want to do that kind of work.
(Auckland, Māori, male)
UMR Research 68
I think there are people within government departments that do know, who have had experience,
like in Foreign Affairs and places like that, not necessarily the politicians of the day but those
people within the departments. The government agencies do have an idea but I don’t really feel
terribly happy with the idea of just money being passed over. To me it would seem much better
that either the government buys the products: the tents, the food and things, and sends it or gives
it to the people to buy things when they get there. Have agents that would handle it or give it to
the Red Cross. It has to be monitored. (Auckland, news follower, female)
They’re developing an industry on their own. They want to have people dependent on them and
they can keep getting money. There’s no clear focus on what they’re trying to do. [That’s where
the Government, if they were going to give money to the NGOs, would need to sort through the
weeds basically and pick out the ones that can be accountable and can prove that they can be
accountable. (Interjection.)] (Auckland, news follower, male)
UMR Research 69
VII. Level of Government Funding
7.1 0.7% GNI target
61% of New Zealanders surveyed supported and 25% opposed the New Zealand Government meeting the
0.7% target. This was a similar result to that recorded in 1999.
There were higher levels of opposition to meeting the target from males, New Zealanders aged over 45
years and New Zealanders on higher personal incomes.
SHOULD NEW ZEALAND MEET THE OVERSEAS AID TARGET
OF 0.7% OF GNI
The OECD recommends each Government provide 0.7% of their country's GNI for overseas aid.
GNI is the value of all the goods and services in the economy. Do you think the New Zealand
Government should meet this target?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
Yes 58 61
No 26 25
Depends (volunteered) 5 4
Unsure 12 10
NB: The question in August 1999 was: The OECD recommends the Government provide 0.7% of their country’s GNP for
overseas aid. GNP is the value of all the goods and services in the economy. Do you think the New Zealand Government
should meet this target?
This support held up when respondents to the telephone survey were provided with more information on
the amount of funding involved and also given the option of moving to the target by annual increases. 59%
were in favour and 29% were opposed.
UMR Research 70
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE NEW ZEALAND REACHING OECD TARGET
Let me give you a little background. The amount the New Zealand Government currently spends
on overseas aid is 0.23% of our Gross National Income. That comes to around $300 million. The
Government has made a commitment to reach the 0.7% Target by 2015. Some European
countries have met or exceeded this target.
If New Zealand were to meet this target by annual increases, would you support or oppose this?
APR 04
%
Support 59
Oppose 29
Depends (volunteered) 6
Neither support or oppose (volunteered) 1
Unsure 5
NB A similar questions was asked in August 1999, this is shown in the below table
Support held up much better when respondents were given this scenario than in 1999 when they were told
the dollar increase that tripling overseas aid spending would represent and not given the option of moving
to the target on an annual basis.
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE NEW ZEALAND REACHING OECD TARGET
Let me give you a little background. The amount the New Zealand Government currently spends
on overseas aid is 0.25% of the New Zealand Gross National Product. That comes to around
$240 million. The New Zealand Government has made a commitment to reach the 0.7% target.
Some European countries including Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden have met or
exceeded this target. If New Zealand was to meet this target it would involve tripling overseas aid
spending to around $720 million.
Having heard that do you support or oppose the New Zealand Government increasing funding for
overseas aid to meet the 0.7% target?
AUG 99
%
Support 34
Oppose 54
Depends (volunteered) 6
Neither support or oppose (volunteered) 2
Unsure 4
The cautions noted in interpreting these results outlined in the 1999 report still apply. Respondents were
mostly working on very flimsy knowledge bases.
It was evident in the New Zealand focus group discussions that respondents had very little idea on the
numbers involved.
A number when asked to estimate appropriate amounts and appropriate percentages of GNI noted
difficulties in establishing what exactly was involved with overseas aid. A common query was whether the
help provided by the Army was part of the calculation.
UMR Research 71
When we talk about what’s in the aid budget, are we talking about things like the military that we
send overseas for peacekeeping as well? I don’t know what’s in the budget. [If we send soldiers
over we don’t fund it. (Interjection.)] We do in a way because we pay for their salaries while
they’re away. [You don’t pay the allowance salaries. The United Nations will pay their extra
salary. (Interjection.)] So there’s no extra money because if they were in New Zealand it would
cost the country the same amount. [In fact they’ll just get paid a percentage of that, and the
government takes the rest of it. That’s the reason why they send soldiers over there. There’s no
cost for allowances. The United Nations pays for the whole lot. (Interjection.)] (Auckland, Māori,
female)
If you consider the cost of sending planes, loading planes, airforces and ships and things going,
whether the navy or the airforce charge that as an extra or whether they build that into their own
budget, we don’t know so you can’t really determine. (Auckland, news follower, female)
We haven’t defined whether we in fact are talking about aid that we give to organisations. Also we
give aid through the United Nations. We have troops. We have soldiers in Israel, all around in
various United Nations units. That in itself is another form of aid that we give. (Auckland, news
follower, female)
There were consistent substantial underestimates of how much the Government currently actually allocates
to overseas aid and how much it should allocate.
I’ve got $15 million and I think that’s about right. (Auckland, general public, female)
I’ve got $100 million and it’s about 20%. (Auckland, general public, male)
I’ve got $200 million, 1% of expenditure. $500 million would be nice. (Auckland, general public,
male)
I have no idea, $5 million I put. (Auckland, general public, female)
I guessed that maybe they spend $60 million and they should only spend $30 million. (Auckland,
Pacific Island, female)
I’ve got too much here, $250 million. [What should we spend?] Half of the $250 million.
(Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
I’ve got $12 million spending and it should be $10 million. (Auckland, Pacific Island, male)
I had it at $4 million we’re spending and thought it should be doubled. (Auckland, Pacific Island,
male)
I had $100 million and I thought 10%, why not, $10 million is what we should spend. (Auckland,
Pacific Island, female)
I put down $5000 for actual. We should spend $30,000. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
I reckon probably heaps, $100 million. We should spend half that. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
I said actual is $50 million and we should spend $50 million. [Doing about the right amount at the
moment?] I think so. I don’t really know though. (Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
I said actually $50,000 and we should spend $1 million but then I’ve never really thought about it.
(Auckland, 16-24 years, female)
UMR Research 72
I think we spend $150 million and we should spend about the same. (Auckland, news follower,
male)
I thought we spent about $100 million and we should spend about 0.5% of GDP. [What about in
actual money terms?] I don’t know. I don’t know what our GDP is. (Auckland, news follower,
female)
I’ve put $50 million and I’ve no idea how much so I just put $100 million. [You think we should
double our spending] Yes. (Auckland, news follower, female)
About $100 million. I thought that was okay. (Auckland, news follower, female)
$130 million. I think we should halve it and concentrate on our own country. (Auckland, news
follower, female)
I think I’ve got poverty consciousness because I put down that the Government probably provides
$7 million and they should provide at least $10 million. (Auckland, news follower, female)
7.2 Reasons for supporting an increase to meet the 0.7% target
The reasons given by those who supported meeting the 0.7% target were broadly the same as those
already given in responses to the question on why respondents generally approved of the New Zealand
Government providing aid to poorer overseas countries.
The major reason centred on humanitarian factors followed by New Zealand being in a position to afford
the funding and meeting our international responsibilities.
Again noting that care is needed in interpreting tracking analysis of open-ended responses, the
international obligation did appear to come through more strongly than in 1999.
UMR Research 73
REASONS FOR SUPPORTING AN INCREASE OF OVERSEAS AID FUNDING
Why do you support increasing overseas aid funding, what are your reasons?
APR 04
%
HUMANITARIAN / DUTY
There’s lots of needy people (16%), If people need help we should give it to them
(11.1%), Close the gap between rich and poor countries (9.1%), Important to try and
make the world a better place (5.4%), Improve their living conditions (2.9%),
54.5
Humanitarian grounds (2.5%), Everyone deserves water / food / life / standard of living
(1.4%), Don’t like seeing suffering (1.4%), Victims of disasters (1.4%), Starvation
(0.9%), Someone has to help the poor people (0.7%), It’s the Christian thing to do
(0.7%), Seen / Understand the need (0.5%), Victims of war (0.5%).
NEW ZEALAND CAN AFFORD IT / NEW ZEALAND IS MORE FORTUNATE
We have enough / the economy is good (16.9%), We should help those less fortunate
23.7
than us (3.6%), NZ is in a better state than other countries (2.5%), We can afford it
(0.7%).
INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
NZ has an international obligation to help (6.3%), If other countries can do it so can we
(5.9%), NZ should pull it weight (5%), We have an obligation / responsibility to help
25.3
(3.6%), We should do our share to help the international community (2.9%),
Encourage world development / improvement (1.4%), It is part of us being in the
United Nations (0.2%).
DEVELOP SELF-SUFFICIENCY IN POOR COUNTRIES
Develop self-sufficiency in poor countries (4.5%), Develop education (4.1%), Develop 13.8
infrastructure / sanitation (2.7%), Develop health care (2.5%).
BENEFIT NEW ZEALAND
Increase trade opportunities in the future (2.5%), It will benefit NZ in the long term
5.7
(2.3%), Opportunities for NZ to grow (0.7%), It will decrease the amount of refugees
(0.2%).
AID PROVIDES STABILITY
Provides global political stability (2.7%), Reduces the problems of war / terrorism 5.4
(2.7%).
HELP / IMPROVE SPECIFIC AREAS
Pacific Neighbours (1.6%), Women’s / human rights (0.7%), Stop child / slave labour 2.5
(0.2%).
NEEDS TO INCREASE
Makes sense to increase it incrementally (2.3%), Increase is OK / It doesn’t sound like
much (0.9%), We’re giving less than we should (0.9%), Costs go up so should aid 5
(0.7%), Present level has made no difference (0.2%).
OTHERS WOULD HELP NEW ZEALAND IN THE SAME SITUATION 4.1
GENEROSITY SHOWS NEW ZEALAND IS A GOOD COUNTRY 3.6
QUALIFIED APPROVAL
Help New Zealanders first (1.1%), Given / reach the right people (0.9%), Depends on the
3.2
increase (0.5%), Need to ensure it is spent wisely (0.5%), As long as my taxes / rates don’t
go up (0.2%).
DEVELOPED COUTRIES SHOULD HELP UNDEVELOPED ONES 2.9
MONEY WASTED BETTER USED ON AID 1.4
EXPLOITATION OF 3RD WORLD COUNTRIES NEEDS TO STOP 0.9
OECD RECOMMENDED 0.5
TRUST THE GOVERNMENT KNOWS WHATS IMPORTANT 0.2
FAIR TRADE AGREEMENTS SHOULD BE SET UP 0.2
Base: 59% of respondents, those who declared that they support New Zealand reaching the OECE target (n=443).
NB: This is a multiple response question; percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research 74
7.3 Reasons for opposing an increase to meet the 0.7% target
The primary reason given by those who oppose an increase in funding to meet the 0.7% GNI target was
that the money would be better spent in New Zealand. This is followed by a view that New Zealand was
too small and could not afford that increase.
REASONS FOR OPPOSING AN INCREASE OF OVERSEAS AID FUNDING
Why do you oppose increasing overseas aid funding, what are your reasons?
APR 04
%
MONEY BETTER SPENT IN NEW ZEALAND
Charity begins at home (49.5%), Health system / mental health / hospitals (16.4%),
Education system / student loans (10.5%), Poverty (4.1%), Roads (1.8%), Jobs /
unemployment (1.8%), NZ Plunket / children / youth (1.8%), Housing / homeless
97
(1.8%), Low wages / lack of medical / education staff (1.8%), We could do a lot with
the money (1.4%), Elderly / Pensioners (1.4%), Problems with high cost of living
(1.4%), Problems with crime / police (0.9%), Airforce (0.9%), Refuges (0.5%), Local
disasters (0.5%), Internal security (0.5%).
NEW ZEALAND IS TOO SMALL / NOT AS WEALTHY / CANNOT AFFORD IT
We are a small country / small population (9.5%), New Zealand is not as rich as
other OECD countries (6.4%), We can’t afford it (6.4%), Our economy is based on
26.2
agriculture / tourism (1.4%), We are an isolated country (0.5%), Should not do it
unless we can afford it (0.5%), It might have a crippling effect (0.5%), Our own debt
is too high (0.5%), Economy not growing (0.5%).
DOES NOT REACH THOSE INTENDED
Goes into the wrong hands (3.2%), Dictators / corrupt officials get the money (1.8%), 6.8
Administrators get the funds (0.9%), Soldiers get the aid (0.9%).
AMOUNT IS TOO HIGH 2.3
INCREASE OUR TAXES 5.5
SHOULDN’T BE PUSHED INTO AID BY OTHER COUNTRIES 2.8
ALREADY SPENDING ENOUGH 2.3
AMOUNT IS TOO HIGH 2.3
POOR COUNTRIES DON’T HELP THEMSELVES 1.8
HAVE NOT RECEIVED AID WHEN NEEDED 0.9
SHOULDN’T INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE TOO QUICKLY 0.9
POOR COUNTRIES BECOME DEPENDENT ON AID 0.5
WE SHOULDN’T INTERFERE WITH OTHER COUNTRIES POLITICS 0.5
SEND PEOPLE NOT MONEY 0.5
ONLY HELP PEOPLE IN THE PACIFIC 0.5
ONLY DONATE AS NEEDED 0.5
COMES BACK IN THE FORM OF CONTRACTS 0.5
Base: 29% of respondents, those who declared that they oppose New Zealand reaching the OECE target (n=220).
NB: This is a multiple response questions and hence percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research 75
Support for overseas aid funding being spent in New Zealand was also cited by focus group respondents
opposed to an increase.
That 0.23 could go into better education, better health. Trevor Mallard’s shutting down schools in
certain areas, shutting down maternity wards in small towns. The $900 million supposedly could
be much better spent here in New Zealand. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
[Should we be aiming for the 0.7?] I don’t think so. We’ve got lots of problems here that need
immediate attention. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
What about $600 million on hospitals or toward better education and then we can improve our
prosperity and then we can afford to give more. (Auckland, general public, male)
It’s taking away resources from New Zealand and focusing on issues that are not relevant to our
problems. Socioeconomic situation of New Zealand is not that great. (Auckland, general public,
male)
I think we need more money for our own country. We shouldn’t give any more than what we are
already giving. (Auckland, general public, male)
Respondents in the focus groups were also provided with information on the proportion of GNI different
countries were allocating to overseas aid.
The information that Scandinavian countries were allocating a much higher proportion of their GNI to
overseas aid did not have much apparent impact on opinion.
The contribution of the Scandinavian countries and other European countries were discounted on a number
of grounds including that they had oil and EU subsidies and were generally more prosperous.
These countries like Denmark, Norway, Sweden, those countries have a very high welfare
government and it’s all subsidised by their oil, their offshore rigging stuff. Norway is something
like 70% wealthy in the country and the government still makes a lot of money so they can afford
to do that. They’re very wealthy countries. I don’t know about the Netherlands. [All those
countries are high economically. (Interjection.)] (Auckland, Māori, male)
The whole European economic community thing, a lot of it is based on the European oil and they
collectively share it. [That’s why their standard of living is so high. (Interjection.)] (Auckland,
news follower, female)
Countries like Norway have oil so it’s easy for them. (Auckland, news follower, female)
They get huge subsidies. They’ve taken massive EU subsidies which have grown their economy
significantly. (Auckland, news follower, male)
A lot of those countries in Europe have very high tourist trades as well compared to New Zealand.
(Auckland, Māori, male)
UMR Research 76
Don’t the Scandinavian countries have quite good health and education? They’ve sorted out their
own problems obviously and now they have some more money to give away so maybe if we sort
our own problems out now, then we could look at upping how much we give away. (Auckland, 16-
24 years, female)
It was also difficult to get across to some respondents that the comparisons being made were on a per
head basis. Even if this point was made frequently and with emphasis some respondents kept coming
back to arguments that New Zealand was too small a country to lift its contribution.
I still think around Canada and Australia, up to maybe their highest. We’re a small population.
We don’t have an economy. (Auckland, Māori, male)
These countries are way bigger than us. We need to sort ourselves out first before we go rushing
to everyone’s help. Not saying that we just dispel all aid and not help anybody because we’ve had
a lot of help ourselves. We’re a small country. We’re only four million people but we do very well
for what we’ve got but it could be better. [Ireland is similar to New Zealand, doing twice as much
as us] Possibly because they’ve had a lot of help in the last 30-40 years from a lot of people.
[Surely Ireland have their own problems to sort out. (Interjection.)] Definitely. I’m not saying that
any of these countries don’t have problems. (Auckland, 16-24 years, male)
7.4 International comparisons
Survey results exploring public attitudes on the appropriate level of Government expenditure also highlight
a need to be very careful in interpretation.
