sign uplog in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

1 News-Colmar Brunton Poll: Support for Labour falls back a bit; ACT increasingly seen as a credible opposition 

1 News-Colmar Brunton Poll: Support for Labour falls back a bit; ACT increasingly seen as a credible opposition 

Labour has taken a slight knock, while the minor parties have received a little boost, in the latest 1 News-Colmar Brunton Poll. 

According to 1008 eligible voters polled between September 17 and 21, support for Labour was down 5 percentage points from the last poll conducted in late July. 

However with 48% support, Labour would still secure 62 seats - enough to govern on its own. 

Support for National inched back 1 percentage point to 31%, meanwhile momentum continued to build behind ACT, with support up 2 percentage points to 7%.

The Greens would scrape back into Parliament with 6%. NZ First would be out at 2%.

No minor party would hold a balance of power.

With 14% undecided, the race is still on. 13% of survey respondents were undecided according to a 1 News-Colmar Brunton poll done at a similar time before the 2017 election.

Jacinda Ardern remains comfortably ahead in the preferred prime minister ranks.

National made its temporary tax cut policy announcement at the beginning of the polling period. The $4 billion hole in its budget was discovered towards the end of the polling period. 

The poll was also conducted just after the better-than-expected, but still bad, June quarter GDP figures were published, as well as Treasury's Pre-Election Fiscal and Economic Update, which showed how lengthy the Covid recovery is expected to be. 

Preferred party:

  • Labour: 48% (-5% points)
  • National: 31% (-1% point)
  • ACT: 7% (+2% points)
  • Greens: 6% (+1% point)
  • NZ First: 2% (no change)
  • New Conservative: 2% (no change)
  • Maori Party: 1% (no change)
  • TOP: 1% (+1% point)
  • Advance NZ: 1% (+1% point)
  • Don't know/refused: 14%


  • Labour: 62
  • Greens: 8
  • National: 41
  • ACT: 9

Preferred prime minister:

  • Jacinda Ardern: 54% (no change)
  • Judith Collins: 18% (-2% points)
  • Winston Peters: 2% (+1% point)
  • David Seymour: 2% (+1% point)

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.



National has to be bleeding votes to ACT.

no need for the sweetheart deal this time , they should tell epsom national voters its ok to vote for there local candidate

Ironic really,ACT would be nowhere without the sweetheart deal all these they are seriously cannabilising the Nats voters.

The Nats can focus on the centre and try to take votes off NZ First and Labour. If national can win the votes they lost to labour back they will be sorted.

The trouble is their local candidate is Rangi Goldsmith,who apparently failed school C maths...

Goldsmiths CV;
Goldsmith attended Auckland Grammar School and the University of Auckland.[2] Goldsmith then worked as a press secretary and speech writer for Phil Goff (Labour), Simon Upton (National) and John Banks (then a National MP).[3] In 2000 Goldsmith became a public relations adviser and worked for Tranz Rail and the University of Auckland.[3]

Goldsmith graduated with an MA in history.[2] He has written the biographies of John Banks, Don Brash, William Gallagher, Alan Gibbs and Te Hemara Tauhia as well as a history of taxes, Puketutu Island and a history of the Fletcher Building construction company.[3]

That explains a rather low ability in arithmetic. My sympathy though, I am much the same.

And Gerry Brownlee showed why he started as a woodwork teacher and not a geography teacher in the weekend..


Aye but the axe rather than the lathe. Mr GB has some history to explain. The recent revelations of the conduct of EQC and Southern Response under his watch are unsavoury to say the least. And listening to a director of the Canterbury DHB it is clear that the dire situation that has emerged at the CDHB had its roots under his watch too. It is unusual to say the least for an MP to wilfully inflict such damage and hardship on the city of his own seat.

I have a (poor) degree in maths. Wish I had been bright enough to study History. I still read history but very rarely maths. History and politics is all about judgement.

National shouldn’t feel threatened by ACT though, they are the most obvious coalition party after all so their strength is to Nationals benefit.
If anything ACT are taking the empty ground on the right that National are leaving behind as they seemingly move further and further to the left.

