Latest Roy Morgan poll says National Party well down in March as Prime Minister Bill English talks of lifting retirement age to 67 - lowest party vote since September 2016

Latest Roy Morgan poll says National Party well down in March as Prime Minister Bill English talks of lifting retirement age to 67 - lowest party vote since September 2016

Content supplied by RoyMorgan

During March support for National fell by 4.5% to 43.5%, now just behind a potential Labour/ Greens alliance 44% (up 5%).

If a New Zealand Election was held now the latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows it would be too close to call with New Zealand first likely to play a decisive role in determining which parties would form the next Government.

Support for the National partners was virtually unchanged with the Maori Party unchanged at 2%, Act NZ was 0.5% (down 0.5%) and United Future was 0.5% (up 0.5%).

Of the three Parliamentary Opposition parties - Labour’s support was at 29.5% (up 3.5%), Greens 14.5% (up 1.5%) and New Zealand First 7.5% (down 0.5%).

Of the parties outside Parliament the Internet Party was 0.5% (up 0.5%), Conservative Party of NZ was 0.5% (up 0.5%) and support for Independent/ Others was 1% (down 1%).

In addition the New Zealand Roy Morgan Government Confidence Rating is down 4 pts to 136 pts in March with 61.5% (down 2%) of NZ electors saying NZ is ‘heading in the right direction’ cf. to 25.5% (up 2%) that say New Zealand is ‘heading in the wrong direction’.

Gary Morgan, Executive Chairman, Roy Morgan Research, says:

“Today’s New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll shows a sharp decline in support for National – down 4.5% to 43.5% - the lowest they’ve been since English became Prime Minister in early December.

“A potential Labour/ Greens alliance is now just in front of National on 44% (up 5%) with both parties enjoying increases in support – Labour up 3.5% to 29.5% and the Greens up 1.5% to 14.5%. The neck-and-neck contest between the two sides of New Zealand politics means the centrist New Zealand First Party (7.5%, down 0.5%) led by ‘Maverick' MP Winston Peters could once again decide which parties form Government in September.

“The fall in support for National comes after Prime Minister Bill English announced a raft of potential reforms to New Zealand’s superannuation laws early in March including increasing the retirement age to 67 (from 65) by 2040. The proposed reform will impact anyone born after July 1, 1972 – ie under 45 today. In addition immigrants will have to live for twice as long in New Zealand to gain access to NZ Super.

“The proposed changes to the superannuation laws were criticised by potential Government partner New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters who questioned whether the proposed changes would achieve anything at all; and Act Party Leader David Seymour who said the changes were too far in the future and the retirement age needed to be raised now due to escalating costs.

“The clear opposition to the changes suggests Prime Minister English risks losing the National majority if these reforms become an election issue."

Electors were asked: “If a New Zealand Election were held today which party would receive your party vote?” This latest New Zealand Roy Morgan Poll on voting intention was conducted by telephone – both landline and mobile telephone – with a NZ wide cross-section of 847 electors between February 27 – March 12, 2017. Of all electors surveyed 7.5% (up 2%) didn’t name a party.

The original report is here.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

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.


Comment Filter

Highlight new comments in the last hr(s).

... no matter how you cut , dice and splice it ... you can't help getting this feeling that the Greens are once again going to shoot themselves in the foot , and remain on the outer ...

Whilst piddly non-entities such as United Future remain within the governmental inner sanctum ....

... deja vu all over again .... Sigh !

The "shooting themselves in the foot" also applies to Labour, ie "middle england" doesnt want a loony left. Right now though it looks like its BE's election to lose and he seems to be doing a fine job of achieving that.

Here's hoping Winny has the balance of power.

A) A new Government with smarter / much reduced immigration
B) The same Government with smarter / much reduced immigration

Rubbish, when he was last in power, with the Helen Clark Labour govt, immigration was at 50,000 per year, which was the all time high then.

Didn't hear him complaining then did we?

I can't understand anyone who believes a word that comes out of Winny's mouth.

Times (and public opinion) have well and truly changed since those days.


