# FILE NAME: 00000549.soc
# TITLE: Are people who hold high political office and have a significant influence on public life ethically required to disclose details about their family wealth? [cdf06bd0427fba4b9e3e7618b2583a15]
# DESCRIPTION: 
# DATA TYPE: soc
# MODIFICATION TYPE: original
# RELATES TO: 
# RELATED FILES: 
# PUBLICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# MODIFICATION DATE: 2025-10-12
# NUMBER ALTERNATIVES: 4
# NUMBER VOTERS: 5
# NUMBER UNIQUE ORDERS: 4
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 1: Statement 1 - In general, the group was in favour of disclosure. However, one person expressed concern that in asking such a question there is an assumption that having more money or a large amount of family wealth is negative. However, the other participants were not of this view. It was felt that if people in positions of power have family wealth, this can give rise to conflicts of interest, and if people are to have trust in the decisions of people in power, there is an ethical requirement for them to disclose details of their family wealth.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 2: Statement 2 - There should be some form of disclosure, as those in high office and public life should be role models to the rest of the population.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 3: Statement 3 - People in high political office should disclose details about their family wealth. People in such powerful positions should be more open and willing to disclose information. The information disclosed is sensitive and confidential, and should only be seen by individuals with a need to know.
# ALTERNATIVE NAME 4: Statement 4 - People in high political office should not be expected to disclose their family wealth. This is because most people will earn their wealth through hard work and graft, and there will always be people who earn more and have more than others in society. No matter what their political views are, it would be unfair to ask someone to disclose information which can be seen as personal and confidential. The groups decision on this topic was driven by both a general view of morality, and also their desire to not be judgemental on the basis of income, which was seen as a very personal and private matter. The group was split at first on whether or not to disclose this information, but after some debate, it was decided that it was unnecessary.
2: 4,1,3,2
1: 4,2,1,3
1: 1,2,3,4
1: 1,2,4,3