Fanciful, perhaps, but I think ACT having more weight in parliament could be more useful for NZ if Labour and Greens are in government (than National). ACT could potentially be a more cooperative and engaged group than solely opposition for opposition's sake.

They don't seem to have enough to say on moving the economy beyond houses and high-level immigration, and they have issues of philosophical consistency, but their tax ideas are legitimately interesting and worth having at the table.

Go along with that. Expect a compact and energetic team. National in 2017 claimed as the largest party in Parliament they would form a formidable opposition. Instead they were cumbersome and blundered around, with a penchant for own goals. ACT can form a strike force, shorter communication lines, concise and ready reactive.

Although I have seen rumours online that Seymour is a little worried: he's not had other MPs to manage before, and some a couple of spaces down the list get a little strident and ideologically narrow / nutty...

Competent party strategists would see this as a chance to go for woke and try to take centre voters away from Ardern - at worst you'd bleed support to your coalition partner and the only place you could be taking them from is the party you have to beat. It's essentially risk-free, but I'm not sure Crusher has the cunning to stand up and promise benefit increases on the fly and then challenge Ardern to match it. The closer things get, the bolder each of them is going to have to be.

According to the poll not all the National votes are bleeding to ACT. I've never voted National and I'm switching to ACT based on Seymour's performance this term (even if he is a dork)


Noooo.... we will be off to hell in a hand-basket with Labour governing alone!


Where then would be off to if we have a Labour govt which needs Green support? To wokeville in a paper bag?

i dread greens holding the balance of power, they will push the light rail to the airport though mt roskill a colossal waste of money.
they want CGT with so many loopholes and it will not achieve anything but more work for accountants

there is one thing worse than an exclusive Labour Party government: a Labour Party Government in need of the support of the Greens

Auckland needs light rail, just not the huge monstrosity the airport-obsessed deal has become. The original, street-level design to relieve bus pressure and enable density on main corridors and in areas where there is no transport (Mangere/North West Auckland) was solid. The Superfund colossus is way overspecced and overpriced. The Greens are the voice of reason here, Twyford has screwed the pooch.

Don't forget the wealth tax. They have set the mark at $1m net worth. 1% of $1m is $10k a year. They call it the poverty tax i.e. let's make everyone poor.

Note this is tax on net worth so a lot of people in Auckland with unrealised gains on their family home will be caught. Greens could hold balance of power.

I saw Collins asked about ACT's tax policy last night. Was PM Ardern asked about the Greens?


Extremely disturbing watching the debate witnessing how out of touch the Saint is. For example, re dairy farmers "that feels to me like a world view from the past..."

Er dunno about anyone else but cows get milked now the same way they did 10,000 years ago in Mesopotamia. In other words, food production is what NZ always has and still does best.


Actually thought she nailed that.

I agree. Politics apart, Ardern appeared thoughtful and articulate. Collins just seemed rude and spoke in an excitable, fragmented manner. National needs to sort out its relationship with Act. It’s the tail wagging the dog, and has been for a long time now. I suspect it’s the vehicle they use to promote policies that are close to their world view, but a bit on the nose for middle NZ.

For someone so articulate she had a hard time actually answering the question she was being asked.

pie. ... Politics apart .......
Then what was the point?

# too funny

Mr Shaw leader of the Greens said on TV that NZ can look forward to a Labour/Greens government. Rather presumptuous that! For a start a lot of NZrs would view that with some alarm given the extreme left socialist utterance from the Greens of late. It looks beyond doubt that Labour will be returned and one would hope they proceed in government single handedly. The first problem is recent developments indicate the Greens have much pent up frustration ready to charge out of left field. The second problem is that Labour may be inclined to advance radical policy under the guise of coalition necessity as did the Clark/Cullen government by the vehicle of Jim Anderton.

To paraphrase a commenter from several weeks ago, this election has become about voting with the primary reason to keep Green out. NZs future depends on it.