Things have changed since then. N.Z. had some capacity then, but maybe W.P. has been keeping an eye on the filling of the tank, and now is the time to turn the tap off, before we get stuck in a bigger mire.

No complaining because HC well knew the adage about keeping your friends close and enemies closer. She would have thoroughly gagged him.

But I also agree with the comment that times have well and truly change and the impact of immigration was not understood by the public, media or MPs at that time.

Lets make New Zealand great again. Vote left!


Time for change. 9 years is long time to Rule specially for national. So vote for change.

The Labour/NZF/Greens will run similar settings to this Nat Govt.
Where is NZs true alternative?
With MMP, the voter can never Trump.


Doubt that - doubt that very much. Inequality, health, house prices, immigration, environment etc. etc. are in such a mess, that change is inevitable. Reminds me of the hospital pass Lange was handed - and his was the most radical, change-orientated government NZ has probably ever seen. I expect the same from this next change of government, and I think the intellectual grunt as well as the moral determination of a Labour/Greens/NZF coalition would be unbeatable.

It seems to me what we really need is an MMP Parliament of a multiple of substantive coalition partners. The problem with National coalitions all along has been the one-off hangers on partners - they add little to nothing to the executive mix. A Labour/Greens/NZF coalition provides a sort of internal check and balance on the executive branch. And that can only be a really good thing for our unicameral system.

What we need is an upper house to critique the legislation and announce its drivel

Yes - because the solution to any problem is to add more politicians.

And more tax. Tax can solve any problem.

the ideal of your comment is correct and is a return to a purer form of democracy, but it will only work if there is a balancing of power in caucus. If a Labour majority still holds sway, or any other party for that matter, then the bulldozer will be out in full force.

I was extremely impressed with James Shaw's speech in the General Debate in Parliament yesterday - he spoke on a cross-party initiative on climate change. He emphasises the non-partisan, collaboration across party lines on the effort - and praises in particular Paula Bennett and colleagues who partook in the effort. This is how Parliament should work/be.

But he is still an ideologue and as such lacks pragmatism on complex issues.

If you want consensus he calls it "political squabbling".

If you dare any question he call you "a denyalist", (which isn't even a word in my dictionary).

He does speak well.

Actually I dont agree, he's actually more like a hooker, he'll do just about anything for a vote (or not to lose one) which is part of the reason why I quit the Green Party.

When I was growing up we called it environmentalism and it meant stopping companies dumping oil into their drains. How times have changed.

who can count on the polls, two polls in two days have a difference for national at 4%, ironically around the figure of middle NZ swinging voters.
it will be a close election, unless something big happens.
by the by JK left today with no legacy,
we had fun naming politicians and their legacys today and it just went to show how he wasted his time in charge.


He didn't waste his time as it was a career enhancing move for him, but he did waste ours. Here's his legacy as far as I'm concerned;

Poll or No poll. National is going and should. Need of the time.

Anyone want my vote? ( I'm sure the politicians read right? )

** Significant action on environmental issues ( meaningful stuff that will no doubt cost us financially, but its worth it )
** Lower immigration. Actually ask kiwi's what population sizes they want long term for NZ

On item one - James Shaw's speech in the General Debate in Parliament today is well worth watching. He's one of our best politicians these days - statesman, intellectual, not a boomer.

he is quite good and can take on national on economic ideals quite comfortably, in fact when going against the woodwork teacher, solo mum or radio host outshines them
if he could move on some of the remaining mps and replace them, the greens could take more support and may overtake labour sometime in the future.
they have some good policies but get dragged back by the shocking ones they have

Posted a clip to his speech yesterday above. Yes, Greens are of most value to my mind when they focus on environmental matters which are inextricably coupled to the economy. NZ is crying out for that kind of expertise and initiative. We'll go right down the tubes without far, far, far better environmental management. National have taken us into a very dark place there.

Arresting the decline in both our natural and built environment is my No. 1 priority - I couldn't have been more pleased to see Labour and the Greens coming to some kind of pre-election accommodation - all kudos to Andrew Little and Annette King... I hope it works out for both parties and for NZ. We need to stop running roughshod over our own country.

