2023 New Zealand general election (14 October)

[Pericles]

I should get around to creating this thread.

So, New Zealand will be holding a general election in exactly 5 months time. This is conducted under the MMP electoral system. This is (currently) set up to the battle of the Chrises-Prime Minister Chris Hipkins as Labour leader vs Christopher Luxon as National Party leader. Unlike the last election, this is looking very competitive. The potential governing parties on the left are Labour, the Greens, and the Maori Party  (Luxon ruled out working with them too), against National and ACT on the right. NZ First, still led by Winston Peters, can be counted as part of the right this time because he ruled out backing Labour, but it is unlikely that they get any seats.

The economy is being rated as the most important issue this year. Like many countries, in the aftermath of Covid we face high inflation (around 7%), high interest rates and a potential recession. Extreme weather events like Cyclone Gabrielle this year might raise the salience of climate change. Race relations have also become more divisive, with Labour's Three Water Reforms and new Maori Health Authority leading to an angry backlash against 'co-governance' and 'separatism'.

[Pericles]

Is anything of the increased visibility of Moari issues a result of what's going on in Australia?

It started to surge up the agenda back in 2021, National and ACT were attacking Labour during Judith Collins' leadership too, and Three Waters just kept getting more controversial as Nanaia Mahuta struggled to sell it. Honestly, I haven't seen the NZ media talking about The Voice at all.

[Pericles]

It started to surge up the agenda back in 2021, National and ACT were attacking Labour during Judith Collins' leadership too, and Three Waters just kept getting more controversial as Nanaia Mahuta struggled to sell it.

Is the government Māori policies something Labour strongly support themselves or have they sort of wandered into it?

The policies like the 'co-governance' (not quite that simple tbh) in Three Waters and the Maori Health Authority were consciously chosen by them. Three Waters was just a water infrastructure reform that should have been boring but was sold poorly. Part of it in 2021 was the leaked He Puapua report, which was not government policy but the government in 2019 had chosen not to release it to the public.

[Pericles]

Latest 1 News Poll gives narrow lead to National and ACT;

NZ First and the other parties would not be elected, but the Maori Party would be.



Not a good news story for Labour like the previous polls, but it shows it would be foolish to write off either major party. The budget didn't seem to affect the poll numbers, my assessment was that it would have been marginally helpful but it was a pretty minor budget (arguably by design given the inflationary economic context-and on the bright side the Reserve Bank signalled that interest rates will soon peak).

[Pericles]

With 100 days to the election having passed (an Americanism that is now a thing in NZ politics), we saw a bunch of election prediction articles. While it isn't news, I thought Atlas would appreciate seeing that the right-wing pundits here are 'high on hopium'. This is in the context of the public polls being as close as they can be between the blocs. Admittedly, there hasn't been a poll in a few weeks. Since then, Labour had a horror month with one minister being fired and another suffering controversy (so Hipkins has lost three ministers so far and suffered more cabinet controversies, though he handled them well), and the economy slipped into a recession. Also, which got less media coverage but would have been most important to voters, the 25% petrol tax cut passed last year was allowed to expire at the end of June.

Stuff's right-wing pundit, Damien Grant, predicted that "Labour can fall below 30% and there is every reason to think it will; and the opinion polls will be a factor in their decline." While he brought up some issues that have hurt the government, he seemed more concerned about his own opinion with them than the public's. Other reasons were voter fears about the Greens and the Maori Party (the former is not a factor imo and the latter is unlikely to be as effective against an incumbent majority government than it was in the 2015 UK example that inspires these attacks), and the idea that "If it begins to look like a change of government, a small number of swing voters may decide it is better to give Luxon a few extra seats to dilute ACT’s negotiating power" (something that imo there is no evidence of happening in the past and I can't see it being a thing). Saying in the same article that he wants heroin to be sold in dairies does go against his credibility as someone who is in touch with public opinion.