Unless the poll numbers change drastically between now and election night thats certainly how i'll be voting. Party vote to Labour, some random for electorate, yes to the voluntary euthanasia bill, and probably not bother casting a vote for the reeferendum.


I am on the fence when it comes to choosing between Labour and National. But I would be delighted to see NZ First and the Greens both disappear from Parliament with these elections.

Well if you want Greens to disappear, you shoudl probably vote Labour and hope they get in on their own. You must be fairly unusual to not know between Nats and Labour. Good on your open mind.

Really??? Wouldn't it be better not to vote for Labour as the Nats would never entertain the Greens. The Greens are an extremists party that NZers should be very worried about. Unless Labour make a statement that they will not entertain a coalition with the Greens, better to vote for Act or Nat.

No. It is quite clear National & ACT will not be supported sufficiently to govern. That then means the lesser of two evils is Labour on its own. If the Greens get to hold any political sway over Labour at all, NZ will then be in deep trouble.

I think majority of NZ like you will agree that Greens are talking very dangerous policies. Why would we vote labour who are their natural coalition partners.

OK first you have to decide yourself that National are not going to regain power, even with a return to form by the ACT party. Therefore strategically If you vote Labour that might mean helping an outcome where they do not need to have the Green Party involved to form a government. Believe me this is weird. I swore I would never vote Labour again after the Clark/Cullen tax grab. But may have to revisit that. For example I voted NZF last time for the first time purely in the hope of avoiding a Labour/Greens government or a radical Labour government on their own. Things are no longer simple are they. Don’t think MMP has delivered what was hoped for.

Yes it's important that Labour are fully accountable for what happens over the next 3 years.
"under the guise of coalition necessity " - that's a good way of describing it.

Might have to tell bank they can milk the cows themselves.

Just imagine how high house prices will be if Jacinda is allowed to rule alone. Perhaps 3 million median in Auckland? She certainly knows how to stick it to the poor.

Labour is best thing that ever happened to our wealth and all those of everyone I know. Doesn't make me want to worship the Saint though.

Not willing to commit to a capital gains tax or hit up the truly wealthy, just grab a modest amount more from higher salary earners. Guess I'll be looking more closely at PIE funds once the equity markets are in a good state again.


Act - the party that wants to open up immigration flood gates and foreign house buying. As right wing as I am, no bloody thanks!


Labour's doing a cracker job of keeping house prices going up. No need for foreign buyers

I’m going to be petty and point out that Advance NZ should’ve been placed above TOP on the list above as they come first alphabetically. Advance NZ then Maori then TOP.

On that criteria, we will undoubtedly soon have a Aardvark Party.

The Aardvark Party would rightly be fuming if they got the same poll result as the Baboon Party but were placed lower on the list by Jenée.

One thing then, at least the ill fated Zebra party would not die wondering what caused their demise.


NZ First on 2%.
Pleasing to see. Clearly New Zealanders don’t like NZ First looking after their privileged mates such as in Racing and killing a CGT, nor acting as the fairy godmother prancing around the provinces sprinkling fairy dust on the basis of its their money - not the taxpayers - and how grateful and indebted to NZ First we should be, the arrogance and bullying tactics of both Winston and Jones to those who think differently, Winston being a Trump wannabe, and Jones’ continue use of flossy big words as an attempt to remind us of his privileged Harvard education.
And that’s just pointing out the good things about NZ First . . . :)

ACT is the only party that has a remotely sensible COVID19 strategy. I'm anti-neoliberal and even I'm thinking of voting for them. (edit) actually no there are no political parties in NZ that have the courage to adopt Sweden's approach.

I agree that ACT's COVID19 policy is only remotely sensible.

But even then ACT's policies aren't really that sensible. We should be opening the border, resuming tourism and business as usual ASAP so that we can minimise the economic damage. Do it NOW while the summer window of opportunity is upon us. Of course protect the elderly vulnerable, while strengthening hospitals ability to deal with severe cases. Stop with he hysterical fearmongering which is exemplified by daily case by case reporting, but be honest with the public about the risks and what we're trying to achieve which should be herd immunity. How many ICU beds could we have purchased for 1 million, 10 million, 100 million? If we'd spent 10 million on ICU beds then perhaps we could have avoided wasting 100 billion on futile endeavours.