I want a government that doesn't destroy the economy chasing idealogical goals and leaves us in massive debt and with no jobs for kids, who have to leave this country to find good work.

That the Greens have *any* economic credibility is yet to be proven to my eyes. Every "solution" I ever see from them involves seem kind of "more tax".

Why are NZ First doing so badly? Bit like Fletcher's issuing a profits warning at the top of the cycle.

They aren't - this is normal for Roy Morgan Polls. Does anyone think that 874 people are a correct representation of the overall voting public or should I say potential voting public? Factor in those unable to answer their private phone at work or those who say no thanks to being asked to take part in a Poll if they have a landline.

Two problems with your critique: Firstly, this is a genuinely random poll of responders. Both landlines and mobile phones are called. Many more than 874 people are contacted, but the correct random sample for this level of confidence needs 874. If it is truly random, 874 is a  sample size "a correct representation of the voting public". The science is clear. (But I do accept that random sampling can throw up occassional rogue results. Regular polling overcomes this. Poll-of-polls also diminishes the risks.) And secondly, the RM series has by far the most accurate results of public polls when compared to the actual election results. They have cred.

"... The science is clear. (But I do accept that random sampling can throw up occasional rogue results...)".
Hahaha. What a quote!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sounds like a typical Mayoral Office statement on a Len Brown public survey.

But won't nz first go with National. Nz first will go with which party receives the largest percentage of the vote which looks like national. National will do what ever it takes to stay in government. No more united and no more act.

Thai is one reason for not voting Winston Peter as it may not be a vote for change - though could have voted him but unless he declares that he will not go with national - which is doubtfully so why split vote and go for Labour/Green if really support change of government

Should NZ First hold the balance of power come September .... then
NZ First would be far more powerful and achieve much more by allowing the highest polling major to form a minority government and for NZF to sit on the cross-benches and hold sway from there - holding the whip hand

All the power and beholden to no one - accountable only to their principles

They concede too much and lose too much by entering into a coalition

I dunno, what does that party have to show for over twenty years in parliament?

It's just a vehicle to keep Winston in baubles isn't it?


Worthwhile being across nz first housing policy so you can plan accordingly -

Thanks. Hadn't read it before. Fantastic idea about government acquiring the land presently designated as SHAs (I assume using the PWA) and selling the sections directly to homeowners - giving the homeowners the opportunity to build what they like (i.e., free of land covenants).

Establish a new state agency to acquire land where Special Housing Areas have been designated under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013, for sustainable residential development.
Sell residential sections under long term agreements for sale and purchase (up to 25 years) to first home buyers, on a cost recovery basis, so that first home buyers will have access to sections which are affordable, reducing the overall initial capital cost of a new home by about one-third.
Interest at 2% p.a. for at least 5 years, then rising to lowest market rates.
Purchasers would build their own homes using normal bank financing, with title to the section transferred to them and the amount owing for the section secured by a second ranking statutory land charge.

That really will bring the price of land down in Auckland. Best idea I've seen yet if lowering land value is the aim.

Labour has leader issues. Little will be left in to lose the next election because its too late to change it then they will throw him under the bus. The obvious choice for leader already has more votes than Little in the preferred PM stakes. I hear on the radio that the Maori party are off the list and standing candidates. Its National again guys, sorry but the 20 people on here all the time bagging National is not enough. Hopefully National Doesn't need Winnie or it will be a circus. Time for Winnie to retire anyway, his time would be better playing golf with JK and reminiscing what could have been..

National will need them. If they don't offer the best deal, labour will, forming the government. National know this and have been courting nzlf for the last year or so.

So what do we think about a national / New Zealand first government? Invest in waiheke tours for seniors?

Sorry to disappoint national supporters (I too use to be - once upon a time) . Truth is bitter. This election - will be vote for change. This is universal truth. Die hard fan of national the earlier one accepts the better.

Poor Bill English will fail again.

Not sure about anyone else, but I'd be much more inclined to vote Labour at the next election if Andrew LIttle stood aside and let Adern take the helm.