Newstalk ZB radio host Mike Hosking has had a profile as a vocal right-winger for years, so it's no surprise that he would make a bold prediction. Perhaps he should have been less bold after predicting that the 2020 election would be close. Unfortunately his article is pay-walled, but the basic point was running through cliches about polls being inaccurate (ignoring that predicting the direction of the error is hard), and then predicted "National 38-42 per cent; Act 12-15 per cent, an easy election-night victory; Labour 29-32 per cent; Greens 6-7 per cent." Around a 53% vote for National and ACT would be very difficult for them to achieve, given that those two parties never even quite got 50% in the John Key years.

A more serious prediction was offered by Jacinda antagonist and pundit Barry Soper, that there would be a change of government. His basic point is that since most people feel the country is headed in the wrong direction (this is backed up by polls, and unlike in the US it is not the public's default position), they will vote for change. I'm not sure if politics is really on people's minds that much though, anecdotally it feels like there is less engagement than in 2017 and 2020. All the pundits on that panel agreed with the prediction, so I guess that shows what 'the narrative' is.

If Labour wins, it would be an upset to the conventional wisdom at this point and it would be almost worth it on its own for the right-wing meltdown it would produce.

[Pericles]

Since right tends to outperform polls by a point or two, I would say Luxon is favourite but close enough Labour could hold in but definitely underdogs.  At same time seems Luxon has some fairly controversial policies which would probably fly in US, but in Canada where I live would be political suicide so wondering how open New Zealand is to a more small government approach?  It strikes me as less conservative than US & Australia, while similar to UK and more conservative than Canada.  Would that be accurate?

With the first point, polling errors can happen either way (and perhaps it is likely because NZ has so few public polls). NZ doesn't have a pattern of polling errors favoring one bloc, though with minor parties there are slightly stronger patterns-National was underestimated in 2014, the polls were very accurate in 2017, and Labour was underestimated in 2020.

Can you explain which of Luxon's policies you are thinking about? As a general observation his image is more conservative than previous National Party PMs.

[Pericles]

Since right tends to outperform polls by a point or two, I would say Luxon is favourite but close enough Labour could hold in but definitely underdogs.  At same time seems Luxon has some fairly controversial policies which would probably fly in US, but in Canada where I live would be political suicide so wondering how open New Zealand is to a more small government approach?  It strikes me as less conservative than US & Australia, while similar to UK and more conservative than Canada.  Would that be accurate?

With the first point, polling errors can happen either way (and perhaps it is likely because NZ has so few public polls). NZ doesn't have a pattern of polling errors favoring one bloc, though with minor parties there are slightly stronger patterns-National was underestimated in 2014, the polls were very accurate in 2017, and Labour was underestimated in 2020.

Can you explain which of Luxon's policies you are thinking about? As a general observation his image is more conservative than previous National Party PMs.

I am thinking raising retirement age which is smart economically but I don't think is very popular although I doubt you would see riots in streets like you did in France.  Doesn't he also want to raise fees on prescription drugs?  I think he backed off but initially wanted to scrap the top tax rate of 39% and considering that is already on low side not sure big tax cut for rich an easy sell.  If as high as Canada or some European countries where high 40s or over 50% might be easier but it is not.

Raising the retirement age became National's policy under Bill English, while they did lose that election the public don't seem to have cared about that policy much.

Yes he did want to reduce the top rate to 33%, but is no longer proposing this. Their current policy of adjusting tax brackets for inflation is not so easy to attack-but it has been attacked for only giving low income earners $2 a week while people like Luxon get hundreds each week. National's economic policy is generally to reverse most of the changes Labour has made since 2017. This even includes popular policies like the repeal of a tax loophole for property investors, and allowing no-cause evictions of renters. In terms of economic policy, New Zealand tends to lean a bit more to the right than other developed countries though.

The prescriptions fee was repealed in this year's budget, and National promised to restore it before it even officially ended.

[Pericles]

What sort of people does ACT attract now that the disastrous National leadership that helped them in 2020 isn't a factor anymore? Are they typically considered more moderate or more right-wing than the Nats?