In the United States the PIPA survey showed a decisive majority consider that too much is spent on aid,
that the amount spent on aid as a percentage of the Federal Budget is massively overestimated and that
what is seen as the appropriate percentage of the Federal Budget that goes to foreign aid would mean a
massive increase in overseas aid.
When first asked in the PIPA survey whether the amount the United States spends on foreign aid is too
much, too little or about right, 61% of Americans thought it was too much, 7% too little and 26% about right.
There was some early evidence of apparent inconsistency when those who considered that too much was
spent on foreign aid were asked whether they wanted to cut foreign aid, 65% did and 32% did not.
Respondents were then asked their ‘hunch about what percentage of the Federal Budget goes to foreign
aid’. The median was 20% and mean 24%.
Asked further what they thought was an appropriate percentage of Federal Budget to go to foreign aid, the
median was 10% and the mean 14%.
UMR Research 77
Respondents were then told, ‘now imagine that you found out that the US spends 1% of the Federal Budget
on foreign aid would you feel that this is too little, too much or about right?’. 13% thought it was way too
little, 24% a bit too little, 44% about right, 8% a bit too much and 5% way too much.
In the AusAID survey respondents were told, ‘Australia spends 1% of total Government expenditure, the
equivalent of the cost of one loaf of bread per week for every Australian, on overseas to assist poor
countries around the world’ and were asked, ‘do you personally believe that Australia spends too much
money, the right amount of money, not enough money assisting poor countries?’.
34% thought not enough was spent, 40% the right amount and 13% too much.
UMR Research 78
Appendix 1:
Māori Booster Tables
UMR Research 79
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
How interested are you in the subject of overseas aid - that is aid provided by the NZ
Government and overseas aid organisations to poorer countries overseas?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
Very interested 14 12
Fairly interested 50 49
TOTAL INTERESTED 64 61
Not that interested 27 28
Not interested at all 9 10
TOTAL NOT INTERESTED 36 38
Unsure 1 1
UMR Research 80
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
How much would you say you know about the subject of overseas aid?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
A lot 6 5
A fair amount 32 28
TOTAL A LOT + A FAIR AMOUNT 38 33
Not that much 44 49
Hardly anything 18 17
TOTAL NOT THAT MUCH + HARDLY ANYTHING 62 66
Unsure 6 1
UMR Research 81
SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR OVERSEAS AID
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
What are your main sources of information about overseas aid?
APR 04
%
(n=247)
TELEVISION
82.2
Television (39.7%), News (40.5%), Documentaries (2.0%).
NEWSPAPERS 51.8
OVERSEAS AID ORGANISATIONS
Newsletters / Brochures from charities (11.3%), TV ads for overseas aid
20.2
organisations (6.5%), Church (1.6%), Red Cross (0.4%), Lions
international (0.4%)
RADIO 13.4
PERSONAL EXPERIENCE
People you talk to (5.7%), Personal experience (0.4%), Worked for an aid 6.9
organisation (0.4%), Historical knowledge (0.4%)
MAGAZINES 4.9
INTERNET 4.9
EDUCATION
0.8
Library (0.8%)
NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PUBLICATIONS 2.0
OTHER
0.4
Workplace (0.4%)
Base: 82% of respondents, those who declared that they knew a lot, a fair amount or not that much about Overseas Aid
(n=247).
NB: This is a multiple response question and hence the percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research 82
AWARENESS OF OVERSEAS AID ORGANISATIONS SEEKING DONATIONS
FROM NEW ZEALANDERS
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Which overseas aid organisations seeking donations from New Zealanders are you aware of?
Please tell me as many as you can remember:
APRIL 2004
%
(n=300)
First Mention Total Mentions
Red Cross 29.3 45.3
World Vision 15.0 24.3
UNICEF 8.0 15.3
CCF 6.7 13.7
Save the Children Fund NZ 3.7 11.7
Corso 2.0 4.7
Tear Fund 1.7 5.3
OXFAM NZ 1.3 3.0
The Salvation Army 1.0 5.3
Fred Hollows Foundation 0.3 0.3
Barnardos 0.3 1.7
The Church 0.3 1.0
Unesco 0.3 1.0
Through the women’s' organisation 0.3 0.3
World health organisation 0.3 0.3
Green peace 0.3 1.7
United nations 0.3 0.3
Pacific countries 0.3 0.3
Niue 0.3 0.3
New Zealand Aid 0.3 0.3
World appeal 0.3 0.3
VSA 0.0 0.3
Amnesty international 0.0 0.3
Caritas 0.0 0.7
CARE 0.0 0.7
World Wildlife Fund 0.0 0.3
40 hour famine 0.0 1.3
None 15.0 15.0
Unsure 12.7 12.7
NB: Total mentions are multiple responses and hence the percentages do not add to 100%.
Agencies that had 0.1% (n=1) total mention were not displayed.
UMR Research 83
MORE NEW ZEALAND OVERSEAS AID PROVIDED DIRECTLY BY GOVERNMENT OR
BY DONATIONS THROUGH OVERSEAS AID ORGANISATIONS
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Do you think more New Zealand overseas aid is provided directly by the New Zealand
Government or by the voluntary donations made through overseas aid organisations?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
Provided by New Zealanders 62 41
Provided by Government 20 31
Both (volunteered) 11 10
Unsure 7 18
NB: The wording for August 1999 was: Do you think more New Zealand overseas aid is provided directly by the New
Zealand Government or by the donations made by New Zealanders through overseas aid organisations?
UMR Research 84
AMOUNT NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PROVIDES COMPARED
TO OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Do you think that the amount of overseas aid provided by the New Zealand Government on a
per head of population basis is greater than, about the same as or less than that provided by
governments of other developed countries?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
Greater 23 22
About the same 26 32
Less 34 29
Depends (volunteered) - 1
Unsure 17 16
NB: The wording for August 1999 was: Do you think that the amount of overseas aid provided by the New Zealand
Government on a per head of population basis is greater than, about the same as or less than that provided by other
developed countries?
UMR Research 85
REGIONS WHERE MOST NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT AID GOES
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
To which of the following regions do you think MOST New Zealand Government aid goes?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
The Pacific 43 68
Africa 22 14
Asia 11 6
Europe 5 1
South America 4 3
Unsure 15 8
NB: August 1999 question was: Which one of the following areas do you think MOST New Zealand Government aid
goes to?
UMR Research 86
REGIONS WHERE MOST NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT AID GOES
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
And which region do you think gets the next largest amount of New Zealand Government aid?
AUG 99 APR 04
THE MOST THE NEXT THE MOST THE NEXT
AID LARGEST AID LARGEST
(n=303) (n=258) (n=300) (n=276)
% % % %
The Pacific 43 16 68 11
Africa 22 29 14 42
Asia 11 23 6 26
Europe 5 11 1 3
South America 4 9 3 6
Unsure 15 10 8 12
Base (Next Largest): 92% of respondents, those who nominated a region that the most of New Zealand’s Government
Aid goes to (n=276).
NB: August 1999 questions were: Which one of the following areas do you think MOST New Zealand Government aid
goes to? And which area do you think gets the next largest amount of New Zealand Government aid?
UMR Research 87
GENERALLY APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
PROVIDING AID TO POORER COUNTRIES
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Do you generally approve or disapprove of the New Zealand Government providing aid to
poorer countries around the world?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
Approve 66 73
Disapprove 25 19
Both (volunteered) 4 3
Neither (volunteered) 2 1
Unsure 4 4
UMR Research 88
REASONS FOR APPROVING OF THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
PROVIDING AID TO POORER COUNTRIES
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Why do you approve? What are your reasons?
APR 04
%
(n=219)
HUMANITARIAN/DUTY
We have an obligation / responsibility to help (9.6%), Because of
what they are going through / they need it desperately (6.4%),
Humanitarian grounds (5.9%), We should help each other / our
fellow men (5.5%), If people need help we should give it to them
(5%), Someone has to help them (5%), Victims of Disasters (2.7%),
51.2
We should stop people from starving (2.3%), Everyone in the world
deserves water / food / life (1.8%), I see the need (1.8%), Richer
countries should share wealth with poorer ones (1.4%), It’s a
Christian thing to do (1.4%), Starving children (0.9%), Sick children
(0.5%), There’s a huge gap between rich and poor in the world
(0.5%), Children there need our help (0.5%).
NEW ZEALAND IS MORE FORTUNATE
New Zealand is more fortunate (16%), We’re in a better state than 20.6
other countries (4.1%), We are lucky to be self sufficient (0.5%).
OTHER COUNTRIES WOULD HELP NEW ZEALAND IN THE
11.4
SAME SITUATION
NEW ZEALAND CAN AFFORD IT / GENEROUS COUNTRY
We have enough and should share (4.6%), We can spare the money 9.1
(2.7%), Because we can afford it (1.8%).
HELP SPECIFIC AREAS
1.4
Our Pacific neighbours (1.4%).
QUALIFIED APPROVAL
Give but not to the detriment of New Zealand (2.3%), Followed up so
3.3
it reaches the people (0.5%), Not to people who can help themselves
(0.5%).
DEVELOP SELF-SUFFICIENCY IN POOR COUNTRIES
Develop self-sufficiency in poor countries (1.4%), Poor countries
2.4
can’t get started otherwise (0.5%), Help self sufficiency by training
and skills (0.5%)
DEVELOPED COUNTRIES SHOULD HELP UNDEVELOPED
2.3
ONES
INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
We should do our share to help the international community (0.5%),
1.5
We should help countries who can’t help themselves (0.5%), We
can’t ignore the problems of other countries (0.5%).
Base: 73% of respondents, those who declared that they approve of the Government providing aid to poorer countries
(n=219).
NB: This is a multiple response question; percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research Limited 89
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID - STATEMENT TESTING
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
APRIL 2004
%
(n=300)
1, 5,
TOTAL TOTAL
Strongly 2 3 4 Strongly Unsure
AGREE DISAGREE
Agree Disagree
If New Zealand provides overseas aid we will
be more likely to receive help in future if we 29 23 52 28 8 11 19 1
ever need it
The case for New Zealand providing aid is
becoming stronger as the world increasingly 25 27 52 34 7 4 11 3
becomes a global community
New Zealand has a responsibility to provide
what help it can to people who are living in 24 25 49 26 14 11 25 -
poverty overseas
Providing overseas aid will help New Zealand's
19 30 49 30 12 8 20 1
long term trade prospects
Overseas aid can help increase political
stability throughout the world and reduce the 22 23 45 20 17 16 33 2
threat of war and terrorism
Providing overseas aid will help win New
20 22 42 29 14 14 28 1
Zealand friends overseas
UMR Research Limited 90
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID
- STATEMENT TESTING COMPARISON
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
AGREE DISAGREE AGREE DISAGREE
If New Zealand provides overseas aid we will be
more likely to receive help in the future if we 49 19 52 19
ever need it.
New Zealand has a responsibility to provide
what help it can to people who are living in 44 23 49 25
poverty overseas.
Providing overseas aid will help New Zealand’s
38 26 49 20
long term trade prospects.
Overseas aid can help increase political stability
throughout the world and reduce the threat of 39 30 45 33
war and terrorism. *
Providing overseas aid will help win New
38 31 42 28
Zealand friends overseas.
* In the August 1999 survey this statement did not include the words “and terrorism”.
UMR Research Limited 91
INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Do you think New Zealand Government Aid should be given entirely on humanitarian grounds
or do you think international political considerations should play some part in deciding where
our aid is sent?
APR 04
%
(n=300)
Entirely humanitarian 61
International political some part 31
Depends 4
Unsure 4
UMR Research 92
REASONS FOR DISAPPROVING OF THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
PROVIDING AID TO POORER COUNTRIES
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Why do you disapprove? What are your reasons?
APR 04
%
(n=56)
MONEY BEST SPENT IN NEW ZEALAND
Look after our own backyard / charity begins at home (60.7%), There is
poverty in New Zealand (14.3%), Use the money for education / student
87.6
loans (3.6%), Disaster relief in New Zealand (3.6%), Help the elderly /
pensioners (1.8%), Increase low salaries (1.8%), Help New Zealand youth /
children (1.8%)
MONEY MAY NOT REACH THOSE WHO NEED IT
Don’t know where the aid is going / doesn’t reach those who need it (8.9%),
14.3
Aid goes into the pockets of “fat cats” and corrupt governments (3.6%), Aid
doesn’t get to the people (1.8%).
NO BENEFIT TO NEW ZEALAND
1.8
We don’t receive anything back in return (1.8%).
EACH COUNTRY SHOULD SOLVE THEIR OWN PROBLEMS
1.8
These countries should sort themselves out (1.8%).
Base: 19% of respondents, those who declared that they disapprove of the Government providing aid to poorer countries (n=56).
NB: This is a multiple response question; percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research 93
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID - STATEMENT TESTING
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
APRIL 2004
%
(n=300)
1, 5,
TOTAL TOTAL
Strongly 2 3 4 Strongly Unsure
AGREE DISAGREE
Agree Disagree
The New Zealand Government needs to give
priority to helping poorer people in New 60 17 77 17 4 2 6 -
Zealand before helping people overseas
Most overseas aid is swallowed up by
administration costs and corrupt overseas 35 21 56 28 6 5 11 5
politicians
Trade is more effective than aid in helping
20 19 39 39 14 5 19 3
poorer countries overseas
New Zealand is not wealthy enough to help
poor people overseas as well as in New 25 11 36 30 18 14 32 2
Zealand
There is no point trying to help people in the
third world as the problem of international 16 11 27 20 18 33 51 2
poverty is so big - it will never change
UMR Research Limited 94
WHY NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE OVERSEAS AID - STATEMENT TESTING
COMPARISON
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL
AGREE DISAGREE AGREE DISAGREE
The New Zealand Government needs to give
priority to helping poorer people in New Zealand 85 5 77 6
before helping people overseas.
Most overseas aid is swallowed up by
administration costs and corrupt overseas 57 14 56 11
politicians.
New Zealand is not wealthy enough to help poor
45 26 36 32
people overseas as well as in New Zealand.
There is no point trying to help people in the
third world as the problem of international 33 45 27 51
poverty is so big - it will never change.
UMR Research Limited 95
EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT AND NON-GOVERNMENT AID
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you are very confident and 5 not confident at all, how confident are you?
APRIL 2004
%
(n=300)
5, Not TOTAL
1, Very TOTAL
2 3 4 Confident NOT Unsure
Confident CONFIDENT
at All CONFIDENT
That New Zealand's non-Government aid
organisations actually help people in poorer 18 21 39 30 16 10 26 5
countries
That overseas aid from the New Zealand
Government actually helps people in poorer 14 20 34 41 10 12 22 3
countries
UMR Research Limited 96
EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT AND NON-GOVERNMENT AID COMPARISON
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you are very confident and 5 not confident at all, how
confident are you?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
TOTAL TOTAL NOT TOTAL TOTAL NOT
CONFIDENT CONFIDENT CONFIDENT CONFIDENT
That New Zealand's non-
Government aid organisations
38 25 39 26
actually help people in poorer
countries
That overseas aid from the
New Zealand Government
25 32 34 22
actually helps people in poorer
countries
NB: The non-Government question in August 1999 was: That New Zealand’s non-Government overseas charities actually
help people in poorer countries.
UMR Research Limited 97
AREAS THAT SHOULD GET MOST AID FROM
THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Which of the following areas do you think SHOULD get MOST of the overseas aid provided by
the New Zealand Government?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
The Pacific 47 67
Africa 20 14
Asia 4 2
South America 4 5
New Zealand (volunteered) 2 -
Anywhere that needs it most (volunteered) 1 1
All of them should be evenly spread (volunteered) 1 1
Europe 4 1
None (volunteered) 6 4
Unsure 13 5
UMR Research 98
AREAS THAT SHOULD GET MOST AID FROM
THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
And which area SHOULD get the next largest amount of New Zealand Government Aid?
AUG 99 APR 04
THE MOST THE NEXT THE MOST THE NEXT
AID LARGEST AID LARGEST
(n=303) (n=250) (n=300) (n=273)
% % % %
The Pacific 47 16 67 13
Africa 20 33 14 38
Asia 4 19 2 22
Europe 4 8 1 4
South America 4 14 5 13
New Zealand (volunteered) 2 - - -
Anywhere that needs it most 1
- 1 1
(volunteered)
All of them should be evenly spread 1
- 1 -
(volunteered)
None (volunteered) 6 2 4 4
Unsure 13 8 5 5
Base (Next Largest): 91% of respondents, those who nominated an area that most of New Zealand’s Government Aid should go to
(n=273).
