Statistics are shown for this demographic
Māori electorate
Electorate
Response rates from 5.5k Hutt city voters.
46% Yes |
54% No |
23% Yes |
53% No |
16% Yes, but only by court order |
1% No, and enact legislation preventing government surveillance of citizen communications |
3% Yes, this is necessary to combat terrorism |
|
3% Yes, but only for those with criminal backgrounds |
Trend of support over time for each answer from 5.5k Hutt city voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Trend of how important this issue is for 5.5k Hutt city voters.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Unique answers from Hutt city voters whose views went beyond the provided options.
@9HK9YD6 12mos12MO
The legs seats if reelected candidate for united COVID with Boris Johnson and former US president Donald Trump hoping leaders independent contractor
@9DFDNRX1yr1Y
No they shouldnt but they do
@9DD5BB21yr1Y
Yes, but only if the person poses a potential risk of endangering people
@9DD4FMP1yr1Y
Yes and they and our Five Eyers partners already do
@9D93TBL1yr1Y
Yes but only for organised crime and terrorism
@9D8WTQJ1yr1Y
Only by court order and the subject should be informed that they were surveilled and why once the operation is over. That decision should then be open to challenge with the opportunity to have records deleted.
@9D63XH51yr1Y
Only for persons of interest who may be involved or interested in terrorism etc, not everyday people as this is controlling and breaches privacy which we are entitled to.
@9D4TSBV1yr1Y
Yes but only if they are a person of interest for terror or criminal reasons, and a legal search warrant has been obtained. General, anonymized screening for problem words like "bomb" should be allowed, e.g. monitored by AI, and it it comes up x no. of times, maybe with other red flags a human can be flagged to assess and then alert the police (if threat seems imminent) or set the search warrant request in train.