Just chuck done coin-operated ICU beds in the empty Airbnb on the corner. Problem solved easy.

fat pat,

"of course protect the elderly vulnerable". Just who would you put in that category and how would you 'protect' them? At 75, but still capable of a full day's tramp, how would I fare under your policy?
Rod jackson, Professor of Epidemiology wrote an article in yesterday's Herald. The final sentence read; "This means that Covid-19 is at least 10 times more deadly than the flu". Can you give me a figure for how many additional deaths you would find acceptable?
I do understand the point you are making and I too am concerned about the long-term implications of unemployment and business failures, but a rush to 'get back to business as usual' will not work.

Hi Linklater. Well there are differing opinions on that, and my understanding from reading other epidemiologists is that it's not 10x flu. But hey, anyone can hand pick an epidemiologist that suits them. You know if it comes to a credential showdown then consider Professor Sunetra Gupta form Oxford.

COVID just doesn't seem that lethal. Take Sweden's 5000 deaths for example, a lot of that was displaced mortality, ie people that would have died that year anyway. You have to look at "excess deaths". That's a nice number because you cant fake it or overestimate it.

I'm sure we can do business as usual in a better way than Sweden. It's just the retirement villages that need to be firewalled. We know more now. There's encouraging evidence for instance coming out of Spain that vitamin D supplements can dramatically reduce ICU progression in hospitalized patients. See here or here

There are a real tangible number of deaths that will occur from depression, suicide induced by poor economic conditions. Not to mention the reduction in quality of life that's being baked into the cake, particularly if we buck the European and USA trend by staying locked down during the summer months. There has to be some balance.

glad to see jacinda rule out any CGT while she is leader of the labour party in tonights debate,

True but neither did she rule out not acquiescing to alternative tax policies demanded by the Greens.

yes that is why we dont want the greens in power in any way


CGT is seemingly unpopular but that is because the vocal and articulate will be penalised because of their privileged wealthy position.
I fail to understand how a blue collar worker doing overtime is taxed at their highest marginal rate, whereas those who rely on CG (such as an entrepreneur like Gareth Morgan or a property investor) can usually get away without paying tax on that income. A person investing in term deposits pay tax on that CG - but not those investing in properties (and able to avoid the bright line test).
A lack of a CGT is morally wrong.
(From one who would be liable to a CGT)

term deposit don't generate capital gain, they generate interest income. not the same at all.

Can you share your secret for avoiding the Brightline Test for your investment properties?

Keep the property for long enough? Doesn't have to be nefarious (but there's also the old "this is tooootally my primary residence").

Well, apart from only being able to have one primary residence at a time (generally rules out most investment property) the Brightline test is now five years. Keeping the property for longer than the brightline period isn't really 'avoiding the test', is it?

The test is applied to all property though (even primary residences), I read it as "avoid failing the test".

In the context of tax, 'avoiding' has a very well-understood meaning. Departing from this significantly changes the substance of the point being made.

Agree 100%.
Jacinda is obviously terrified that any hint of a CGT would get her voted out. I can only assume that Labour have done the polling to confirm that's the case. Just shows how uninformed the average person is.
Obviously it's inevitable that we'll have a more extensive CGT sooner or later.

Here's hoping

Wooohooo! Go Judy!
Looking surprisingly good in the debate so far... won’t be enough for me to switch from Act party vote though

judith coming across as angry and wont answer anything straight to the point.
jacinda is being clever and letting her go, and crediting her on some points and playing to the masses with bullet points
still wont vote for either though


Jacinda also doing what she does best... obfuscation and speaking R E A L L Y slowly like we're all complete morons and need our mummy to explain things to us. Not to mention actually explaining where all the money's coming from to pay for stuff. Oh sorry... her double dudy idea. Wtf is that??