UMR Research 99
ADDITIONAL AID TO GO TO THOSE IN GREATEST NEED OR PEOPLE
IN THE PACIFIC REGION
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
If additional New Zealand Government funding was made available for overseas aid do you
think it should go where people are in the greatest need of help no matter where that is or
should it go to people in need in the Pacific region?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
To people with greatest need 70 67
People in Pacific region 25 29
Neither 2 1
Both 3 2
Unsure - 1
UMR Research 100
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority do you think the following options for
providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means the option of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
APRIL 2004
%
(n=300)
1, TOTAL 5, TOTAL
Very High 2 HIGH 3 4 Very Low LOW Unsure Depends
Priority PRIORITY Priority PRIORITY
Water and sanitation 65 19 84 8 3 5 8 - -
Disaster relief 57 24 81 10 5 3 8 - 1
Public health programmes 50 30 80 11 6 3 9 - -
Support for pre-school and primary education 44 28 72 20 3 4 7 1 -
Improving human rights 41 26 67 21 6 5 11 1 -
Improving the position of women in society 33 27 60 25 7 7 14 1 -
Improving adult literacy 27 26 53 26 14 5 19 1 1
Tertiary education scholarships 27 23 50 28 13 8 21 1 -
Help in ensuring more efficient Government 30 20 50 26 13 9 22 2 -
Assistance to improve trade 23 26 49 30 15 5 20 1 -
Help with rural development 22 26 48 33 11 7 18 1 -
UMR Research Limited 101
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID COMPARISON
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority do you think the following
options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means the option of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low
priority.
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
TOTAL HIGH TOTAL LOW TOTAL HIGH TOTAL LOW
PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY PRIORITY
Disaster relief 77 6 81 8
Public health programmes 73 10 80 9
Support for pre-school and primary education 72 12 72 7
Improving human rights 63 13 67 11
Improving the position of women in society 54 17 60 14
Improving adult literacy 49 21 53 19
Tertiary education scholarships 50 24 50 21
Help in ensuring more efficient Government 42 31 50 22
Assistance to improve trade 46 23 49 20
Help with rural development 54 16 48 18
NB: Water and sanitation was not included in the August 1999 survey.
UMR Research 102
NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE AID TO OVERSEAS COUNTRIES
WITH POOR HUMAN RIGHTS RECORDS
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Using a scale 1 to 5 where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how
strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements?
- New Zealand should not provide aid to overseas countries with poor human rights records.
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
1, Strongly agree 21 19
2 18 15
TOTAL AGREE 39 34
3 22 24
4 19 20
5, Strongly disagree 18 19
TOTAL DISAGREE 37 39
Unsure 3 3
UMR Research Limited 103
SHOULD NEW ZEALAND MEET THE OVERSEAS AID TARGET
OF 0.7% OF GNI
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
The OECD recommends each Government provide 0.7% of their country's GNI for overseas
aid. GNI is the value of all the goods and services in the economy. Do you think the New
Zealand Government should meet this target?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
Yes 60 57
No 24 28
Depends (volunteered) 2 5
Unsure 14 10
NB: The question in August 1999 was: The OECD recommends the Government provide 0.7% of their country’s GNP
for overseas aid. GNP is the value of all the goods and services in the economy. Do you think the New Zealand
Government should meet this target?
UMR Research 104
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE NEW ZEALAND REACHING OECD TARGET
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Let me give you a little background. The amount the New Zealand Government currently
spends on overseas aid is 0.23% of our Gross National Income. That comes to around $300
million. The Government has made a commitment to reach the 0.7% Target by 2015. Some
European countries have met or exceeded this target.
If New Zealand were to meet this target by annual increases, would you support or oppose
this?
APR 04
%
(n=300)
Support 55
Oppose 35
Depends (volunteered) 3
Neither support or oppose (volunteered) -
Unsure 7
NB: A similar questions was asked in August 1999, this is shown in the below table
UMR Research 105
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE NEW ZEALAND REACHING OECD TARGET
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Let me give you a little background. The amount the New Zealand Government currently
spends on overseas aid is 0.25% of the New Zealand Gross National Product. That comes to
around $240 million. The New Zealand Government has made a commitment to reach the
0.7% target. Some European countries including Denmark, the Netherlands and Sweden have
met or exceeded this target. If New Zealand was to meet this target it would involve tripling
overseas aid spending to around $720 million.
Having heard that do you support or oppose the New Zealand Government increasing funding
for overseas aid to meet the 0.7% target?
AUG 99
%
(n=303)
Support 26
Oppose 62
Depends (volunteered) 5
Neither support or oppose (volunteered) 2
Unsure 5
UMR Research 106
REASONS FOR SUPPORTING AN INCREASE OF OVERSEAS AID FUNDING
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Why do you support increasing overseas aid funding, what are your reasons?
APR 04
%
(n=163)
HUMANITARIAN / DUTY
Humanitarian grounds (8%), There’s lots of needy people (4.9%),
Someone has to help the poor people (4.9%), If people need help we
should give it to them (4.3%), Important to try and make the world a better
place (2.5%), Richer countries should help/share wealth with poorer 32.5
countries (2.5%), Improve their living conditions (1.2%), Everyone deserves
water / food / life / standard of living (1.2%), Starvation (1.2%), Don’t like
seeing suffering (0.6%), Close the gap between rich and poor countries
(0.6%), Victims of disasters (0.6%).
NEW ZEALAND IS MORE FORTUNATE
NZ is in a better state than other countries (12.3%), We should help those 12.9
less fortunate than us (0.6%).
INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY
If other countries can do it so can we (4.9%), It is part of us being in the
United Nations (3.7%), We have an obligation / responsibility to help
16
(3.1%), NZ should pull its weight (2.5%), We should do our share to help
the international community (1.2%), Encourage world development /
improvement (0.6%).
NEW ZEALAND CAN AFFORD IT
11.6
We have enough / the economy is good (7.3%), We can afford it (4.3%).
DEVELOP SELF-SUFFICIENCY IN POOR COUNTRIES
Develop self-sufficiency in poor countries (3.7%), Develop health care
7.3
(1.8%), Develop education (1.2%), Develop infrastructure / sanitation
(0.6%).
NEEDS TO INCREASE
Makes sense to increase it incrementally (4.9%), Present level has made 7.3
no difference (1.8%), Increase is OK / It doesn’t sound like much (0.6%).
BENEFIT NEW ZEALAND
It will benefit NZ in the long term (3.1%), Increase trade opportunities in the 4.9
future (1.8%).
GENEROSITY SHOWS NEW ZEALAND IS A GOOD COUNTRY 4.3
HELP / IMPROVE SPECIFIC AREAS
0.6
Pacific Neighbours (0.6%).
QUALIFIED APPROVAL
Help New Zealanders first (0.6%), Given / reach the right people (0.6%), 1.8
Depends on the increase (0.6%).
OTHERS WOULD HELP NEW ZEALAND IN THE SAME SITUATION 1.8
AID PROVIDES STABILITY
0.6
Reduces the problems of war / terrorism (0.6%).
Base: 55% of respondents, those who declared that they support New Zealand reaching the OECE target (n=163).
NB: This is a multiple response question; percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research 107
REASONS FOR OPPOSING AN INCREASE OF OVERSEAS AID FUNDING
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Why do you oppose increasing overseas aid funding, what are your reasons?
APR 04
%
(n=106)
MONEY BEST SPENT IN NEW ZEALAND
Charity begins at home (54.7%), Health system / mental health /
hospitals (9.4%), Education system / student loans (9.4%), Problems
82.8
with high cost of living (2.8%), Poverty (1.9%), Jobs / unemployment
(1.9%), NZ Plunket / children / youth (0.9%), Refuges (0.9%), Local
disasters (0.9%).
NEW ZEALAND IS TOO SMALL / NOT AS WEALTHY
10.4
New Zealand is not as rich as other OECD countries (10.4%).
NEW ZEALAND CAN’T AFFORD IT / GIVING ENOUGH
Already spending enough (6.6%), We can’t afford it (3.8%), Should
16
not do it unless we can afford it (3.8%), It might have a crippling effect
(0.9%), Our own debt is too high (0.9%).
DOES NOT REACH THOSE INTENDED
Goes into the wrong hands (0.9%), Dictators / corrupt officials get the 1.8
money (0.9%).
INCREASE OUR TAXES 0.9
OPPOSED TO TARGET 0.9
EACH COUNTRY SHOULD LOOK AFTER ITSELF 3.8
Base: 35% of respondents, those who declared that they oppose New Zealand reaching the OECE target (n=106).
NB: This is a multiple response question and hence percentages do not add to 100%.
UMR Research 108
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
[MĀORI RESPONDENTS]
Have you personally made a donation to an overseas aid organisation in the last year or so?
AUG 99 APR 04
% %
(n=303) (n=300)
Yes 55 46
No 43 51
Unsure 2 3
UMR Research 109
Appendix 2:
Demographic Tables
UMR Research Limited 110
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID.......................................................................................................................................................................112
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID ...............................................................................................................................................................113
MORE NEW ZEALAND OVERSEAS AID PROVIDED DIRECTLY BY GOVERNMENT OR BY VOLUNTARY
DONATIONS MADE THROUGH ORGANISATIONS ..................................................................................................................................114
AMOUNT NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PROVIDES COMPARED TO OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES ..............................115
APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PROVIDING AID TO POORER COUNTRIES .................116
ARGUMENT TESTING - THE CASE FOR NEW ZEALAND PROVIDING AID IS BECOMING STRONGER AS THE
WORLD INCREASINGLY BECOMES A GLOBAL COMMUNITY............................................................................................................117
ARGUMENT TESTING - NEW ZEALAND HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE WHAT HELP IT CAN TO PEOPLE
WHO ARE LIVING IN POVERTY OVERSEAS.............................................................................................................................................118
ARGUMENT TESTING - IF NEW ZEALAND PROVIDES OVERSEAS AID WE WILL BE MORE LIKELY TO RECEIVE
HELP IN FUTURE IF WE EVER NEED IT .....................................................................................................................................................119
ARGUMENT TESTING - PROVIDING OVERSEAS AID WILL HELP NEW ZEALAND'S LONG TERM TRADE PROSPECTS .......120
ARGUMENT TESTING - OVERSEAS AID CAN HELP INCREASE POLITICAL STABILITY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD
AND REDUCE THE THREAT OF WAR AND TERRORISM .......................................................................................................................121
ARGUMENT TESTING - PROVIDING OVERSEAS AID WILL HELP WIN NEW ZEALAND FRIENDS OVERSEAS .......................122
NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT AID BE GIVEN ENTIRELY ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS OR SHOULD
INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS PLAY SOME PART ...............................................................................................123
ARGUMENT TESTING - THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO GIVE PRIORITY TO HELPING POORER
PEOPLE IN NEW ZEALAND BEFORE HELPING PEOPLE OVERSEAS ..................................................................................................124
ARGUMENT TESTING - MOST OVERSEAS AID IS SWALLOWED UP BY ADMINISTRATION COSTS AND CORRUPT
OVERSEAS POLITICIANS ..............................................................................................................................................................................125
ARGUMENT TESTING - TRADE IS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN AID IN HELPING POORER COUNTRIES OVERSEAS .................126
ARGUMENT TESTING - NEW ZEALAND IS NOT WEALTHY ENOUGH TO HELP POOR PEOPLE OVERSEAS AS WELL
AS IN NEW ZEALAND ....................................................................................................................................................................................127
ARGUMENT TESTING - THERE IS NO POINT TRYING TO HELP PEOPLE IN THE THIRD WORLD AS THE PROBLEM
OF INTERNATIONAL PROVERTY IS SO BIG - IT WILL NEVER CHANGE...........................................................................................128
EFFECTIVENESS OF NON-GOVERNMENT AID ........................................................................................................................................130
EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT AID ..................................................................................................................................................129
ADDITIONAL AID TO GO TO THOSE IN GREATEST NEED OR PEOPLE IN THE PACIFIC REGION .............................................131
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - WATER AND SANITATION ...........................................................................................................132
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAMMES ................................................................................................133
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - DISASTER RELIEF ...........................................................................................................................134
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - SUPPORT FOR PRE-SCHOOL AND PRIMARY EDUCATION...................................................135
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - IMPROVING HUMAN RIGHTS ......................................................................................................136
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - IMPROVING THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY............................................................137
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY ..................................................................................................138
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - HELP WITH RURAL DEVELOPMENT..........................................................................................139
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - HELP IN ENSURING MORE EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT .........................................................140
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - ASSISTANCE TO IMPROVE TRADE.............................................................................................141
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - TERTIARY EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIPS..................................................................................142
ARGUMENT TESTING - NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE AID TO OVERSEAS COUNTRIES WITH POOR
HUMAN RIGHTS RECORDS...........................................................................................................................................................................143
SHOULD NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT MEET THE OVERSEAS AID TARGET OF 0.7% GNI......................................................144
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE NEW ZEALAND REACHING OECD TARGET....................................................................................................145
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION................................................................................................................................................................146
UMR Research Limited 111
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
How interested are you in the subject of overseas aid - that is aid provided by the NZ Government and
overseas aid organizations to poorer countries overseas?
Not
Very Fairly Not that interested
Base interested interested interested at all Unsure
ALL 750 12% 54% 27% 7% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 11% 53% 28% 7% 1%
Provincial 364 11% 51% 28% 9% 1%
Christchurch 95 12% 60% 25% 3% 0%
Wellington 83 14% 60% 21% 5% 0%
SEX
Male 359 12% 52% 25% 10% 1%
Female 391 12% 55% 28% 5% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 8% 57% 29% 5% 1%
30-44 242 10% 55% 27% 7% 1%
45-59 179 16% 51% 24% 9% 0%
60 Plus 166 12% 51% 28% 9% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 17% 54% 26% 3% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 11% 58% 23% 7% 1%
Professionals
Clerks 43 13% 38% 45% 4% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 14% 54% 26% 6% 0%
Blue Collar 139 8% 55% 25% 10% 2%
Students 51 15% 56% 26% 3% 0%
Retired 115 12% 51% 26% 10% 1%
Homemaker 63 8% 60% 26% 6% 0%
Not employed 16 6% 47% 27% 20% 0%
Self employed 35 5% 56% 24% 15% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 10% 58% 24% 8% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 14% 44% 37% 5% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 13% 52% 25% 8% 2%
$30,001-40,000 111 9% 59% 24% 8% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 11% 62% 25% 1% 1%
$50,001-70,000 88 9% 56% 22% 13% 0%
More than $70,000 69 17% 51% 24% 8% 0%
Non-Māori 691 12% 54% 27% 7% 0%
Māori 300 12% 49% 28% 10% 1%
Māori - Male 150 11% 42% 31% 15% 1%
Māori - Female 150 13% 55% 25% 6% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 22% 50% 19% 8% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 6% 56% 31% 7% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 18% 57% 21% 3% 1%
No/Unsure 366 5% 50% 33% 12% 0%
UMR Research Limited 112
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
How much would you say you know about the subject of overseas aid?
A fair Not that Hardly
Base A lot amount much anything Unsure
ALL 750 3% 31% 52% 14% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 4% 31% 50% 15% 0%
Provincial 364 3% 33% 50% 14% 0%
Christchurch 95 3% 20% 64% 13% 0%
Wellington 83 3% 34% 51% 12% 0%
SEX
Male 359 4% 34% 49% 13% 0%
Female 391 3% 28% 54% 15% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 1% 21% 62% 16% 0%
30-44 242 3% 23% 55% 19% 0%
45-59 179 5% 40% 44% 10% 1%
60 Plus 166 4% 42% 44% 9% 1%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 5% 28% 57% 10% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 6% 23% 58% 13% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 2% 35% 48% 15% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 6% 23% 54% 17% 0%
Blue Collar 139 2% 31% 50% 17% 0%
Students 51 1% 24% 60% 15% 0%
Retired 115 3% 49% 39% 8% 1%
Homemaker 63 0% 22% 51% 26% 1%
Not employed 16 5% 13% 54% 28% 0%
Self employed 35 0% 42% 51% 7% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 3% 29% 55% 13% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 3% 34% 43% 19% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 1% 26% 59% 14% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 0% 27% 61% 12% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 1% 37% 53% 9% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 8% 29% 56% 7% 0%
More than $70,000 69 4% 31% 46% 19% 0%
Non-Māori 691 3% 31% 52% 14% 0%
Māori 300 5% 28% 49% 17% 1%
Māori - Male 150 5% 29% 44% 20% 2%
Māori - Female 150 5% 27% 54% 14% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 4% 34% 52% 10% 0%
Total not interested 256 2% 25% 51% 22% 0%
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 4% 37% 50% 9% 0%
No/Unsure 366 2% 25% 54% 19% 0%
UMR Research 113
MORE NEW ZEALAND OVERSEAS AID PROVIDED DIRECTLY BY GOVERNMENT OR BY VOLUNTARY DONATIONS MADE THROUGH
ORGANISATIONS
Do you think more New Zealand overseas aid is provided directly by the New Zealand Government or by the
voluntary donations made through overseas aid organisations?