I'd expect ACT voters are the more right-wing ones in the National base. It is making inroads with the rural vote and got the Federated Farmers President to stand as an ACT candidate, and it is making a serious play for a second electorate seat in the Tamaki electorate (a wealthy National base seat). They are also picking up on some of the role of NZ First by going hard on the tough on crime, 'Kiwi vs iwi' populism. I do think there will be a noticeable group of Labour-ACT voters though because of how much vote share Labour is losing from the 2020 election.

[Pericles]

Perhaps the collapse is coming after all? Labour's internal pollster Talbot Mills has just released a new poll which is that pollster's worst poll for the left since 2017-

National-36% (+1%)
Labour-31% (-5%)
ACT-12% (+1%)
Green-8% (+1%)
Maori-4%

National + ACT-48%
Labour + Green + Maori-43%

Preferred Prime Minister:
Hipkins-32% (-6%)
Luxon-21% (-1%)

If more polls confirm this, it could mean the election is now slipping away from Labour. The worry as I was saying is that there has been a gap between views on the direction of the country/approval of the government and the party vote numbers. On the other hand, this is just one poll. While this pollster is relatively favourable to Labour, a 5-point deficit and a double-digit preferred PM lead suggests the election is still totally winnable. National's result wasn't amazing here after all.

[Pericles]

Is there any chance of Winnie Peters coming back?

It's possible, NZ First were at 4% in that poll and are averaging around 3%. I haven't heard much about them recently though, ACT is overshadowing them.

[Pericles]

Labour can really be pathetic sometimes.

Hipkins boasts about killing CGT and wealth tax in 2023 budget, rules them out permanently

Eventually, in 2023, the Government seized on the idea of a “tax switch”, slapping on a wealth tax of up to $10.6 billion over the four-year forecast period in order to fund income tax cuts. The wealth tax would have levied a 1.5 per cent tax on wealth over $5 million.

These income tax cuts would have been delivered by a tax-free threshold, which would have meant people paying no tax on the first $7000 to $10,000 of their income. A tax-free threshold of $10,000 would have saved anyone earning above that threshold $1,050 in tax.

Someone would need to earn more than $100,000 under National’s current tax policy to save the same amount of money.

[Pericles]

Perhaps the collapse is coming after all?

Maybe I spoke too soon-the new Taxpayers Union (a right-wing pollster clearly) shows the blocs tied. That's actually a shift to the left from their previous poll.

Party vote comes to 33% National, 31% Labour, 13% ACT, 9% Green, and 5% Maori Party (that last one is a shocker).


As I mentioned, the direction of country numbers have been bad for a while and this poll has a very large gap with 64.5% saying the country is heading in the wrong direction, 42% ahead of 'right direction'.

Apparently the preferred Prime Minister numbers are Hipkins 23% and Luxon 20%, but this must only be in the full report given to subscribers.

It's such a random result. Maybe it's a rogue poll? Going just by the topline, that makes Labour's own pollsters stick out as the pro-National outlier though. So things remains unclear.

[Pericles]

Is there no chance of the Maori Party backing a Nat-ACT government?

IIRC they supported Key.

They are coming across as a lot more radical this time and Luxon is in no position to reach out to them. It was never happening so Luxon ruled them out to try and make them a liability for Labour (even using the 'Coalition of Chaos' phrase), we'll see if that cuts through.

[Pericles]

The latest 1News poll had an underwhelming lead for National, with 61 seats for the right-wing bloc to 59 for the left-wing bloc. This was taken in late June, a bad news period for Labour. So far the election remains very close.

[Pericles]

Devastating news came in for Labour this morning, as the (now former) Justice Minister Kiri Allan was arrested for reckless driving and resisting arrest, as well as being over the alcohol limit. She was already under fire for her treatment of staff, and clearly has been dealing with some mental health issues. It's a real shame-she looked like one of the more talented and likable ministers. For Labour, that means four ministers are gone since Hipkins became PM just a few months ago-three forced to resign due to scandal and one who defected.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300934025/kiri-allan-resigns-as-minister-charged-with-reckless-driving-and-resisting-arrest

[Pericles]

Not a factor for their election chances, but this is some interesting news about ACT-Roger Douglas attacks ACT as "representing only the wealthy"

This is pretty surprising. For some context, Douglas was one of the founders of ACT. What he is most famous for is his time as Finance Minister from 1984-1988 under David Lange's Labour government. He was probably more consequential than any politician since, and completely overhauled the New Zealand economy from a virtually command and control interventionist economy to a highly deregulated neoliberal economy. This attack is ironic because it's hard to find a New Zealander who did more to increase inequality. Still, I like to see it.