I came of age when NZ had Nash vs Holyoake vs Nordmeyer/Kirk vs Marshall/Muldoon vs Lange. In comparison these two tonight have about as much cut and thrust, as a plastic sword and a limp proboscis!

To be fair,both sides know where the money is coming from...its being borrowed.
There is no silver bullet,Collins hasn't miraculously found a way to fund their promises.

@ theoracle,obviously Prime Minister Ardern didn't speak slowly enough for you.She mentioned the Dunedin Hospital to be built,'double duty' being the build provides the work & the free trades training provides the workers.

Jacinda is full of empty statements lite on detail without plan to grow economy... this results in money go-round and increasing debt.

They both have the same ideas around economic growth. Increasing house prices, i thought that was obvious

Borrowing money to pay out as a tax cut isn't a plan to grow the economy either.

I'd prefer to see stimulus by way of Government spend (QE) with taxation there to keep inflation in check. There's a big difference between giving people tax cuts and praying they spend it (not save it/pay down debt), and targeting the use of capital towards infrastructure which should (if targeted correctly) make its way through the local economy, assuming multi-national corporates don't have their cake.

Continually giving the private sector tax cuts does not result in the private sector building water treatment plants, much needed reservoirs in Auckland etc. Those dead set keen on Tax Cuts would likely be the first to moan if they can't wash their car due to water restrictions.


Judith comes across as a "Karen"


Maybe if you’re a boomer,dairy farmer, own a small business or on more then 120k. Otherwise she comes across as a snarky cow.

Frankly I'm just glad we had at least one woman up there who could give a direct answer to a question.

You prefer skyrocketing house prices and increasing poverty but at least those remaining have a minimum wage job paying $1.92/hr more and no landlord can easily kick ya out after cooking P and trashing house

ML,has any party got a plan to put a lid on house prices?

No. The beast is loose.
Reform RMA, CGT, incentivise productive investment further with favourable tax treatment.... be very discerning with immigration and keep eye on land-bankers and land-planners!

Earning a high salary shouldn't mean voting for National!

Biased political analysis by too-Mitch-McKay and the other numpty

Yes I thought it was a strange assessment by those two commentators. That wasn’t a debate it was a series of prepared answers - you don’t answer the serious questions in 30 secs. No real need for Ardern to attack Collins- just let Judith open her mouth and say something


Jacinda struggled to challenge the rubbish coming out of Judith's mouth.

Example, Judith says no to a minimum wage increase because it will put employers out of business. But the vast majority of minimum wage workers in NZ are those working for multi-national and national corporations in the retail sector, grocery sector, fast food sector, catering/cleaning sector, aged care sector. The same corporates that took the wage subsidy and then reported healthy profits even coming out of lockdown. These (the bulk of minimum wage employers the nation over) aren't going to go out of business.

And that's just one example. Happy to provide more!

struggled to challenge...
Why would that be?

Hope you noticed the brilliant social media play by the National during the debate. with constant memes out on FB.
Labour lost it there.


Two articulate, intelligent people with the ability to think laterally and with foresight to the future featured in tonight’s debate. And then there was Judith Collins...


Full of empty slogans and popularism bylines... lets keep moving


And Judith's big line was: If you want a National government, vote for National.

Had us in stiches.

How about this one:
The National leader managed to get one last dig in before tonight's debate.

"Tonight, I'll be reminding Ms Ardern that traffic over the Auckland Harbour Bridge is currently moving faster than her plans to move the country forward."

Yeah, I found that odd too. Why did Judith continually refer to Jacinda as Ms Ardern? It's not like Jacinda referred to Judith as Ms Colllins.

What else could Judith call her?

Usually in Leaders Debates, it is first name. However there has been a sustained campaign the past three years across all sorts of media from both reporters, general public, and rabid keyboard warriors that to use Jacinda's first name is Condesending/Sexist/Ageist/disrespectful/etc...

I am fairly certain that if JC rocked the old "Jacinda" moniker, it would have been seen as a negative.