Provided by
Provided by New
Base Government Zealanders Unsure Both Neither
ALL 750 37% 40% 17% 6% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 41% 38% 14% 7% 0%
Provincial 364 34% 41% 19% 6% 0%
Christchurch 95 34% 44% 19% 3% 0%
Wellington 83 48% 32% 15% 5% 0%
SEX
Male 359 38% 41% 15% 6% 0%
Female 391 37% 38% 19% 6% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 38% 41% 16% 5% 0%
30-44 242 38% 43% 15% 4% 0%
45-59 179 39% 41% 14% 6% 0%
60 Plus 166 34% 31% 26% 9% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 43% 41% 13% 3% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 37% 36% 21% 6% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 45% 39% 11% 5% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 34% 44% 17% 5% 0%
Blue Collar 139 32% 46% 16% 6% 0%
Students 51 40% 46% 11% 3% 0%
Retired 115 33% 34% 25% 8% 0%
Homemaker 63 36% 31% 24% 9% 0%
Not employed 16 43% 25% 19% 13% 0%
Self employed 35 43% 40% 10% 7% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 39% 35% 18% 8% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 32% 41% 22% 5% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 40% 42% 15% 3% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 42% 35% 20% 3% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 39% 42% 17% 2% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 44% 43% 6% 7% 0%
More than $70,000 69 33% 48% 13% 6% 0%
Non-Māori 691 37% 40% 17% 6% 0%
Māori 300 31% 41% 18% 10% 0%
Māori - Male 150 33% 38% 19% 10% 0%
Māori - Female 150 29% 43% 17% 10% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 38% 40% 16% 6% 0%
Total not interested 256 36% 39% 19% 6% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 38% 39% 15% 8% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 37% 40% 18% 5% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 34% 41% 18% 7% 0%
No/Unsure 366 42% 38% 16% 4% 0%
UMR Research 114
AMOUNT NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PROVIDES COMPARED TO OTHER DEVELOPED COUNTRIES
Do you think that the amount of overseas aid provided by the New Zealand Government on a per head of
population basis is greater than, about the same as or less than that provided by governments of other
developed countries?
About the
Base Greater same Less Unsure Depends
ALL 750 21% 32% 28% 18% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 22% 34% 27% 17% 0%
Provincial 364 22% 30% 27% 20% 1%
Christchurch 95 19% 39% 30% 12% 0%
Wellington 83 15% 31% 37% 16% 1%
SEX
Male 359 25% 30% 29% 15% 1%
Female 391 17% 34% 28% 20% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 15% 41% 34% 10% 0%
30-44 242 21% 28% 31% 20% 0%
45-59 179 23% 34% 24% 18% 1%
60 Plus 166 26% 27% 24% 21% 2%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 23% 32% 27% 17% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 18% 39% 29% 14% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 25% 27% 31% 15% 2%
Sales and service workers 55 17% 30% 35% 16% 2%
Blue Collar 139 25% 36% 25% 13% 1%
Students 51 23% 29% 32% 16% 0%
Retired 115 24% 27% 29% 17% 3%
Homemaker 63 15% 44% 21% 20% 0%
Not employed 16 6% 43% 34% 17% 0%
Self employed 35 11% 7% 33% 49% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 22% 33% 26% 18% 1%
$15,001-25,000 111 22% 31% 26% 20% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 23% 28% 29% 19% 1%
$30,001-40,000 111 21% 38% 30% 11% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 23% 32% 27% 17% 1%
$50,001-70,000 88 20% 36% 28% 14% 2%
More than $70,000 69 23% 23% 39% 15% 0%
Non-Māori 691 21% 32% 28% 18% 1%
Māori 300 22% 32% 29% 16% 1%
Māori - Male 150 29% 27% 32% 11% 1%
Māori - Female 150 15% 37% 26% 21% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 22% 32% 30% 15% 1%
Total not interested 256 19% 33% 25% 22% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 24% 33% 25% 16% 2%
Not that much + Hardly 493 19% 32% 30% 18% 1%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 20% 32% 29% 18% 1%
No/Unsure 366 22% 33% 27% 17% 1%
UMR Research 115
GENERALLY APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT PROVIDING AID TO POORER COUNTRIES
Do you generally approve or disapprove of the New Zealand Government providing aid to poorer countries
around the world?
Base Approve Disapprove Unsure Both Neither
ALL 750 76% 14% 6% 3% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 77% 12% 4% 6% 1%
Provincial 364 72% 16% 8% 3% 1%
Christchurch 95 80% 14% 5% 0% 1%
Wellington 83 85% 10% 1% 3% 1%
SEX
Male 359 75% 15% 6% 3% 1%
Female 391 77% 12% 6% 4% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 81% 13% 4% 1% 1%
30-44 242 80% 11% 5% 4% 0%
45-59 179 70% 16% 6% 6% 2%
60 Plus 166 72% 17% 7% 2% 2%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 84% 9% 1% 4% 2%
Technicians, Associate 80 77% 13% 8% 1% 1%
Professionals
Clerks 43 73% 13% 6% 6% 2%
Sales and service workers 55 84% 9% 5% 2% 0%
Blue Collar 139 72% 15% 7% 5% 1%
Students 51 83% 12% 5% 0% 0%
Retired 115 69% 16% 9% 4% 2%
Homemaker 63 72% 17% 8% 3% 0%
Not employed 16 74% 20% 6% 0% 0%
Self employed 35 68% 25% 2% 5% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 72% 18% 8% 2% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 82% 12% 3% 2% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 75% 18% 4% 3% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 76% 8% 11% 4% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 88% 8% 2% 2% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 76% 12% 4% 6% 2%
More than $70,000 69 79% 15% 4% 1% 1%
Non-Māori 691 76% 13% 6% 4% 1%
Māori 300 73% 19% 4% 3% 1%
Māori - Male 150 73% 21% 3% 2% 1%
Māori - Female 150 73% 17% 5% 4% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 85% 7% 5% 2% 1%
Total not interested 256 60% 26% 7% 5% 2%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 73% 17% 5% 3% 2%
Not that much + Hardly 493 78% 12% 6% 3% 1%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 82% 9% 6% 2% 1%
No/Unsure 366 70% 19% 6% 4% 1%
UMR Research 116
STATEMENT TESTING - THE CASE FOR NEW ZEALAND PROVIDING AID IS BECOMING STRONGER AS THE WORLD INCREASINGLY
BECOMES A GLOBAL COMMUNITY
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
The case for New Zealand providing aid is becoming stronger as the world increasingly becomes a global
community
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 22% 37% 29% 7% 3% 2%
AREA
Auckland 208 22% 35% 28% 9% 3% 3%
Provincial 364 22% 35% 30% 6% 5% 2%
Christchurch 95 24% 44% 23% 5% 2% 2%
Wellington 83 21% 40% 29% 6% 2% 2%
SEX
Male 359 25% 35% 28% 6% 5% 1%
Female 391 20% 38% 30% 8% 2% 2%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 16% 48% 31% 3% 1% 1%
30-44 242 22% 39% 29% 7% 2% 1%
45-59 179 25% 32% 26% 10% 7% 0%
60 Plus 166 24% 28% 29% 8% 6% 5%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 23% 41% 23% 11% 1% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 17% 48% 25% 3% 7% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 24% 34% 28% 5% 4% 5%
Sales and service workers 55 25% 35% 32% 5% 1% 2%
Blue Collar 139 21% 36% 31% 6% 5% 1%
Students 51 23% 52% 25% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 27% 26% 28% 6% 7% 6%
Homemaker 63 14% 31% 39% 13% 1% 2%
Not employed 16 19% 24% 37% 5% 11% 4%
Self employed 35 22% 33% 38% 7% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 26% 33% 29% 7% 3% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 21% 42% 26% 5% 4% 2%
$25,001-30,000 75 16% 41% 33% 0% 7% 3%
$30,001-40,000 111 25% 41% 25% 7% 2% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 20% 39% 28% 10% 2% 1%
$50,001-70,000 88 19% 30% 39% 7% 4% 1%
More than $70,000 69 28% 38% 18% 12% 4% 0%
Non-Māori 691 22% 38% 28% 6% 4% 2%
Māori 300 25% 27% 34% 7% 4% 3%
Māori - Male 150 30% 26% 31% 6% 5% 2%
Māori - Female 150 21% 28% 37% 7% 4% 3%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 25% 40% 25% 6% 2% 2%
Total not interested 256 17% 30% 35% 9% 6% 3%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 29% 32% 26% 6% 6% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 19% 39% 30% 7% 3% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 27% 36% 25% 9% 2% 1%
No/Unsure 366 16% 37% 33% 5% 6% 3%
UMR Research 117
STATEMENT TESTING - NEW ZEALAND HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE WHAT HELP IT CAN TO PEOPLE WHO ARE LIVING
IN POVERTY OVERSEAS
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
New Zealand has a responsibility to provide what help it can to people who are living in poverty overseas
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 28% 29% 23% 13% 6% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 31% 24% 26% 15% 3% 1%
Provincial 364 26% 29% 22% 12% 9% 2%
Christchurch 95 30% 32% 19% 14% 4% 1%
Wellington 83 25% 37% 26% 8% 4% 0%
SEX
Male 359 27% 30% 22% 13% 6% 2%
Female 391 29% 28% 24% 12% 6% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 30% 36% 20% 11% 3% 0%
30-44 242 26% 32% 27% 11% 4% 0%
45-59 179 31% 26% 18% 13% 11% 1%
60 Plus 166 24% 23% 27% 15% 6% 5%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 32% 33% 19% 13% 2% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 29% 26% 29% 9% 6% 1%
Professionals
Clerks 43 19% 31% 33% 16% 1% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 31% 28% 28% 6% 7% 0%
Blue Collar 139 22% 27% 25% 16% 10% 0%
Students 51 40% 38% 7% 15% 0% 0%
Retired 115 29% 23% 24% 13% 6% 5%
Homemaker 63 30% 30% 21% 10% 9% 0%
Not employed 16 20% 27% 19% 19% 11% 4%
Self employed 35 19% 35% 27% 9% 8% 2%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 27% 26% 23% 15% 7% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 29% 40% 19% 6% 4% 2%
$25,001-30,000 75 25% 31% 21% 13% 8% 2%
$30,001-40,000 111 29% 24% 28% 13% 6% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 23% 32% 28% 12% 5% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 28% 32% 26% 11% 3% 0%
More than $70,000 69 39% 29% 13% 11% 8% 0%
Non-Māori 691 29% 29% 23% 12% 6% 1%
Māori 300 24% 25% 26% 14% 11% 0%
Māori - Male 150 21% 31% 24% 12% 12% 0%
Māori - Female 150 26% 19% 29% 16% 10% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 35% 31% 21% 9% 3% 1%
Total not interested 256 14% 26% 28% 19% 11% 2%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 33% 25% 23% 12% 6% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 26% 31% 23% 13% 6% 1%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 30% 34% 22% 11% 2% 1%
No/Unsure 366 25% 24% 25% 15% 10% 1%
UMR Research 118
STATEMENT TESTING - IF NEW ZEALAND PROVIDES OVERSEAS AID WE WILL BE MORE LIKELY TO RECEIVE HELP IN FUTURE
IF WE EVER NEED IT
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
If New Zealand provides overseas aid we will be more likely to receive help in future if we ever need it
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 19% 27% 29% 14% 10% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 18% 25% 31% 13% 11% 2%
Provincial 364 19% 24% 31% 12% 12% 2%
Christchurch 95 23% 34% 17% 18% 7% 1%
Wellington 83 23% 30% 24% 16% 6% 1%
SEX
Male 359 20% 25% 28% 13% 13% 1%
Female 391 19% 28% 29% 15% 8% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 29% 33% 26% 10% 2% 0%
30-44 242 19% 27% 32% 15% 6% 1%
45-59 179 15% 23% 33% 13% 15% 1%
60 Plus 166 16% 24% 21% 17% 19% 3%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 13% 27% 29% 19% 12% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 20% 31% 28% 8% 10% 3%
Professionals
Clerks 43 18% 29% 37% 10% 6% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 32% 24% 26% 6% 10% 2%
Blue Collar 139 22% 23% 32% 12% 10% 1%
Students 51 24% 31% 31% 14% 0% 0%
Retired 115 16% 26% 20% 16% 18% 4%
Homemaker 63 20% 24% 27% 20% 6% 3%
Not employed 16 28% 21% 40% 6% 5% 0%
Self employed 35 13% 28% 29% 15% 15% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 24% 28% 22% 13% 12% 1%
$15,001-25,000 111 27% 24% 31% 12% 4% 2%
$25,001-30,000 75 18% 26% 32% 15% 8% 1%
$30,001-40,000 111 22% 31% 27% 11% 9% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 15% 32% 28% 11% 13% 1%
$50,001-70,000 88 14% 17% 39% 22% 8% 0%
More than $70,000 69 16% 20% 34% 10% 17% 3%
Non-Māori 691 19% 28% 27% 14% 10% 2%
Māori 300 29% 23% 28% 8% 11% 1%
Māori - Male 150 31% 24% 23% 10% 12% 0%
Māori - Female 150 27% 22% 33% 7% 9% 2%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 21% 29% 27% 12% 9% 2%
Total not interested 256 17% 22% 30% 17% 13% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 19% 24% 29% 11% 15% 2%
Not that much + Hardly 493 20% 27% 29% 15% 8% 1%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 16% 28% 31% 14% 9% 2%
No/Unsure 366 23% 25% 26% 13% 12% 1%
UMR Research 119
STATEMENT TESTING - PROVIDING OVERSEAS AID WILL HELP NEW ZEALAND'S LONG TERM TRADE PROSPECTS
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
Providing overseas aid will help New Zealand's long term trade prospects
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 16% 29% 36% 11% 7% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 15% 31% 36% 13% 4% 1%
Provincial 364 16% 28% 36% 9% 9% 2%
Christchurch 95 16% 29% 35% 14% 4% 2%
Wellington 83 15% 28% 35% 14% 7% 1%
SEX
Male 359 20% 30% 30% 11% 8% 1%
Female 391 11% 28% 41% 12% 6% 2%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 18% 39% 32% 6% 4% 1%
30-44 242 11% 27% 41% 14% 6% 1%
45-59 179 14% 25% 36% 15% 9% 1%
60 Plus 166 22% 27% 31% 8% 9% 3%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 10% 29% 37% 16% 8% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 15% 28% 39% 9% 9% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 7% 29% 47% 8% 2% 7%
Sales and service workers 55 19% 29% 39% 4% 7% 2%
Blue Collar 139 17% 32% 30% 15% 6% 0%
Students 51 14% 42% 35% 9% 0% 0%
Retired 115 25% 26% 28% 9% 10% 2%
Homemaker 63 17% 15% 45% 13% 6% 4%
Not employed 16 22% 39% 24% 5% 6% 4%
Self employed 35 5% 32% 42% 10% 11% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 19% 30% 37% 6% 6% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 24% 25% 36% 11% 3% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 14% 29% 32% 12% 11% 2%
$30,001-40,000 111 14% 34% 30% 17% 4% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 9% 29% 42% 9% 10% 1%
$50,001-70,000 88 9% 28% 42% 16% 5% 0%
More than $70,000 69 17% 29% 26% 15% 11% 2%
Non-Māori 691 16% 29% 36% 12% 6% 1%
Māori 300 19% 30% 30% 12% 8% 1%
Māori - Male 150 22% 33% 22% 13% 9% 1%
Māori - Female 150 17% 26% 37% 12% 6% 2%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 18% 32% 34% 10% 5% 1%
Total not interested 256 12% 24% 39% 14% 10% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 20% 30% 30% 12% 8% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 13% 29% 38% 11% 7% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 14% 32% 33% 13% 6% 2%
No/Unsure 366 17% 26% 39% 9% 8% 1%
UMR Research 120
STATEMENT TESTING - OVERSEAS AID CAN HELP INCREASE POLITICAL STABILITY THROUGHOUT THE WORLD AND REDUCE THE
THREAT OF WAR AND TERRORISM
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
Overseas aid can help increase political stability throughout the world and reduce the threat of war and
terrorism
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 20% 24% 26% 16% 12% 2%
AREA
Auckland 208 20% 24% 29% 17% 9% 1%
Provincial 364 19% 24% 25% 16% 14% 2%
Christchurch 95 14% 29% 28% 15% 10% 4%
Wellington 83 30% 20% 25% 16% 9% 0%
SEX
Male 359 23% 26% 23% 13% 13% 2%
Female 391 17% 22% 30% 19% 11% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 19% 34% 27% 14% 6% 0%
30-44 242 16% 22% 32% 18% 11% 1%
45-59 179 21% 22% 22% 18% 15% 2%
60 Plus 166 26% 18% 22% 15% 15% 4%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 14% 34% 22% 21% 9% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 20% 30% 24% 12% 14% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 25% 15% 34% 16% 5% 5%
Sales and service workers 55 14% 24% 28% 16% 15% 3%
Blue Collar 139 19% 18% 31% 17% 14% 1%
Students 51 27% 27% 33% 11% 2% 0%
Retired 115 32% 17% 22% 15% 11% 3%
Homemaker 63 16% 20% 36% 15% 10% 3%
Not employed 16 29% 11% 26% 13% 15% 6%
Self employed 35 9% 32% 9% 20% 27% 3%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 25% 18% 27% 16% 10% 4%
$15,001-25,000 111 30% 26% 25% 12% 6% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 21% 20% 27% 17% 13% 2%
$30,001-40,000 111 14% 25% 23% 25% 13% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 17% 28% 30% 13% 12% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 13% 35% 23% 20% 8% 1%
More than $70,000 69 22% 26% 23% 11% 16% 2%
Non-Māori 691 20% 25% 26% 16% 11% 2%
Māori 300 22% 23% 20% 17% 16% 2%
Māori - Male 150 26% 25% 16% 15% 18% 0%
Māori - Female 150 19% 21% 25% 19% 14% 2%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 23% 25% 26% 14% 10% 2%
Total not interested 256 15% 21% 27% 20% 15% 2%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 25% 23% 20% 18% 12% 2%
Not that much + Hardly 493 17% 25% 30% 15% 11% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 21% 26% 26% 16% 9% 2%
No/Unsure 366 19% 22% 27% 17% 14% 1%
UMR Research 121
STATEMENT TESTING - PROVIDING OVERSEAS AID WILL HELP WIN NEW ZEALAND FRIENDS OVERSEAS
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
Providing overseas aid will help win New Zealand friends overseas
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 17% 26% 33% 15% 8% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 18% 23% 36% 18% 4% 1%
Provincial 364 15% 27% 30% 14% 12% 2%
Christchurch 95 13% 29% 35% 14% 8% 1%
Wellington 83 23% 33% 31% 7% 6% 0%
SEX
Male 359 22% 31% 29% 10% 8% 0%
Female 391 12% 22% 36% 19% 9% 2%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 14% 40% 26% 15% 4% 1%
30-44 242 16% 24% 36% 16% 8% 0%
45-59 179 12% 24% 38% 14% 11% 1%
60 Plus 166 25% 20% 29% 13% 10% 3%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 14% 24% 33% 19% 9% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 15% 33% 35% 6% 10% 1%
Professionals
Clerks 43 14% 29% 39% 17% 1% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 15% 31% 31% 10% 13% 0%
Blue Collar 139 16% 28% 35% 16% 5% 0%
Students 51 15% 36% 29% 17% 0% 3%
Retired 115 29% 20% 25% 12% 11% 3%
Homemaker 63 13% 20% 37% 17% 11% 2%
Not employed 16 11% 27% 27% 24% 11% 0%
Self employed 35 11% 28% 35% 12% 14% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 18% 29% 28% 14% 9% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 26% 32% 28% 8% 6% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 11% 33% 34% 14% 8% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 13% 31% 30% 17% 8% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 21% 16% 41% 14% 8% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 16% 24% 33% 18% 9% 0%
More than $70,000 69 14% 25% 41% 8% 12% 0%
Non-Māori 691 16% 28% 33% 14% 8% 1%
Māori 300 20% 22% 29% 14% 14% 1%
Māori - Male 150 24% 23% 27% 11% 14% 1%
Māori - Female 150 16% 21% 31% 16% 14% 2%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 19% 29% 32% 12% 7% 1%
Total not interested 256 13% 22% 33% 19% 12% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 18% 25% 33% 15% 9% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 16% 27% 33% 15% 8% 1%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 17% 28% 33% 14% 7% 1%
No/Unsure 366 16% 25% 33% 15% 10% 1%
UMR Research 122
NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT AID BE GIVEN ENTIRELY ON HUMANITARIAN GROUNDS OR SHOULD INTERNATIONAL POLITICAL
CONSIDERATIONS PLAY SOME PART
Do you think New Zealand Government Aid should be given entirely on humanitarian grounds or do you think
international political considerations should play some part in deciding where our aid is sent?