ACT indeed has increasingly just been pandering to the top 10% of society. It even opposes National's policy of adjusting tax brackets for inflation, not to save money but because it preserves the progressive tax system.

[Pericles]

In the event that Labour loses, will Chippie stay on and if not, who would replace him?

The odd thing about the recent cabinet scandals is that they took out the two most viable alternative leaders-Michael Wood and Kiri Allan. Wood though was not permanently damaged, but it might take a few years for him to recover politically. He is seen as being on the left of the party. A candidate like him could win Labour's electoral college system while losing the caucus, but the recent rule change that lets 2/3rds of caucus elect a leader without the membership makes that harder. Grant Robertson would be the obvious choice for leader, but he already declined it and it looks like he'll leave politics if Labour loses (since he gave up his electorate seat which means he can leave without a by-election).

There are some newer faces who could be leaders in the future-Kieran McAnulty has the 'Kiwi bloke' charisma and new Police Minister Ginny Andersen looks capable. I doubt they're ready right now though, or would even want to lead a first-term Opposition. If Labour loses they have at least 20 fewer MPs and this could change things too.

If he wants it, he could probaby keep the leadership for quite a while rather than being immediately forced out. Even Bill English though, who got the most votes and seats, did not stay on as leader to the next general election though. It's also possible Hipkins will quit politics after losing.

In any case, no government has lost re-election after one term since the Third Labour Government in 1975. If the economy does improve, then it will be even tougher for Labour to overcome the contrast on an issue they already struggle with.

[Pericles]

Just when Labour were looking like they knocked out, National leaked and went hard against a very popular Labour policy. For context, what this means is Labour are going to cut the 15% tax on fruit and vegetables, which would clearly mean food prices get lower. Economists and National don't like it because it complicates the tax system, and National are trying to make the story about Labour disunity. What has actually happened though is this policy has gotten lots of attention now, as well as the attention it will get when Labour officially announces it. It shifted the conversation away from cabinet chaos to the 'bread and butter issues' Hipkins is campaigning on. This isn't the first time they have fallen into his trap, so that's why I think he might out-campaign them.

[Pericles]

The polls are going to start coming in regularly now so I might not post every one, but the latest Newshub poll has some interesting data. As expected, Labour has taken a big hit, and are now back to where they were when Jacinda Ardern was Prime Minister. The party vote is 37% National to 32% Labour. Adding on ACT that gets the right to 49% and 63 seats, 57 seats and 45% of the vote remain for the left with the Greens on 10% and the Maori Party on 3%. Worryingly NZ First is on 4%, close to the threshold, but if they do make a comeback maybe it's a good thing if they become the handbrake to what could otherwise be a National-ACT government.

The leadership numbers are the silver lining for Labour though. Hipkins holds an 8 point lead as preferred Prime Minister, and his margin has actually increased slightly. He is insulated from the cabinet drama, with the public overwhelmingly thinking he has handled it well. And even worse for National, Luxon continues to get more distrusted-with a -12% net trust rating while Hipkins has a +17% rating. Newshub's poll tends to make Luxon look more unpopular than other polls, but that rating is at least worth looking out for.

[Pericles]

Winston has declared that he will not work with Labour again. I think that is the most definitive he has ever been about which way he'll go. Still, if he decides it's in his own interest I think he can find a loophole in his promise (such as abstaining on confidence votes and seeing which bloc is larger on its own).

This is bad news for Labour's chances though. If NZ First is just under the 5% threshold, their votes are 'wasted' and so the left would be closer to the elected National and ACT bloc without any change in their own support. If NZ First gains two points from National and ACT, that means the margin between the left and right increases.