PM is almost never used, unless in Jest. The psychology of why is pretty well known, so that was never going to happen.

So what are you really left with? Minister/Honourable/etc... If that is the case, why wasn't the PM using the same?

Prime Minister or Leader of the Labour Party - that's how Jacinda referred to Judith - Leader of the Opposition or Leader of the National Party.

> It's not like Jacinda referred to Judith as Ms Colllins.

Interestingly, Jacinda didn't appear to refer to Judith at all. I'm not sure she even once looked in the National leader's direction.

And when Judith said along the lines of:

"Those who get a $58 per week tax cut are the ones who are more likely to spend it because they the ones losing their jobs everyday". Uh hello Judith, how do you spend a tax cut when you lose your job?

Yeah, I heard that too :-). I also found the discussion of her second house in trust interesting - not because she mentioned the trust (but that was a bit snooty/dumb) but because she and her husband own more than just one additional property. They've got rentals too;

Talofa, fellow Samowens!

At least John Campbell will go up in the Preferred Prime Minister stakes after tonight’s lame debate.

glad it was JC and not hosking , what a mess that would have been, in between protecting his party and rants both leaders would not have got much time

How about Jack Tame? Find John a little too animated

Speaking of the Hosk,had me rolling with laughter with her retort to him this morning;
Ardern: "Mike, if you're saying you're now a person of nuance and subtlety, bless. I am not going to claim perfection but I will stand by our response."

Funny, if she's not claiming perfection then why are we still being spun the 'hard and early' lie?


Can you feel it coming...the foul wind of Cullens last coughs from the tax review. Lab outright win will bring a cap gain or universal land tax.


I didn't watch the debate but apparently the PM ruled out a CGT. I wonder if they would go a land tax??

Collins won the debate,
PM twitter saying surprisingly poor.

Ditto... I’m guessing an uptick on polls based on tonight’s debate

And over at Stuff a hair on fire moment.

A gymnastics approach to logic & critical thought, mega mind reading.
Taking a leaf from the child's chant "heads I win, tails you lose"
I doubt folk will pick up on this assignment of what to think.

Running a country through a global pandemic,being a mother to a young un, oh and throw in an election to fight,no wonder she is a bit jaded.

Nanny’d up. Running the country on the fly.... spends more time taking selfie’s

If you say so...

do polls still have "margins of error"

Democracy is hard work! Sort tax system to unlock productivity. Rekindle GDP per capita growth without destruction of biosphere. Really only 1 percent of people that are thinking ahead/globally?

Ardern was low energy. No amount of fawning could hide the fact that without a room full of groupies she's just a hubris machine. Collins was refreshing in that she acted like someone who wasn't trying to continually kill you with soft bigotry.


As refreshing as a cup of cold sick.


"My husband's a Samoan" reminded me of Don Brash's "my wife's an Asian".

I thought the wokeness would like the racial harmony of a mixed race marriage... got to make everything explicit and if acceptable to lefties

Just watched the leaders debate. For me the personality stuff is a sideline.
I would like to have a clear policy statements or at least reasoned discussion of the following.
1. Should there be a population goal for NZ.? What is it?
What is the immigration policy which will achieve that goal and how will housing and infrastructure be developed to match it.

2. What is the NZ policy toward the growing trade and military posturing between China and USA?
 How will NZ focus its trade and defence policy to reflect that?

3. How will NZ move from low Covid to reintegrate with the rest of the world? 
What economic policies will lead to reintegration and on what timescale?

4. NZ’s main agricultural export earners are challenged by climate change and animal welfare - be it water, soil, animal health, population encroachment. What policies will help resolve these challenges?

Sadly haven’t found many answers tonight.

We are living in the age of popularism not policy or more specifically actually even delivering on that policy.

It was very difficult to watch, it's nauseating listening to Jacinda "30 seconds past the bell" Ardern and Collins is a nasty piece of work. Sort of epitomizes politics in the New Zealand at the moment.