International
Entirely political some
Base humanitarian part Depends Unsure
ALL 750 63% 28% 4% 5%
AREA
Auckland 208 60% 32% 5% 3%
Provincial 364 67% 24% 2% 7%
Christchurch 95 61% 27% 9% 3%
Wellington 83 60% 36% 1% 3%
SEX
Male 359 59% 34% 3% 4%
Female 391 68% 22% 4% 6%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 52% 36% 6% 6%
30-44 242 67% 25% 2% 6%
45-59 179 63% 29% 4% 4%
60 Plus 166 70% 25% 3% 2%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 61% 32% 4% 3%
Technicians, Associate 80 55% 28% 7% 10%
Professionals
Clerks 43 61% 29% 2% 8%
Sales and service workers 55 69% 21% 5% 5%
Blue Collar 139 60% 31% 3% 6%
Students 51 59% 35% 0% 6%
Retired 115 71% 26% 2% 1%
Homemaker 63 75% 13% 9% 3%
Not employed 16 55% 37% 0% 8%
Self employed 35 68% 26% 0% 6%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 64% 28% 4% 4%
$15,001-25,000 111 74% 18% 1% 7%
$25,001-30,000 75 55% 38% 3% 4%
$30,001-40,000 111 66% 26% 6% 2%
$40,001-50,000 79 66% 26% 4% 4%
$50,001-70,000 88 49% 38% 5% 8%
More than $70,000 69 61% 35% 1% 3%
Non-Māori 691 63% 29% 3% 5%
Māori 300 61% 31% 4% 4%
Māori - Male 150 58% 37% 2% 3%
Māori - Female 150 64% 26% 5% 5%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 64% 29% 4% 3%
Total not interested 256 63% 26% 3% 8%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 66% 25% 4% 5%
Not that much + Hardly 493 62% 30% 3% 5%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 64% 28% 5% 3%
No/Unsure 366 63% 28% 3% 6%
UMR Research 123
STATEMENT TESTING - THE NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO GIVE PRIORITY TO HELPING POORER PEOPLE IN NEW
ZEALAND BEFORE HELPING PEOPLE OVERSEAS
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
The New Zealand Government needs to give priority to helping poorer people in New Zealand before helping
people overseas
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 45% 22% 23% 7% 3% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 46% 19% 23% 8% 3% 1%
Provincial 364 50% 20% 23% 5% 2% 0%
Christchurch 95 41% 26% 17% 13% 3% 0%
Wellington 83 27% 29% 32% 11% 1% 0%
SEX
Male 359 41% 22% 24% 9% 3% 1%
Female 391 49% 22% 22% 6% 1% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 40% 33% 21% 6% 0% 0%
30-44 242 43% 20% 28% 6% 3% 0%
45-59 179 46% 19% 20% 10% 4% 1%
60 Plus 166 54% 15% 21% 7% 3% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 37% 20% 28% 12% 3% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 44% 21% 22% 9% 3% 1%
Professionals
Clerks 43 37% 36% 23% 2% 2% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 40% 20% 29% 8% 3% 0%
Blue Collar 139 49% 24% 21% 4% 1% 1%
Students 51 33% 37% 21% 6% 3% 0%
Retired 115 55% 15% 20% 7% 3% 0%
Homemaker 63 53% 16% 23% 6% 2% 0%
Not employed 16 55% 19% 17% 4% 5% 0%
Self employed 35 50% 14% 24% 7% 2% 3%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 53% 26% 18% 2% 1% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 43% 18% 25% 9% 5% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 42% 29% 24% 4% 1% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 43% 28% 23% 4% 2% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 40% 15% 28% 16% 0% 1%
$50,001-70,000 88 41% 21% 23% 11% 4% 0%
More than $70,000 69 38% 24% 24% 11% 3% 0%
Non-Māori 691 44% 21% 24% 8% 3% 0%
Māori 300 60% 17% 17% 4% 2% 0%
Māori - Male 150 56% 17% 21% 5% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 65% 17% 13% 3% 2% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 37% 22% 29% 9% 3% 0%
Total not interested 256 61% 21% 12% 4% 2% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 46% 18% 22% 9% 4% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 45% 23% 23% 7% 2% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 36% 23% 29% 9% 3% 0%
No/Unsure 366 55% 20% 17% 6% 2% 0%
UMR Research 124
STATEMENT TESTING - MOST OVERSEAS AID IS SWALLOWED UP BY ADMINISTRATION COSTS AND CORRUPT OVERSEAS
POLITICIANS
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
Most overseas aid is swallowed up by administration costs and corrupt overseas politicians
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 24% 23% 33% 11% 4% 5%
AREA
Auckland 208 22% 28% 34% 12% 1% 3%
Provincial 364 27% 21% 31% 10% 5% 6%
Christchurch 95 18% 20% 35% 16% 4% 7%
Wellington 83 17% 19% 36% 10% 10% 8%
SEX
Male 359 25% 23% 33% 11% 5% 3%
Female 391 22% 22% 33% 12% 4% 7%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 12% 21% 44% 10% 7% 6%
30-44 242 19% 23% 36% 15% 3% 4%
45-59 179 28% 25% 28% 11% 4% 4%
60 Plus 166 36% 21% 25% 8% 3% 7%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 13% 22% 41% 13% 6% 5%
Technicians, Associate 80 24% 25% 28% 12% 7% 4%
Professionals
Clerks 43 21% 15% 39% 12% 7% 6%
Sales and service workers 55 22% 11% 47% 13% 5% 2%
Blue Collar 139 26% 29% 26% 13% 4% 2%
Students 51 18% 27% 41% 11% 0% 3%
Retired 115 40% 17% 22% 9% 2% 10%
Homemaker 63 21% 26% 36% 7% 3% 7%
Not employed 16 23% 23% 28% 12% 5% 9%
Self employed 35 22% 27% 32% 8% 6% 5%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 26% 31% 27% 6% 3% 7%
$15,001-25,000 111 25% 24% 28% 12% 4% 7%
$25,001-30,000 75 20% 16% 46% 12% 3% 3%
$30,001-40,000 111 20% 22% 35% 15% 4% 4%
$40,001-50,000 79 21% 17% 40% 13% 4% 5%
$50,001-70,000 88 14% 28% 32% 17% 9% 0%
More than $70,000 69 23% 17% 41% 10% 7% 2%
Non-Māori 691 23% 22% 34% 12% 4% 5%
Māori 300 35% 21% 28% 6% 5% 5%
Māori - Male 150 36% 23% 25% 7% 6% 3%
Māori - Female 150 36% 19% 32% 4% 3% 6%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 21% 22% 36% 12% 4% 5%
Total not interested 256 29% 23% 28% 10% 4% 6%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 29% 21% 30% 11% 6% 3%
Not that much + Hardly 493 21% 23% 35% 12% 3% 6%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 20% 22% 34% 13% 4% 7%
No/Unsure 366 27% 23% 32% 10% 4% 4%
UMR Research 125
STATEMENT TESTING - TRADE IS MORE EFFECTIVE THAN AID IN HELPING POORER COUNTRIES OVERSEAS
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
Trade is more effective than aid in helping poorer countries overseas
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 17% 26% 33% 16% 6% 2%
AREA
Auckland 208 17% 28% 31% 17% 5% 2%
Provincial 364 18% 25% 32% 15% 7% 3%
Christchurch 95 17% 24% 41% 12% 4% 2%
Wellington 83 14% 24% 34% 18% 8% 2%
SEX
Male 359 19% 26% 32% 14% 6% 3%
Female 391 15% 25% 35% 17% 6% 2%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 8% 18% 39% 21% 11% 3%
30-44 242 14% 25% 35% 19% 6% 1%
45-59 179 21% 29% 33% 11% 5% 1%
60 Plus 166 26% 31% 26% 11% 2% 4%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 12% 26% 37% 17% 7% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 18% 25% 32% 16% 7% 2%
Professionals
Clerks 43 11% 25% 33% 23% 8% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 5% 19% 42% 15% 17% 2%
Blue Collar 139 15% 27% 35% 16% 6% 1%
Students 51 8% 16% 43% 24% 3% 6%
Retired 115 31% 30% 25% 9% 1% 4%
Homemaker 63 19% 29% 29% 16% 4% 3%
Not employed 16 23% 21% 29% 17% 5% 5%
Self employed 35 27% 26% 30% 9% 5% 3%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 20% 30% 26% 12% 6% 6%
$15,001-25,000 111 12% 16% 41% 22% 7% 2%
$25,001-30,000 75 13% 28% 31% 14% 12% 2%
$30,001-40,000 111 16% 23% 38% 16% 7% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 12% 15% 42% 20% 9% 2%
$50,001-70,000 88 13% 31% 34% 18% 3% 1%
More than $70,000 69 26% 38% 24% 12% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 17% 26% 33% 16% 6% 2%
Māori 300 20% 19% 39% 14% 5% 3%
Māori - Male 150 25% 23% 31% 15% 5% 1%
Māori - Female 150 15% 15% 47% 13% 5% 5%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 16% 24% 34% 16% 8% 2%
Total not interested 256 19% 29% 33% 14% 3% 2%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 23% 23% 29% 16% 7% 2%
Not that much + Hardly 493 14% 26% 36% 16% 6% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 16% 27% 34% 15% 6% 2%
No/Unsure 366 18% 24% 32% 17% 6% 3%
UMR Research 126
STATEMENT TESTING - NEW ZEALAND IS NOT WEALTHY ENOUGH TO HELP POOR PEOPLE OVERSEAS AS WELL AS IN NEW
ZEALAND
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
New Zealand is not wealthy enough to help poor people overseas as well as in New Zealand
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 14% 14% 27% 21% 22% 2%
AREA
Auckland 208 13% 16% 23% 19% 27% 2%
Provincial 364 17% 16% 28% 21% 16% 2%
Christchurch 95 11% 10% 32% 22% 25% 0%
Wellington 83 8% 11% 26% 24% 31% 0%
SEX
Male 359 13% 14% 23% 23% 26% 1%
Female 391 15% 15% 30% 19% 18% 3%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 7% 16% 26% 26% 25% 0%
30-44 242 12% 16% 27% 22% 23% 0%
45-59 179 20% 11% 25% 18% 24% 2%
60 Plus 166 17% 15% 30% 18% 16% 4%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 11% 13% 23% 27% 26% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 17% 18% 23% 23% 19% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 8% 22% 32% 18% 20% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 12% 8% 28% 25% 24% 3%
Blue Collar 139 17% 15% 30% 16% 21% 1%
Students 51 11% 3% 26% 30% 28% 2%
Retired 115 17% 17% 28% 14% 20% 4%
Homemaker 63 14% 15% 28% 20% 19% 4%
Not employed 16 30% 23% 26% 6% 11% 4%
Self employed 35 7% 16% 28% 25% 24% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 23% 10% 28% 18% 19% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 8% 19% 22% 25% 22% 4%
$25,001-30,000 75 16% 19% 30% 18% 17% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 11% 13% 32% 21% 22% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 17% 8% 33% 19% 23% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 8% 21% 19% 24% 28% 0%
More than $70,000 69 11% 7% 24% 23% 32% 3%
Non-Māori 691 13% 14% 26% 22% 23% 2%
Māori 300 25% 11% 30% 18% 14% 2%
Māori - Male 150 27% 12% 23% 19% 18% 1%
Māori - Female 150 23% 9% 37% 17% 11% 3%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 10% 11% 26% 24% 27% 2%
Total not interested 256 21% 20% 30% 16% 13% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 19% 13% 22% 21% 23% 2%
Not that much + Hardly 493 11% 16% 29% 21% 21% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 10% 12% 28% 22% 26% 2%
No/Unsure 366 18% 17% 26% 21% 17% 1%
UMR Research 127
STATEMENT TESTING - THERE IS NO POINT TRYING TO HELP PEOPLE IN THE THIRD WORLD AS THE PROBLEM OF
INTERNATIONAL PROVERTY IS SO BIG - IT WILL NEVER CHANGE
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
There is no point trying to help people in the third world as the problem of international poverty is so
big - it will never change
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 8% 9% 19% 24% 39% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 7% 7% 18% 22% 45% 1%
Provincial 364 10% 10% 23% 23% 33% 1%
Christchurch 95 7% 11% 15% 24% 43% 0%
Wellington 83 5% 9% 6% 32% 48% 0%
SEX
Male 359 9% 9% 18% 25% 39% 0%
Female 391 7% 9% 19% 23% 40% 2%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 4% 5% 15% 35% 41% 0%
30-44 242 4% 9% 18% 23% 46% 0%
45-59 179 13% 8% 23% 17% 38% 1%
60 Plus 166 12% 15% 19% 22% 29% 3%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 5% 9% 15% 24% 47% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 6% 5% 17% 30% 41% 1%
Professionals
Clerks 43 3% 4% 25% 28% 40% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 11% 3% 15% 15% 54% 2%
Blue Collar 139 8% 11% 23% 25% 33% 0%
Students 51 6% 10% 8% 30% 46% 0%
Retired 115 13% 18% 18% 20% 28% 3%
Homemaker 63 5% 4% 18% 30% 42% 1%
Not employed 16 11% 7% 39% 10% 29% 4%
Self employed 35 14% 7% 28% 18% 33% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 11% 7% 23% 19% 38% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 6% 8% 21% 25% 39% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 7% 14% 20% 29% 29% 1%
$30,001-40,000 111 6% 4% 17% 31% 42% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 6% 11% 20% 21% 42% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 7% 13% 11% 20% 49% 0%
More than $70,000 69 7% 4% 13% 22% 54% 0%
Non-Māori 691 7% 9% 19% 23% 41% 1%
Māori 300 16% 11% 20% 18% 33% 2%
Māori - Male 150 18% 13% 16% 18% 35% 0%
Māori - Female 150 14% 8% 25% 19% 31% 3%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 7% 8% 15% 24% 45% 1%
Total not interested 256 9% 10% 26% 24% 30% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 12% 11% 16% 18% 42% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 6% 8% 20% 27% 38% 1%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 5% 9% 17% 21% 47% 1%
No/Unsure 366 11% 9% 20% 28% 31% 1%
UMR Research 128
EFFECTIVENESS OF GOVERNMENT AID
Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means you are very confident and 5 not confident at all, how confident are
you that overseas aid from the New Zealand Government actually helps people in poorer countries?