In that poll, National and ACT had a bare 61/120 majority anyway. It would be absolute humiliation for Labour to lose nearly half their vote share in a single election. To have such a right-wing government, Winston back and the left (even including TPM) only on 52 seats would be the worst possible outcome. I don't think Labour's chances are hopeless, but it would a big upset and relief if they even squeaked back in.

It would be a relief if it isn't just a two-way National and ACT coalition. I'd definitely rather have NZ First there to moderate National, rather than a large ACT caucus dragging Luxon further to the right.  Seymour even refused to work with Winston and is now putting out attack ads against him. Luxon keeps dodging the question on if he'll form a coalition with NZ First-a lot of right wingers think he can drive NZ First below the threshold by doing so, but it's not as simple as it was for John Key.

[Pericles]

Chris Hipkins: A wealth tax that polls with majority support? That's politically toxic.

Also Chris Hipkins: Announce a fuel tax hike 57 days from the election? Sure!

Government to hike fuel taxes by 12c a litre to fund transport projects

Baffling.

[Pericles]

Labour has gone on the attack against NZ First. Hipkins ruled out another coalition with them, and said they are "a party more interested in toilets than the issues that matter most to New Zealanders". He labelled the combination of National, ACT and NZ First as a "coalition of fear" that would alienate people's "sense of belonging".

Practically it makes no difference because NZ First already ruled out Labour. This also does not mean we have much of an idea about what the arrangements between the three parties would be if NZ First gets the balance of power. Politically though, Labour clearly need to run a negative campaign, and the alternative needs to be seen as too risky. The public by landslide margins think the country is heading in the wrong direction and so undefined 'change' wins.

[Pericles]

Labour has upped their game by promising to make dental care free-for under 30s only though. Dental care has been a major gap in the health care system and the high costs mean many people put it off. National meanwhile came out with tax cuts targeted at middle-income earners, marketed as being up to $250 a fortnight for couples with children. Their costings have looked sketchy though-in particular their plan to eliminate the ban on foreign housing buyers and replace it with a foreign buyer's tax. So far it is unclear what has gotten cut through with the public.

[Pericles]

Getting hard to keep up hope with just 36 days left.
The Post/Freshwater Strategy poll (new pollster)
National-36%
Labour-26%
Green-12%
ACT-11%
NZ First-6%
Maori-3%

NZ First holds balance of power (narrowly) so a three-party National government, while Labour loses almost half its 2020 vote. Somehow Hipkins was preferred PM in this poll, 45%-43% in the two way question (the article is paywalled).

Latest Talbot Mills poll (Labour's internal pollster)

National-36% (+1%)
Labour-30% (-2%)
Green-12% (+2%)
ACT-10% (-1%)
NZ First-5% (+1%)
Maori-2.4% (-1%)

Preferred PM: Hipkins 28% (-6%), Luxon 26% (+2%)

This has the same outcome, National-ACT-NZ First. Labour aren't even close, though whether NZ First crosses the threshold is still in question.

The field dates for these polls largely do not cover National's tax announcement, Labour's free dental announcement, or any fallout from National's dodgy costings. Still, it was looking like a really close election a few months ago and now the mood for change looks much stronger.

[Pericles]

If Nat+ACT<61 seats, but NAT+ACT+NZF>60 seats, what is the most likely governing permutation?

If ACT wont serve in cabinet with NZF, who will National bring into cabinet and leave on the crossbench?

National haven't given any hints. Luxon has been dodging the question of whether he'll work with NZ First, a lot of his base want him to rule them out but I doubt that's viable now.

National MPs loathe Peters so I think they'd prefer to go with ACT. It could depend on how coalition negotiations go, ACT are a much less cooperative minor party than the Greens. It's always hard to tell which 'bottom lines' are real and which aren't.

The Post's poll also polled support for different coalitions and not just party votes. National-ACT was at 47% to 40% for Labour-Greens. When NZ First was added to National-ACT they dipped a point to 46%, but when the Maori Party was added to Labour-Greens they fell to 35%. Unique question and unclear how salient it is for people's party votes, but interesting addition.