Compare the policies of the parliamentary parties contesting the 2014 Election with our extensive comparison resource

Compare the policies of the parliamentary parties contesting the 2014 Election with our extensive comparison resource

The General Election on September 20 is now just 7 days away.

Our coverage of the issues has been though three projects.

Firstly, Bernard Hickey is publishing a daily (weekday) diary of political events and news items that readers should know about.

Secondly, Bernard has interviewed the finance spokepeople of four political parties and you can see these video interviews here:

- Bill English, National Party

- David Parker, Labour Party

- Russel Norman, Green Party

- Winston Peters, New Zealand First Party

And thirdly we have a comprehensive comparison of 110 policy topics, our agnostic comparative pages of party policy.

This is the fifth general election in a row we have provided this service and this year has seen the highest usage of any previous campaign. More than 100,000 people have used the service.

You can find them indexed on this handy page.

Easy access to this page is also available on our News section page here, in the right-hand "In the section" sidebar menu.

Not all parties release their policies at the same time, so this has been a work in progress updated as new releases have become available from the Parties.

Our comparisons only use the words contained in a policy document published online by each party.

We do not source any information from candidate press releases; it must by official party policy to be used in our pages and it must be available to link to online.

Nor do we use Government policy documents. Our current government is a coalition of various parties; it is only the parties policies themselves that we are comparing.

Our pages are limited to five key points from each party. In all cases we provide a handy link to find the full policy release on their website

We only cover parties currently in Parliament.

Each policy comparison page is open for Comment. Please keep them civil, and relevant to the policy issue of the page.

Our approach is different to others. We are not 'summarising' or using our interpretation of the policies; we are only recording what they say.

What political parties say is one thing; what they do can be another, especially when they enter MMP negotiations. You are on your own assessing those implications.

In addition to the policy comparatives, we also have a handy page comparing the Party Lists, here.

And we have Government budget data analysed in a convenient format here and here.

Here, in order, are the 20 most popular policy comparison pages so far in the 2014 election campaign, in order of download stats (updated September 15):

1 WINZ and Benefits
2 Asset sales
3 Cannibis Reform
4 Tertiary Education
5 Health
6 Drugs - Alcohol  
7 Party Philosophies  
8 Party Lists  
9 Housing
10 Agriculture and Rural Affairs  
11 Immigration  
12 Minimum Wage  
13 Animal Welfare  
14 Defence
15 Early Childhood Education
16 Food in Schools  
17 National Standards (Education)  
18 Arts, Culture & Heritage  
19 Communities - Youth  
20 Drugs - Tobacco  

There are 90 other specific policies compared, with each on a convenient one page, showing where each party stands.

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.


 Its  Hobsons Choice , no dilemma here
Either I vote National or stay in bed next Saturday 

I object to CGT being classified under housing rather than tax. Both Labour and Greens are proposing a comprehensive capital gains tax (excluding KiwiSaver, retirees and family homes so far...). So it will tax more than investment properties, such as

  • Gains on NZ and Australian shares
  • Divestment of businesses
  • Sale of farms
  • Lottery winnings?

A captial gains tax might be dressed as a housing policy, but its impact is far reaching

I see the guns are out for Bill English about suggesting long -term beneficiaries being like crack addicts.
But , he is right.
And the figure of 300,000 on sickness benefits is unaccpetable.
We must be the sickest population of the planet !
There are 2,3 million employed people in NZ so thats about 12 % of the working  population who either cant or dont  make any contribution whatsoever due to some health related  inability or disability  ?
Apart from being almost unbelievable, its quite unaccceptable .
What meaning do their lives have ?
What do so many people  do all day?

Snowden might be able to have residency in NZ, thank to the German gentlement.  Then look out for the quick visit from the Special Seal team, we don't have an Air Force so it will be a walk in the park for them! 

Thanks David.  Disturbing how little some parties are prepared to commit to writing.  The Greens Cannibis reform seems totally at odds to their Alcohol and tobacco policies.  They have never got past their hippie background unfortuneatly.

And NZcoolie, no matter how hard some people on the left try to avoid the discussion (rather they just us it as a negative about housing), there's a damn good reason that net immigartion is heading toward a record 50k per annum. People don't see better elsewhere, and others offshore, even Australians, see better here. In global economic downturn cycles the best you can do is be the best of the rest, and the immigration figures are absolute prove of that.

It's not that it "is better here"

It's that they realise they can be average Joe's in their current earning countries,

or be in wide spaces, lower crime, less hassle...because if they come here with their current money they'll be in the wealthy classes, not the working class. 
  ...just as long as they don't have to depend on the NZ wages (they often underestimate NZ prices too - books, lawnmowers, transport, eating out) - many don't realise the income drop they would take trying to find a position in NZ

So the bulk of those coming here aren''t expecting to live off NZ wages, doubt it !  And ALOT less are leaving, got similar creditable arguments for that ?

The difficulty with "published data" is the classification of "permanent long term arrivals" and "permanent long term departures"

The published stats only define Long Term departures as "kiwis" leaving

With many students coming from Asia and staying for 4 years, they acquire permanent resident status, then on completion of their studies, depart, and having lived in NZ for 4 years, are classified as permanent residents leaving (ie "kiwis" leaving)
Another complexity is many of the departees could originally be migrants who, having stayed for a fews years decide to chance their arm in Australia, or decide it isn't working for them here in NZ and return to their country of origin

While such analysis is not provided, I suspect it accounts for a lot of the departures
What you don't know but need to know is how many born-and-bred kiwis are leaving
Puts a completely different complexion on the statement "a lot less kiwis are leaving"

No you getting that wrong,

They expect that they will have smiilar prosperity to their current position (ie they have rich holdings and wages compared to NZers, especially average NZers) so they expect when they get here they will be able to find comparable incomes.... and are often shocked when the income is similar but prices much higher (UK immigrants) or that the position they are in *if it's even available here full time* only pays 50%-70% of what they're used to receiving, and a lot less bonuses/perques.

For some it creates a poverty trap, some an ego trap,  many just put up with the difference. I get the impression half go home - although the multi-generational thing can be interesting.

Just been reading a Canadians account of returning home to Karachi.    Nows there's a city looking like the future of NZ.  18 mil people and climbing...

$20,000 fine anyone?

what MortgageBelt is, quite correctly, referring to is that posting anything that is seen as influencing voters on Election Day is very illegal.

... so , for an entire day I can't call David Cunliffe a douchebag  ????
I'll have to take up another hobby , then ....

PrtScn - such a useful function!

Good point MortagageBelt.
Although this article originaly published 13 Sept, does moving a link to it to the front page on election day make it published again?  I don't know.  Suppose they know what they doing.

The Electoral  Commission will  struggle to police Facebook, Twitter,  Blogs,  comments  etc ..

... will the electoral ommission give me a Jolly Kid " finally final " warning ... or do these guys really mean business ?

Send me $5k and I'll defend it for you. 

It's actually the platform that risks the fine;
Comment functions should be disabled on all websites, including social media sites, until after 7pm on election day to avoid readers posting statements that could influence voters.

I am going to risk a very, very early call that the Conservatives will not just be under 5%, they will be under 4.5%