5 Not
1 Very confident
Base confident 2 3 4 at all Unsure
ALL 750 8% 22% 43% 15% 9% 3%
AREA
Auckland 208 7% 20% 45% 16% 9% 3%
Provincial 364 9% 18% 46% 13% 11% 3%
Christchurch 95 9% 23% 40% 18% 9% 1%
Wellington 83 7% 39% 34% 13% 5% 2%
SEX
Male 359 10% 26% 35% 16% 11% 2%
Female 391 6% 17% 51% 13% 9% 4%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 3% 26% 46% 18% 5% 2%
30-44 242 9% 24% 45% 13% 6% 3%
45-59 179 9% 17% 44% 13% 14% 3%
60 Plus 166 11% 19% 38% 15% 14% 3%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 9% 25% 47% 10% 6% 3%
Technicians, Associate 80 12% 22% 36% 17% 10% 3%
Professionals
Clerks 43 3% 37% 41% 11% 8% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 9% 13% 60% 13% 3% 2%
Blue Collar 139 6% 19% 42% 18% 13% 2%
Students 51 8% 25% 46% 14% 5% 2%
Retired 115 9% 19% 39% 17% 12% 4%
Homemaker 63 5% 18% 47% 13% 11% 6%
Not employed 16 17% 21% 30% 15% 13% 4%
Self employed 35 8% 20% 35% 17% 20% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 8% 24% 43% 13% 10% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 6% 20% 45% 17% 10% 2%
$25,001-30,000 75 8% 17% 41% 22% 9% 3%
$30,001-40,000 111 7% 18% 50% 15% 9% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 8% 22% 45% 14% 6% 5%
$50,001-70,000 88 8% 37% 38% 8% 7% 2%
More than $70,000 69 10% 23% 37% 15% 12% 3%
Non-Māori 691 8% 22% 44% 15% 9% 2%
Māori 300 14% 20% 41% 10% 12% 3%
Māori - Male 150 14% 23% 36% 11% 15% 1%
Māori - Female 150 14% 16% 46% 9% 10% 5%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 10% 26% 42% 11% 7% 4%
Total not interested 256 5% 14% 46% 20% 14% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 11% 23% 39% 11% 12% 4%
Not that much + Hardly 493 7% 21% 46% 16% 8% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 11% 24% 44% 12% 6% 3%
No/Unsure 366 5% 19% 42% 18% 13% 3%
UMR Research 129
EFFECTIVENESS OF NON-GOVERNMENT AID
Using the same scale how confident are you that New Zealand's non-Government aid organisations actually
help people in poorer countries?
5 Not
1 Very confident
Base confident 2 3 4 at all Unsure
ALL 750 13% 25% 34% 17% 7% 4%
AREA
Auckland 208 11% 24% 37% 19% 5% 4%
Provincial 364 13% 24% 34% 16% 9% 4%
Christchurch 95 16% 26% 32% 18% 4% 4%
Wellington 83 9% 31% 29% 14% 10% 7%
SEX
Male 359 14% 25% 34% 16% 7% 4%
Female 391 11% 25% 35% 18% 7% 4%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 5% 26% 41% 21% 4% 3%
30-44 242 12% 27% 35% 16% 6% 4%
45-59 179 16% 21% 36% 14% 11% 2%
60 Plus 166 16% 26% 23% 19% 8% 8%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 15% 29% 34% 15% 4% 3%
Technicians, Associate 80 11% 27% 35% 12% 11% 4%
Professionals
Clerks 43 8% 31% 52% 4% 5% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 10% 28% 28% 25% 2% 7%
Blue Collar 139 9% 20% 39% 22% 8% 2%
Students 51 6% 23% 37% 29% 3% 2%
Retired 115 21% 23% 20% 17% 10% 9%
Homemaker 63 10% 24% 31% 23% 9% 3%
Not employed 16 19% 15% 38% 3% 21% 4%
Self employed 35 6% 24% 49% 6% 10% 5%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 14% 16% 34% 24% 9% 3%
$15,001-25,000 111 12% 27% 26% 21% 9% 5%
$25,001-30,000 75 10% 21% 37% 19% 7% 6%
$30,001-40,000 111 10% 29% 35% 18% 5% 3%
$40,001-50,000 79 11% 20% 48% 13% 6% 2%
$50,001-70,000 88 12% 38% 34% 10% 6% 0%
More than $70,000 69 16% 25% 35% 12% 9% 3%
Non-Māori 691 12% 27% 34% 16% 7% 4%
Māori 300 18% 21% 30% 16% 10% 5%
Māori - Male 150 21% 20% 28% 17% 10% 4%
Māori - Female 150 14% 21% 33% 16% 9% 7%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 15% 26% 35% 14% 5% 5%
Total not interested 256 7% 23% 32% 23% 12% 3%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 17% 25% 33% 13% 7% 5%
Not that much + Hardly 493 9% 25% 35% 20% 7% 4%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 18% 31% 31% 13% 4% 3%
No/Unsure 366 7% 19% 38% 21% 10% 5%
UMR Research 130
ADDITIONAL AID TO GO TO THOSE IN GREATEST NEED OR PEOPLE IN THE PACIFIC REGION
If additional New Zealand Government funding was made available for overseas aid do you think it should go
where people are in the greatest need of help no matter where that is or should it go to people in need in
the Pacific region?
To people
with People in
greatest Pacific
Base need region Unsure Neither Both
ALL 750 64% 30% 2% 2% 2%
AREA
Auckland 208 61% 33% 2% 1% 3%
Provincial 364 67% 26% 2% 2% 3%
Christchurch 95 64% 31% 3% 1% 1%
Wellington 83 58% 34% 3% 1% 4%
SEX
Male 359 55% 38% 2% 3% 2%
Female 391 72% 22% 2% 1% 3%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 77% 22% 0% 0% 1%
30-44 242 61% 30% 3% 2% 4%
45-59 179 58% 34% 3% 3% 2%
60 Plus 166 60% 32% 3% 2% 3%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 65% 32% 2% 0% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 50% 39% 2% 2% 7%
Professionals
Clerks 43 74% 26% 0% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 73% 19% 3% 0% 5%
Blue Collar 139 63% 31% 2% 3% 1%
Students 51 86% 13% 0% 1% 0%
Retired 115 58% 33% 4% 1% 4%
Homemaker 63 72% 21% 0% 1% 6%
Not employed 16 72% 15% 13% 0% 0%
Self employed 35 39% 47% 3% 8% 3%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 71% 20% 4% 0% 5%
$15,001-25,000 111 72% 23% 0% 1% 4%
$25,001-30,000 75 71% 21% 2% 3% 3%
$30,001-40,000 111 70% 27% 1% 2% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 60% 34% 1% 0% 5%
$50,001-70,000 88 49% 43% 4% 3% 1%
More than $70,000 69 51% 44% 3% 2% 0%
Non-Māori 691 64% 30% 2% 2% 2%
Māori 300 67% 29% 1% 1% 2%
Māori - Male 150 61% 32% 1% 3% 3%
Māori - Female 150 72% 26% 1% 0% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 69% 24% 3% 1% 3%
Total not interested 256 55% 39% 1% 3% 2%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 61% 31% 2% 3% 3%
Not that much + Hardly 493 65% 29% 3% 1% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 65% 29% 2% 1% 3%
No/Unsure 366 63% 30% 3% 2% 2%
UMR Research 131
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - WATER AND SANITATION
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Water and sanitation
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 68% 19% 7% 3% 3% 0% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 68% 17% 8% 4% 3% 0% 0%
Provincial 364 68% 17% 8% 3% 3% 1% 0%
Christchurch 95 73% 21% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0%
Wellington 83 62% 25% 6% 5% 2% 0% 0%
SEX
Male 359 63% 20% 9% 4% 3% 1% 0%
Female 391 73% 17% 6% 2% 2% 0% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 73% 14% 6% 6% 1% 0% 0%
30-44 242 70% 20% 6% 2% 2% 0% 0%
45-59 179 65% 22% 6% 2% 5% 0% 0%
60 Plus 166 63% 18% 11% 3% 3% 2% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 66% 25% 5% 2% 2% 0% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 74% 16% 5% 1% 4% 0% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 72% 16% 4% 6% 2% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 68% 16% 10% 4% 2% 0% 0%
Blue Collar 139 65% 17% 9% 4% 5% 0% 0%
Students 51 65% 24% 3% 8% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 67% 14% 11% 3% 3% 2% 0%
Homemaker 63 79% 16% 2% 3% 0% 0% 0%
Not employed 16 48% 20% 17% 4% 11% 0% 0%
Self employed 35 68% 21% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 67% 21% 8% 3% 1% 0% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 73% 11% 9% 3% 3% 1% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 73% 20% 1% 3% 2% 1% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 63% 24% 5% 6% 2% 0% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 70% 19% 7% 2% 2% 0% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 63% 17% 11% 3% 5% 1% 0%
More than $70,000 69 66% 25% 7% 0% 2% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 68% 19% 7% 2% 3% 1% 0%
Māori 300 65% 19% 8% 3% 5% 0% 0%
Māori - Male 150 62% 21% 8% 3% 6% 0% 0%
Māori - Female 150 69% 17% 7% 4% 3% 0% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 72% 18% 5% 3% 2% 0% 0%
Total not interested 256 62% 20% 10% 3% 4% 1% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 72% 15% 7% 3% 2% 1% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 66% 21% 7% 3% 3% 0% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 71% 19% 6% 2% 2% 0% 0%
No/Unsure 366 64% 19% 8% 4% 4% 1% 0%
UMR Research 132
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - PUBLIC HEALTH PROGRAMMES
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Public health programmes
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 49% 32% 12% 4% 2% 1% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 42% 34% 17% 4% 2% 1% 0%
Provincial 364 51% 27% 13% 5% 3% 1% 0%
Christchurch 95 55% 38% 4% 3% 0% 0% 0%
Wellington 83 52% 40% 6% 2% 0% 0% 0%
SEX
Male 359 46% 33% 13% 5% 2% 1% 0%
Female 391 52% 31% 11% 3% 2% 1% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 57% 30% 10% 2% 1% 0% 0%
30-44 242 47% 34% 13% 4% 2% 0% 0%
45-59 179 46% 38% 9% 4% 3% 0% 0%
60 Plus 166 48% 25% 15% 7% 3% 2% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 48% 38% 9% 3% 1% 0% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 39% 46% 9% 2% 4% 0% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 58% 32% 8% 2% 0% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 42% 35% 12% 8% 3% 0% 0%
Blue Collar 139 47% 29% 14% 8% 2% 0% 0%
Students 51 56% 28% 14% 2% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 50% 25% 15% 4% 3% 3% 0%
Homemaker 63 54% 32% 8% 2% 4% 0% 0%
Not employed 16 53% 15% 15% 11% 0% 6% 0%
Self employed 35 59% 20% 21% 0% 0% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 54% 32% 8% 2% 2% 2% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 52% 27% 14% 3% 3% 1% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 44% 41% 9% 4% 2% 0% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 55% 27% 11% 3% 2% 1% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 53% 30% 10% 7% 0% 0% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 43% 37% 10% 7% 2% 1% 0%
More than $70,000 69 41% 40% 15% 1% 3% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 49% 32% 12% 4% 2% 1% 0%
Māori 300 50% 30% 11% 6% 3% 0% 0%
Māori - Male 150 44% 36% 11% 4% 5% 0% 0%
Māori - Female 150 56% 24% 12% 7% 1% 0% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 53% 32% 10% 4% 1% 0% 0%
Total not interested 256 42% 31% 16% 5% 4% 1% 1%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 49% 29% 15% 4% 2% 1% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 49% 33% 11% 4% 2% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 50% 33% 11% 5% 1% 0% 0%
No/Unsure 366 48% 31% 13% 3% 3% 2% 0%
UMR Research 133
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - DISASTER RELIEF
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Disaster relief
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 51% 27% 15% 4% 2% 1% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 49% 30% 15% 4% 1% 1% 0%
Provincial 364 48% 27% 16% 3% 4% 2% 0%
Christchurch 95 57% 28% 14% 1% 0% 0% 0%
Wellington 83 64% 20% 11% 4% 1% 0% 0%
SEX
Male 359 49% 26% 16% 5% 3% 1% 0%
Female 391 54% 28% 14% 2% 1% 1% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 47% 34% 11% 4% 1% 3% 0%
30-44 242 55% 26% 15% 3% 1% 0% 0%
45-59 179 55% 27% 12% 1% 4% 1% 0%
60 Plus 166 47% 21% 21% 6% 3% 2% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 55% 28% 13% 3% 0% 1% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 55% 21% 20% 1% 1% 2% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 41% 43% 14% 0% 2% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 51% 36% 4% 7% 2% 0% 0%
Blue Collar 139 49% 26% 14% 5% 6% 0% 0%
Students 51 51% 36% 4% 3% 0% 6% 0%
Retired 115 47% 21% 21% 4% 4% 3% 0%
Homemaker 63 62% 21% 16% 0% 1% 0% 0%
Not employed 16 30% 28% 23% 13% 6% 0% 0%
Self employed 35 53% 21% 24% 2% 0% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 52% 27% 14% 2% 1% 4% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 59% 22% 12% 4% 1% 2% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 51% 28% 18% 1% 1% 1% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 56% 21% 18% 2% 3% 0% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 47% 34% 13% 5% 1% 0% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 46% 33% 10% 4% 6% 1% 0%
More than $70,000 69 55% 24% 16% 1% 4% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 51% 28% 15% 3% 2% 1% 0%
Māori 300 57% 24% 10% 5% 3% 0% 1%
Māori - Male 150 53% 23% 13% 5% 5% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 60% 25% 8% 5% 1% 0% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 56% 26% 13% 3% 2% 0% 0%
Total not interested 256 43% 28% 18% 4% 4% 3% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 53% 25% 16% 3% 2% 1% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 51% 28% 14% 3% 3% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 56% 27% 13% 3% 1% 0% 0%
No/Unsure 366 47% 27% 17% 4% 3% 2% 0%
UMR Research 134
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - SUPPORT FOR PRE-SCHOOL AND PRIMARY EDUCATION
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Support for pre-school and primary education
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 33% 33% 23% 7% 3% 1% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 34% 32% 23% 8% 3% 0% 0%
Provincial 364 36% 30% 21% 8% 4% 1% 0%
Christchurch 95 30% 43% 20% 6% 1% 0% 0%
Wellington 83 27% 39% 30% 4% 0% 0% 0%
SEX
Male 359 31% 37% 21% 7% 3% 1% 0%
Female 391 36% 30% 24% 7% 2% 1% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 34% 38% 23% 4% 1% 0% 0%
30-44 242 31% 35% 27% 5% 1% 0% 1%
45-59 179 35% 30% 21% 9% 5% 0% 0%
60 Plus 166 36% 29% 17% 11% 4% 2% 1%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 36% 34% 25% 5% 0% 0% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 26% 46% 16% 9% 2% 1% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 28% 37% 23% 12% 0% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 29% 32% 33% 3% 3% 0% 0%
Blue Collar 139 37% 33% 18% 6% 6% 0% 0%
Students 51 41% 24% 31% 4% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 35% 29% 16% 12% 4% 3% 1%
Homemaker 63 33% 29% 29% 5% 2% 0% 2%
Not employed 16 25% 21% 24% 15% 11% 4% 0%
Self employed 35 33% 39% 22% 4% 2% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 39% 24% 22% 12% 3% 0% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 37% 28% 25% 6% 2% 1% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 43% 37% 11% 5% 4% 0% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 29% 33% 25% 9% 3% 1% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 28% 48% 16% 5% 3% 0% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 30% 37% 25% 5% 2% 1% 0%
More than $70,000 69 26% 40% 26% 4% 4% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 33% 34% 22% 7% 3% 1% 0%
Māori 300 44% 28% 20% 3% 4% 1% 0%
Māori - Male 150 44% 27% 19% 3% 6% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 44% 29% 22% 3% 2% 0% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 35% 34% 22% 7% 1% 0% 1%
