Colin Ambler/cvnznews.com
ACT Targets Foreign Aid Spending in Push for Fiscal Discipline
ACT New Zealand is turning its attention to overseas aid spending, arguing New Zealand taxpayers should not be funding projects abroad while the country grapples with debt and economic pressures at home.
In a strongly worded statement, ACT list candidate Paul Henry said New Zealand needs to reassess how much money is being sent offshore through Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) aid programmes.
“New Zealand is in the sh*t, can we seriously afford to be sending millions of dollars overseas for tripe like ‘climate-smart’ passionfruit?” Henry asked.
ACT says it would reduce foreign aid spending to 2017 levels, while continuing support for Ukraine. The party claims the move would save approximately $283 million per year.
Henry argued that while there are legitimate reasons for overseas aid, including supporting stability in the Pacific, maintaining trade relationships and responding to disasters, all spending should be subject to closer scrutiny.
The party highlighted a range of projects it considers questionable uses of taxpayer money, including funding for climate initiatives, agricultural development in Africa, renewable energy projects, leadership programmes and support for climate-smart agriculture in Vietnam.
Among the examples cited were $15 million to help developing countries prepare for the Paris climate agreement, $20.8 million for sustainable agriculture investment in Africa, and millions more for crop development and educational projects in Timor-Leste.
ACT argues that with government debt continuing to weigh on public finances, spending priorities should focus first on domestic needs.
Henry said New Zealand’s economy is too small to sustain what he described as wasteful expenditure overseas, warning future generations could be left carrying the burden of rising debt.
The comments signal ACT’s intention to make government spending and foreign aid a key election issue, framing the debate around whether taxpayer dollars are better spent addressing challenges at home or supporting development projects overseas.
The proposal is likely to spark debate, with supporters viewing it as fiscal responsibility and critics arguing that foreign aid advances New Zealand’s strategic interests and humanitarian commitments abroad.