Why can't there be civility between the opposition? When you compare to the Health Debate between Hipkins and Reti, complete polar opposite:

I know Judith. She is in fact a very funny person to spend time with. She is also very intelligent and capable as evidenced by her performance last night. This election will tighten up as many people will have noticed that Ardern needs a fawning audience in order to perform.

Yet to be seen but as you say you know her on a personal level so your word holds more weight than mine.

To say someone is a nasty piece of work is very harsh. Some people might think of Ardern like that when she shuts someone down. I don’t think she is nasty , just very limited. Other than deal to disasters which many others could do what has she done? House prices and poverty for example. Her deputy. Is he alive?

Her deputy PM? He's had the most effective track record of delivering for his party/donors over the last three years.

Party Deputy!

To be fair,Winston is deputy PM due to coalition,so Davis was always going to be sidelined.

It seems a lot of folks' impression of Judith as a nasty piece of work have come from her own communications - whether on Twitter, vocally, or in her sketchy communications leaked and made visible through Dirty Politics. Everyone is funny and friendly to their mates.

The question came up twice in the finance debate on Newshub. Tova O'Brien started it but everyone laughed, even Robertson.

I don't give a rats what either of them or any other public figure is like on a personal level. I want to know what they're like at the job they're doing or wanting to do.

Judith - My Husband is Samoan - Talofa .... I have run a small business - ummm so what... Ill spend my 50 dollar (its Tala Judith).

Neither of them want to talk about the bottom end of society in any detail, neither want to do anything about it. It appears to me the days of having strong leaders with clear foresight as to what they want to achieve for the country, and the balls to do it, are over.
The act of winning and the PR bullshit to achieve it is what we are left with. So disillusioned with these idiots.

As unpalettable as it may be there is only one sensible approach to avoiding Lab/Green coalition....

National /Act Government more sensible than a Labour Greens Govt
Those green nutters should been concentrating on green stuff, not policy's that are out of there depth
Cindy looked very worried and as other people have said she speaks so slooooowly thinking we are all school kids. Cindy also waves her hands a lot when she get cornered
Ms Collins did very well and some of the people cant understand that factual content

Oravida is the key words for JC... very chummy relationship !

I like David Seymour, I don't agree with all of ACT's policies but then again nor do I agree with many of the other party's policies. David & ACT will get my vote

My electorate is still Epson, I had a look at ACT website, they lost me at "honest"!

Not a word you understand?

A word that David Seymour won't understand..

David Seymour likes to talk in L-Vocalisations.

So,looking at ACT policies,they are pro immigration,repeal the RMA & building act and put a wage freeze on minimum wage earners,but not anyone else.
So we will have a rampant influx of foreign investors,no restraints on building thru reformed RMA & building ACT...haven't we been there before,but this time it will be on steroids.More people,more houses required and so on and so on...
They should be renamed the the "Property Party".
I am sure there will be exceptions for areas of special Epsom,'leafy' suburbs should be protected from rampant development.
This weekend he unveiled a tax proposal that would see personal and company tax rates set at 17.5 percent — that’s a tax increase for people on lower incomes, and a tax cut for people on higher incomes. It’s a cut below the 20 percent flat tax Roger Douglas took to Prime Minister David Lange in 1987, culminating in one of the biggest inter-Cabinet fracas in modern history.
Economists aren’t so sure about the plan — many say it's unfair and hits those on low income hardest. In fact, using Treasury’s modelling tool a flat tax of 17.5 percent would result in a tax increase for everyone earning less than $56,000. However there is agreement that flatter rates encourage compliance and reduce tax avoidance.

it would also kill the local economy, every study shows those that get the least spend it all , whereas those further up save, put on a mortgage, or spend overseas.
very short sighted policy it always has been since roger douglas days thats why no party has even gone near it

No mention of how targeted transfers would fit in with this, or alternative measures of raising revenue (Douglas' vision was a CGT paired with a flat tax, but they stepped back from the edge). Currently households on lower wages typically get back more than they pay in under through transfers, so pretty important to understand where the transfers fit in before you can compare the current situation with what is ACT is proposing.