Total not interested 256 30% 32% 25% 7% 5% 1% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 38% 26% 23% 8% 4% 1% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 32% 37% 22% 6% 2% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 37% 34% 20% 7% 1% 1% 0%
No/Unsure 366 30% 32% 25% 7% 5% 0% 1%
UMR Research 135
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - IMPROVING HUMAN RIGHTS
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Improving human rights
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 35% 29% 21% 9% 5% 1% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 34% 26% 23% 10% 5% 2% 0%
Provincial 364 35% 27% 19% 9% 8% 2% 0%
Christchurch 95 36% 37% 20% 6% 1% 0% 0%
Wellington 83 39% 33% 18% 8% 1% 1% 0%
SEX
Male 359 30% 29% 24% 10% 6% 1% 0%
Female 391 40% 29% 18% 7% 4% 2% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 45% 33% 15% 4% 2% 1% 0%
30-44 242 34% 28% 23% 8% 6% 1% 0%
45-59 179 31% 27% 24% 9% 8% 1% 0%
60 Plus 166 33% 28% 18% 13% 6% 2% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 31% 34% 20% 10% 5% 0% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 24% 29% 30% 7% 7% 3% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 27% 33% 26% 9% 0% 5% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 39% 33% 17% 7% 2% 2% 0%
Blue Collar 139 31% 26% 26% 9% 8% 0% 0%
Students 51 72% 20% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 38% 25% 15% 10% 9% 3% 0%
Homemaker 63 40% 28% 14% 12% 4% 2% 0%
Not employed 16 25% 44% 17% 5% 5% 4% 0%
Self employed 35 31% 27% 24% 15% 3% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 45% 27% 16% 8% 2% 2% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 34% 29% 19% 8% 6% 4% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 39% 31% 20% 4% 6% 0% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 40% 28% 18% 8% 6% 0% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 24% 32% 28% 10% 4% 2% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 27% 32% 26% 10% 4% 1% 0%
More than $70,000 69 21% 32% 22% 13% 12% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 35% 30% 20% 9% 5% 1% 0%
Māori 300 41% 26% 21% 6% 5% 1% 0%
Māori - Male 150 38% 27% 19% 7% 7% 1% 1%
Māori - Female 150 44% 25% 23% 5% 3% 0% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 40% 29% 18% 8% 4% 1% 0%
Total not interested 256 27% 29% 24% 11% 8% 1% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 42% 21% 19% 10% 6% 2% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 32% 33% 21% 8% 5% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 36% 29% 21% 8% 5% 1% 0%
No/Unsure 366 34% 29% 20% 9% 6% 2% 0%
UMR Research 136
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - IMPROVING THE POSITION OF WOMEN IN SOCIETY
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Improving the position of women in society
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 29% 28% 28% 9% 4% 2% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 28% 29% 28% 11% 4% 0% 0%
Provincial 364 31% 28% 25% 9% 5% 2% 0%
Christchurch 95 25% 29% 28% 8% 7% 2% 1%
Wellington 83 27% 25% 35% 11% 1% 1% 0%
SEX
Male 359 24% 26% 30% 11% 6% 3% 0%
Female 391 33% 30% 26% 8% 3% 0% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 25% 32% 27% 11% 3% 2% 0%
30-44 242 25% 29% 30% 9% 6% 1% 0%
45-59 179 32% 24% 30% 8% 5% 1% 0%
60 Plus 166 35% 26% 22% 10% 4% 2% 1%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 22% 30% 33% 10% 4% 0% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 22% 34% 25% 11% 7% 1% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 22% 30% 33% 11% 4% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 27% 23% 38% 6% 3% 3% 0%
Blue Collar 139 33% 26% 23% 9% 8% 1% 0%
Students 51 33% 23% 33% 8% 0% 3% 0%
Retired 115 38% 23% 22% 9% 2% 4% 2%
Homemaker 63 31% 38% 20% 7% 4% 0% 0%
Not employed 16 30% 27% 18% 14% 5% 6% 0%
Self employed 35 30% 24% 28% 12% 6% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 32% 25% 30% 8% 2% 3% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 30% 33% 22% 12% 2% 1% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 32% 35% 19% 6% 5% 3% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 29% 30% 26% 7% 8% 0% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 26% 30% 36% 6% 2% 0% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 21% 21% 32% 23% 2% 1% 0%
More than $70,000 69 17% 22% 36% 11% 13% 0% 1%
Non-Māori 691 28% 28% 27% 10% 4% 2% 1%
Māori 300 33% 27% 25% 7% 7% 1% 0%
Māori - Male 150 29% 30% 21% 8% 11% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 37% 25% 29% 6% 3% 0% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 31% 30% 24% 10% 3% 1% 1%
Total not interested 256 26% 25% 33% 8% 6% 2% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 35% 22% 30% 7% 3% 2% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 26% 31% 26% 11% 5% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 29% 31% 25% 9% 4% 1% 1%
No/Unsure 366 28% 25% 30% 10% 5% 2% 0%
UMR Research 137
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - IMPROVING ADULT LITERACY
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Improving adult literacy
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 23% 32% 31% 10% 3% 1% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 22% 31% 35% 9% 2% 1% 0%
Provincial 364 24% 30% 27% 13% 5% 1% 0%
Christchurch 95 17% 48% 28% 5% 2% 0% 0%
Wellington 83 28% 27% 37% 7% 1% 0% 0%
SEX
Male 359 20% 31% 34% 9% 5% 1% 0%
Female 391 25% 33% 27% 11% 2% 2% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 20% 32% 34% 10% 3% 1% 0%
30-44 242 21% 32% 34% 11% 2% 0% 0%
45-59 179 24% 35% 28% 7% 6% 0% 0%
60 Plus 166 27% 29% 24% 13% 3% 3% 1%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 24% 34% 31% 10% 1% 0% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 17% 38% 35% 8% 2% 0% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 13% 47% 27% 10% 0% 3% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 20% 41% 25% 8% 6% 0% 0%
Blue Collar 139 22% 29% 30% 11% 8% 0% 0%
Students 51 17% 30% 40% 13% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 28% 24% 28% 13% 2% 5% 0%
Homemaker 63 35% 26% 29% 7% 3% 0% 0%
Not employed 16 19% 34% 13% 19% 11% 4% 0%
Self employed 35 21% 26% 40% 9% 4% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 22% 25% 34% 12% 4% 3% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 29% 31% 29% 6% 2% 2% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 22% 26% 41% 8% 2% 1% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 22% 35% 30% 9% 3% 1% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 16% 42% 26% 16% 0% 0% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 18% 35% 32% 7% 8% 0% 0%
More than $70,000 69 21% 33% 29% 11% 6% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 22% 33% 31% 10% 3% 1% 0%
Māori 300 27% 26% 26% 14% 5% 1% 1%
Māori - Male 150 26% 25% 25% 14% 9% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 29% 27% 26% 14% 2% 1% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 23% 35% 30% 8% 3% 1% 0%
Total not interested 256 23% 26% 30% 14% 5% 2% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 30% 27% 30% 9% 3% 1% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 19% 35% 31% 11% 3% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 24% 35% 29% 10% 2% 0% 0%
No/Unsure 366 22% 29% 32% 11% 4% 2% 0%
UMR Research 138
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - HELP WITH RURAL DEVELOPMENT
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Help with rural development
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 23% 30% 30% 12% 3% 1% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 22% 29% 33% 13% 3% 0% 0%
Provincial 364 23% 29% 27% 13% 5% 2% 1%
Christchurch 95 22% 37% 31% 8% 0% 1% 1%
Wellington 83 26% 29% 32% 12% 1% 0% 0%
SEX
Male 359 21% 29% 31% 14% 4% 1% 0%
Female 391 25% 31% 29% 11% 2% 1% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 22% 27% 38% 11% 2% 0% 0%
30-44 242 21% 35% 25% 16% 3% 0% 0%
45-59 179 25% 28% 32% 9% 4% 2% 0%
60 Plus 166 26% 28% 27% 10% 4% 3% 2%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 24% 32% 30% 12% 1% 1% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 22% 30% 27% 14% 7% 0% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 25% 28% 35% 10% 0% 2% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 23% 27% 36% 10% 2% 2% 0%
Blue Collar 139 20% 27% 33% 14% 6% 0% 0%
Students 51 15% 31% 39% 15% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 25% 34% 24% 7% 4% 3% 3%
Homemaker 63 25% 34% 24% 15% 1% 1% 0%
Not employed 16 28% 9% 27% 15% 11% 10% 0%
Self employed 35 35% 33% 20% 10% 2% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 24% 25% 31% 14% 3% 3% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 25% 32% 28% 9% 4% 2% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 34% 23% 29% 12% 2% 0% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 24% 28% 32% 14% 2% 0% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 19% 25% 43% 10% 2% 1% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 16% 40% 26% 11% 6% 1% 0%
More than $70,000 69 19% 41% 25% 10% 5% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 24% 31% 28% 12% 3% 1% 1%
Māori 300 22% 26% 33% 11% 7% 1% 0%
Māori - Male 150 21% 25% 35% 9% 9% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 23% 27% 32% 12% 5% 1% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 25% 34% 28% 9% 2% 1% 1%
Total not interested 256 20% 24% 32% 18% 5% 1% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 27% 29% 29% 10% 3% 1% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 22% 31% 30% 13% 3% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 26% 32% 30% 9% 2% 0% 1%
No/Unsure 366 21% 28% 30% 15% 4% 2% 0%
UMR Research 139
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - HELP IN ENSURING MORE EFFICIENT GOVERNMENT
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Help in ensuring more efficient Government
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 19% 26% 28% 15% 9% 3% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 17% 29% 24% 16% 10% 4% 0%
Provincial 364 20% 26% 29% 13% 9% 3% 0%
Christchurch 95 17% 26% 32% 15% 6% 3% 1%
Wellington 83 20% 20% 28% 24% 8% 0% 0%
SEX
Male 359 19% 25% 28% 15% 11% 2% 0%
Female 391 19% 27% 28% 15% 7% 4% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 24% 40% 21% 10% 4% 1% 0%
30-44 242 17% 27% 33% 15% 7% 1% 0%
45-59 179 17% 20% 31% 17% 13% 2% 0%
60 Plus 166 18% 18% 24% 19% 12% 8% 1%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 16% 32% 28% 16% 8% 0% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 14% 30% 32% 14% 9% 1% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 13% 24% 33% 12% 13% 5% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 17% 27% 35% 12% 7% 2% 0%
Blue Collar 139 21% 20% 36% 12% 10% 0% 1%
Students 51 23% 41% 19% 17% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 20% 16% 23% 19% 11% 10% 1%
Homemaker 63 28% 28% 16% 18% 6% 4% 0%
Not employed 16 20% 15% 34% 11% 16% 4% 0%
Self employed 35 13% 29% 21% 20% 15% 2% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 20% 28% 28% 16% 4% 4% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 25% 22% 25% 17% 9% 2% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 20% 32% 19% 14% 15% 0% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 19% 31% 38% 6% 4% 1% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 19% 26% 25% 18% 10% 2% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 10% 21% 41% 17% 11% 0% 0%
More than $70,000 69 22% 25% 20% 20% 12% 1% 0%
Non-Māori 691 18% 26% 28% 16% 9% 3% 0%
Māori 300 30% 20% 26% 13% 9% 2% 0%
Māori - Male 150 31% 18% 23% 15% 12% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 29% 21% 30% 11% 6% 3% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 20% 29% 28% 14% 6% 3% 0%
Total not interested 256 16% 21% 29% 17% 15% 2% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 20% 21% 29% 17% 11% 2% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 19% 29% 27% 14% 8% 3% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 17% 27% 30% 16% 7% 3% 0%
No/Unsure 366 21% 25% 25% 15% 11% 3% 0%
UMR Research 140
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - ASSISTANCE TO IMPROVE TRADE
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Assistance to improve trade
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 15% 29% 34% 15% 6% 1% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 12% 28% 39% 17% 3% 1% 0%
Provincial 364 18% 28% 29% 15% 8% 2% 0%
Christchurch 95 11% 37% 38% 11% 0% 2% 1%
Wellington 83 16% 26% 37% 15% 5% 1% 0%
SEX
Male 359 16% 25% 36% 16% 6% 1% 0%
Female 391 14% 33% 31% 14% 5% 2% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 13% 33% 35% 16% 3% 0% 0%
30-44 242 10% 30% 36% 17% 5% 1% 1%
45-59 179 18% 29% 31% 13% 8% 1% 0%
60 Plus 166 21% 24% 32% 12% 7% 4% 0%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 10% 30% 38% 16% 4% 1% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 17% 21% 41% 15% 6% 0% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 5% 39% 48% 2% 6% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 16% 26% 38% 17% 3% 0% 0%
Blue Collar 139 15% 36% 29% 14% 6% 0% 0%
Students 51 15% 22% 27% 31% 5% 0% 0%
Retired 115 24% 19% 33% 11% 7% 6% 0%
Homemaker 63 13% 41% 24% 15% 5% 0% 2%
Not employed 16 25% 23% 13% 18% 6% 15% 0%
Self employed 35 16% 29% 32% 15% 8% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 20% 31% 25% 17% 3% 4% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 17% 24% 35% 19% 4% 1% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 14% 26% 37% 12% 9% 0% 2%
$30,001-40,000 111 11% 35% 31% 12% 10% 1% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 9% 30% 35% 20% 6% 0% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 11% 30% 44% 12% 3% 0% 0%
More than $70,000 69 18% 27% 37% 13% 5% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 15% 29% 34% 15% 5% 2% 0%
Māori 300 23% 26% 30% 15% 5% 1% 0%
Māori - Male 150 26% 23% 32% 13% 5% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 19% 29% 29% 16% 5% 1% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 14% 33% 34% 13% 4% 1% 1%
Total not interested 256 17% 22% 33% 18% 8% 2% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 20% 29% 28% 15% 7% 1% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 13% 28% 37% 15% 5% 2% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 14% 31% 34% 16% 4% 1% 0%
No/Unsure 366 16% 27% 33% 14% 8% 2% 0%
UMR Research 141
PRIORITIES FOR OVERSEAS AID - TERTIARY EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIPS
Hard choices often need to be made on how New Zealand overseas aid money is used. How important a priority
do you think the following options for providing overseas aid are? Please use a scale of 1 to 5 where 1
means the option is of very high priority and 5 means it is of very low priority.
Tertiary education scholarships
1 High 5 Low
Base priority 2 3 4 priority Unsure Depends
ALL 750 15% 23% 35% 17% 9% 1% 0%
AREA
Auckland 208 13% 24% 35% 21% 5% 1% 1%
Provincial 364 17% 23% 33% 14% 11% 2% 0%
Christchurch 95 13% 18% 44% 17% 7% 1% 0%
Wellington 83 18% 22% 33% 18% 8% 1% 0%
SEX
Male 359 17% 19% 35% 18% 10% 1% 0%
Female 391 14% 26% 35% 16% 7% 2% 0%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 15% 23% 37% 18% 7% 0% 0%
30-44 242 11% 21% 38% 18% 11% 1% 0%
45-59 179 14% 21% 35% 18% 11% 1% 0%
60 Plus 166 22% 26% 29% 12% 6% 4% 1%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 11% 25% 39% 20% 5% 0% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 9% 26% 35% 15% 15% 0% 0%
Professionals
Clerks 43 6% 22% 46% 17% 9% 0% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 17% 20% 28% 24% 9% 2% 0%
Blue Collar 139 17% 20% 37% 14% 12% 0% 0%
Students 51 26% 17% 29% 28% 0% 0% 0%
Retired 115 22% 24% 28% 11% 8% 6% 1%
Homemaker 63 13% 28% 38% 11% 8% 2% 0%
Not employed 16 15% 11% 28% 25% 17% 4% 0%
Self employed 35 15% 20% 36% 15% 14% 0% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 22% 22% 33% 15% 6% 2% 0%
$15,001-25,000 111 19% 20% 37% 14% 6% 4% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 19% 17% 32% 15% 17% 0% 0%
$30,001-40,000 111 10% 26% 34% 21% 8% 1% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 8% 25% 34% 18% 13% 2% 0%
$50,001-70,000 88 10% 28% 34% 21% 7% 0% 0%
More than $70,000 69 9% 20% 43% 16% 12% 0% 0%
Non-Māori 691 14% 23% 36% 17% 9% 1% 0%
Māori 300 27% 23% 28% 13% 8% 1% 0%
Māori - Male 150 29% 27% 22% 10% 11% 1% 0%
Māori - Female 150 24% 19% 33% 16% 6% 1% 1%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 16% 25% 35% 17% 6% 1% 0%
Total not interested 256 15% 18% 35% 16% 15% 1% 0%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 18% 25% 34% 14% 8% 1% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 14% 21% 36% 18% 10% 1% 0%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 16% 26% 35% 16% 6% 1% 0%
No/Unsure 366 15% 19% 35% 17% 12% 2% 0%
UMR Research 142
STATEMENT TESTING - NEW ZEALAND SHOULD NOT PROVIDE AID TO OVERSEAS COUNTRIES WITH POOR HUMAN RIGHTS
RECORDS
Using a 1 to 5 scale where 1 means you strongly agree and 5 you strongly disagree, how strongly do you
agree or disagree with the following statements.
New Zealand should not provide aid to overseas countries with poor human rights records
1 Strongly 5 Strongly
Base agree 2 3 4 disagree Unsure
ALL 750 14% 14% 27% 24% 19% 2%
AREA
Auckland 208 11% 17% 27% 25% 17% 3%
Provincial 364 16% 13% 26% 23% 20% 2%
Christchurch 95 16% 16% 22% 24% 20% 2%
Wellington 83 10% 14% 35% 26% 14% 1%
SEX
Male 359 17% 17% 27% 20% 18% 1%
Female 391 12% 12% 27% 28% 19% 2%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 8% 10% 27% 31% 24% 0%
30-44 242 11% 17% 29% 24% 18% 1%
45-59 179 21% 13% 24% 23% 17% 2%
60 Plus 166 18% 17% 27% 19% 15% 4%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 13% 14% 27% 28% 17% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 12% 10% 28% 34% 14% 2%
Professionals
Clerks 43 12% 12% 36% 21% 19% 0%
Sales and service workers 55 6% 17% 23% 27% 24% 3%
Blue Collar 139 16% 17% 23% 20% 23% 1%
Students 51 7% 8% 22% 34% 29% 0%
Retired 115 18% 19% 24% 22% 14% 3%
Homemaker 63 16% 12% 33% 19% 16% 4%
Not employed 16 32% 4% 27% 5% 23% 9%
Self employed 35 16% 16% 46% 12% 10% 0%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 16% 11% 29% 23% 19% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 11% 16% 32% 19% 21% 1%
$25,001-30,000 75 10% 11% 24% 31% 23% 1%
$30,001-40,000 111 12% 13% 24% 23% 28% 0%
$40,001-50,000 79 15% 17% 29% 23% 14% 2%
$50,001-70,000 88 14% 20% 26% 28% 12% 0%
More than $70,000 69 19% 15% 25% 28% 11% 2%
Non-Māori 691 14% 15% 27% 24% 18% 2%
Māori 300 19% 15% 24% 20% 19% 3%
Māori - Male 150 25% 17% 22% 19% 16% 1%
Māori - Female 150 14% 12% 26% 22% 23% 3%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 12% 14% 25% 27% 20% 2%
Total not interested 256 18% 15% 30% 19% 16% 2%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 13% 14% 30% 24% 17% 2%
Not that much + Hardly 493 15% 14% 26% 24% 19% 2%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 11% 14% 27% 28% 19% 1%
No/Unsure 366 17% 16% 27% 20% 18% 2%
UMR Research 143
SHOULD NEW ZEALAND GOVERNMENT MEET THE OVERSEAS AID TARGET OF 0.7% GNI
The OECD recommends each Government provide 0.7% of their country's GNI for overseas aid. GNI is the value
of all the goods and services in the economy. Do you think the New Zealand Government should meet this
target?
Base Yes No Unsure Depends
ALL 750 61% 25% 10% 4%
AREA
Auckland 208 62% 26% 8% 4%
Provincial 364 57% 29% 9% 5%
Christchurch 95 68% 17% 11% 4%
Wellington 83 66% 17% 13% 4%
SEX
Male 359 61% 29% 5% 5%
Female 391 60% 22% 14% 4%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 75% 17% 5% 3%
30-44 242 62% 23% 10% 5%
45-59 179 55% 31% 9% 5%
60 Plus 166 52% 30% 14% 4%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 68% 18% 12% 2%
Technicians, Associate 80 64% 24% 8% 4%
Professionals
Clerks 43 59% 27% 8% 6%
Sales and service workers 55 65% 24% 9% 2%
Blue Collar 139 54% 35% 5% 6%
Students 51 77% 12% 11% 0%
Retired 115 50% 32% 13% 5%
Homemaker 63 59% 20% 11% 10%
Not employed 16 69% 6% 11% 14%
Self employed 35 46% 40% 11% 3%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 57% 24% 14% 5%
$15,001-25,000 111 64% 21% 11% 4%
$25,001-30,000 75 67% 19% 11% 3%
$30,001-40,000 111 62% 24% 8% 6%
$40,001-50,000 79 62% 22% 12% 4%
$50,001-70,000 88 64% 30% 2% 4%
More than $70,000 69 60% 34% 4% 2%
Non-Māori 691 61% 25% 9% 5%
Māori 300 57% 28% 10% 5%
Māori - Male 150 61% 29% 7% 3%
Māori - Female 150 54% 26% 14% 6%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 67% 20% 9% 4%
Total not interested 256 47% 36% 12% 5%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 62% 27% 8% 3%
Not that much + Hardly 493 60% 24% 11% 5%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 63% 23% 10% 4%
No/Unsure 366 58% 28% 10% 4%
UMR Research 144
SUPPORT OR OPPOSE NEW ZEALAND REACHING OECD TARGET
Let me give you a little background. The amount the New Zealand Government currently spends on overseas
aid is 0.23% of our Gross National Income. That comes to around $300 million. The Government has made a
commitment to reach the 0.7% Target by 2015. Some European countries have met or exceeded this target. If
New Zealand were to meet this target by annual increases, would you support or oppose this?
Neither
support or
Base Support Oppose Unsure Depends oppose
ALL 750 59% 29% 5% 6% 1%
AREA
Auckland 208 61% 31% 4% 3% 1%
Provincial 364 54% 31% 6% 7% 2%
Christchurch 95 65% 26% 3% 5% 1%
Wellington 83 68% 20% 3% 6% 3%
SEX
Male 359 62% 30% 3% 4% 1%
Female 391 56% 29% 7% 7% 1%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 71% 20% 4% 5% 0%
30-44 242 61% 27% 5% 5% 2%
45-59 179 52% 37% 4% 5% 2%
60 Plus 166 52% 34% 6% 7% 1%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 65% 26% 4% 5% 0%
Technicians, Associate 80 64% 30% 2% 3% 1%
Professionals
Clerks 43 56% 39% 0% 2% 3%
Sales and service workers 55 60% 23% 7% 6% 4%
Blue Collar 139 53% 37% 2% 6% 2%
Students 51 79% 5% 7% 9% 0%
Retired 115 53% 37% 5% 5% 0%
Homemaker 63 53% 23% 11% 13% 0%
Not employed 16 51% 32% 13% 4% 0%
Self employed 35 53% 32% 6% 0% 9%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 61% 27% 7% 3% 2%
$15,001-25,000 111 70% 22% 4% 4% 0%
$25,001-30,000 75 56% 34% 3% 4% 3%
$30,001-40,000 111 60% 31% 4% 3% 2%
$40,001-50,000 79 65% 24% 4% 6% 1%
$50,001-70,000 88 61% 34% 0% 4% 1%
More than $70,000 69 59% 31% 3% 6% 1%
Non-Māori 691 60% 29% 4% 5% 2%
Māori 300 55% 35% 7% 3% 0%
Māori - Male 150 55% 36% 5% 3% 1%
Māori - Female 150 54% 35% 8% 3% 0%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 68% 21% 4% 6% 1%
Total not interested 256 43% 45% 5% 5% 2%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 58% 33% 4% 4% 1%
Not that much + Hardly 493 60% 28% 5% 6% 1%
anything
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Yes 384 66% 22% 4% 6% 2%
No/Unsure 366 51% 37% 5% 6% 1%
UMR Research 145
PERSONALLY MADE DONATION
Have you personally made a donation to an overseas aid organisation in the last year or so?
Base Yes No Unsure
ALL 750 51% 46% 3%
AREA
Auckland 208 50% 48% 2%
Provincial 364 50% 47% 3%
Christchurch 95 59% 40% 1%
Wellington 83 50% 47% 3%
SEX
Male 359 49% 49% 2%
Female 391 53% 44% 3%
AGE GROUP
Under 30 163 38% 59% 3%
30-44 242 49% 49% 2%
45-59 179 59% 40% 1%
60 Plus 166 59% 36% 5%
OCCUPATION
Professionals, Managers 153 63% 36% 1%
Technicians, Associate 80 55% 42% 3%
Professionals
Clerks 43 41% 52% 7%
Sales and service workers 55 41% 59% 0%
Blue Collar 139 47% 51% 2%
Students 51 33% 61% 6%
Retired 115 61% 36% 3%
Homemaker 63 45% 50% 5%
Not employed 16 28% 72% 0%
Self employed 35 50% 47% 3%
PERSONAL INCOME
Less than $15,000 126 44% 53% 3%
$15,001-25,000 111 47% 50% 3%
$25,001-30,000 75 44% 52% 4%
$30,001-40,000 111 51% 48% 1%
$40,001-50,000 79 56% 41% 3%
$50,001-70,000 88 57% 42% 1%
More than $70,000 69 60% 39% 1%
Non-Māori 691 52% 45% 3%
Māori 300 46% 51% 3%
Māori - Male 150 42% 55% 3%
Māori - Female 150 51% 47% 2%
INTEREST IN OVERSEAS AID
Total interested 490 59% 39% 2%
Total not interested 256 36% 61% 3%
KNOWLEDGE OF OVERSEAS AID
A lot + A fair amount 255 61% 39% 0%
Not that much + Hardly 493 46% 50% 4%
anything
UMR Research 146
Appendix 3:
Detailed Methodology
UMR Research Limited 147
Detailed Methodology
The sample
All interviews are conducted from UMR's centralised 35-line CATI phone bank and national interview
facility in Auckland. The sample universe is the New Zealand population aged 18 years old and over
living in private households with telephones.
The sample universe is stratified into 23 telephone directory regions. The number of residential
addresses in each of these regions is determined and a quota is then specified as to the proportion of
the sample that must fall in each region.
The following table shows the percentage of respondents for each area and the number of respondents
to be surveyed in each area for the proposed sample of 750 respondents.
STRATIFIED SAMPLE BY TELEPHONE REGION
% 750
01 Auckland 1 4.2% 31
02 Auckland 2 4.6% 35
03 Auckland 3 5.3% 40
04 Auckland 4 5.4% 40
05 Auckland 5 4.6% 35
06 Auckland 6 3.6% 27
07 BOP 6.7% 50
08 Christchurch 12.7% 95
09 Gisborne 1.1% 8
10 Hawkes Bay 4.2% 32
11 Manawatu 4.0% 30
12 Marlborough 1.2% 9
13 Nelson & Bays 2.4% 18
14 Northland 3.3% 24
15 Otago 5.2% 39
16 Southland 3.1% 24
17 Taranaki 3.0% 22
18 Timaru & Oamaru 2.5% 19
19 Waikato 7.9% 59
20 Wairarapa 1.3% 10
21 Wanganui 1.9% 14
22 Wellington 11.0% 82
23 West Coast 0.9% 7
Total 100.0% 750
UMR Research 148
Call-backs and calling times
Up to five call-backs are made to initially selected respondents to ensure that non-response has a
minimal impact on the representativeness of the sample. Appointments are made to ring back
respondents if the time they are first contacted is not convenient.
Respondents are called from 5.30pm to 9.00pm during the week, from 9.30am to 6.00pm on Saturday
and from 9.30am to 9.00pm on Sunday.
The telephone sampling scheme
A random sample of telephone numbers is generated from all number ranges found in Telecom’s White
Pages for New Zealand.
Random digit dialling is conducted off this sample so that unlisted numbers are captured in the sample.
To limit the sample frame to “private households with telephones” the following types of telephone
numbers are filtered out from the sample:
- Telecom Yellow Pages
- Disconnected or fax lines
- Where the interviewer determines that contact is not a private household / business lines.
Data quality
CATI telephone interviewing provides a powerful medium to obtain quality, accurate data. The
Quancept CATI system used at UMR has many features designed to aid in the capture of quality data.
Quancept CATI data processing:
- Quotas are automatically totalled as the survey proceeds, and as each quota is fulfilled, the
interviewer is automatically guided to the appropriate course of action.
- Any answer is checked that it is the right type. For example, a multiple response answer
cannot be entered for a single-coded question.
- All numeric answers are checked that they lie within their acceptable range. Each question can
have its own acceptable range, or multiple acceptable ranges can be allowed for one question.
- As answers are entered, the text corresponding to them is highlighted to give the interviewer a
visual confirmation of what he/she has entered.
- Optionally, the interviewer can be required to reconfirm the correctness of each entered
answer, before going on to the next question. Alternatively, this can be done for only certain
specified questions, so that the interviewer need reconfirm the answers only considered
‘critical’.
UMR Research 149
- Within a multi-coded question, any number of responses can be specified as ‘Must be single
coded’, and these responses will only be accepted if not in combination with anything else.
- Special facilities are provided for validating the correctness of date (or data and time) answers.
The interviewer has wide flexibility in how the answer is entered, and the system will check for
correctness and completeness.
- All answers are checked logically against each other. In case of inconsistency, the questions
will be re-asked. The script can make logical checks of any complexity.
- Answers can be checked for arithmetic correctness. It is very easy to check, say, that no part
is greater than the whole, or that several answers total to a previously given answer.
- The interviewer can, at the end of an interview or at any time during the interview, step through
(all or part of) the interview from the beginning, checking the correctness of answers. Answers
can be changed but this facility can be disallowed on a per-survey or per-interviewer basis.
- Whenever an interviewer changes any previous answer, a complete ‘consistency check’ is
done on the entire interview. If the change causes new or different routing, the questions on
the new branch are asked, while questions on routes that are no longer taken are marked ‘off-
path’. Unless specifically requested ‘off-path’ variables are not written to the final data file.
- If, by changing an answer the interviewer has changed the quota cell for a respondent, then all
of the necessary corrections are made within the quota system, and the action is taken based
on the fullness of the newly defined cell.
Along with the internal checking and editing automatically conducted by the CATI system, interviews
are randomly monitored, viewed, and listened to by authorised supervisors.
Quancept CATI interviewer monitoring:
- ‘Overview’ monitoring can be done showing all interviewers on the system or only those on a
given project.
- ‘Overview’ monitoring shows the up-to-the second status of each interviewer.
- For each interviewer, you can see how long he/she has been in that interview, in that section,
and in that question. Thus the supervisor can quickly identify situations in which an interviewer
may be having a problem.
UMR Research 150