I like Little there. He's an impressive leader - done what no other has been able to do since HC in keeping the caucus focused on a single task: being an effective, united oppositional front. And that's his union background showing through. He's an adept negotiator and a natural team player. You can see his effectiveness in the changes and back downs National have made in response to their opposition. He's surrounding himself with formidable, motivated people - Jacinda Ardern being just one. He is respected by other party leaders - no doubt about it.

As is obvious... my enthusiasm for a three-way coalition change of government is high. Most optimistic I've been in ages.

I think it's great for politics that in adding up the preferred PM polls for both Andrew and Jacinda - there is an expression of confidence in Labour being a party with depth in its ranks. To me, it's an embarrassment that no one other than BE in the National caucus registers on the polls as a potential PM. That says something to me - which is look at the capability (or lack of) in the others there. In the Parliamentary system, the Ministerial line up is what matters - if you haven't got depth, you make a bad government no matter how good/popular the PM is.

John Key's nine years is proof of that.

if that EVER happened they would never get elected for quite some time,

They are being strategic, put up something that will never happen...and then look responsible by cancelling after 'listening to the public and taking on board their concerns'. A govt that listens to the people! Meanwhile, other pristine areas less known get the nod. I have the same view re the rejected monorail bid in Fiordland. Was never going to happen, but made Smith look eco friendly.

I thought the monorail proposal was a wonderful opportunity - and I'm as green as they come! As I understood it - it was proposed as an electric powered monorail, running above ground. Quiet, clean. What better way to mass transit people in and out of Milford Sound? He made a bad call there in my opinion. An horrific accident/deaths on that road just yesterday;

Different monorial. The monorail from the Kiwi Burn entrance near Mavora Lakes to Te Anau Downs.

Talking and doing is two different things in politics, look at Trump. When a party is outside of power they try to deceive voters, when they are in power they need to run a country as it running a business. They need to keep NZ moving if they still need a victory in next election or even keep them in power the current term. Migration especially skilled migrants is the most powerful economic pump for NZ. Wait and see.

a nat/nzfirst isn't really change, although I think JohnK said that's what would probs happen. I hope not!
greens have good policies but the the bad ones cancel out the good ones
Labour leader just does not do it for me, just can't see him as PM

but I do want a change, 9 years is long enough, so anything but nat/act/uf/mp will do me, just not sure how to vote to help achieve that

Just curious - what do you see as the bad Green policies?

No compulsory work-testing for beneficiaries
so wrong you should not get money for nothing you should have to do something for it
Introduce a universal child benefit for families - $18.40 per week for the first child and $13 per week for subsequent children.
will only encourage a certain segment to spit out more babies into a bad up bringing
Debt relief for poorer countries.
we need to look after ourselves first, we have plenty of issues here that could use that money
Close Waihopai spy base.
without it we would not get info that may be needed in the future to keep us safe
Home for life
so so wrong a state house should be a hand up not a hand out, I would favour a 3 year lease with a couple of rights of renewal, for a max of 9 years before being moved even if it was across the road

Yes, interesting - all the social policies. I've always seen this area as their weakness but I appreciate that they (and most parties) just do not know how to deal with our growing problem of poverty - and that widening gap between the haves and the have nots. To my mind it simply can't be dealt with without taking more from the haves - and some of the biggest haves are leading that call for more effective redistributive policies.

When we last visited Honolulu - we commented to the taxi driver how surprised were were with homelessness and poverty there. He told us that a number of city governments in northern US states were funding one-way airfares to homeless people to Hawaii - warmer climate, easier to be homeless in the tropics was the official line. Don't know if it was true or not!

Don't know their policies that well but its just the overall feel I get, this one for instance
"The Green Party has announced a policy which would allow student loan borrowers to defer paying it back and save for a house instead."

I just don't think it would help much with people buying houses.

Your analysis of the opposition is unfortunately about as deep as most people go. If you actually look at policies with an open mind you might be surprised.
Don't get all you politics from Hoskins.

Despite the rhetoric all MMP elections in NZ have been close - a few %points each way would changes things. However, all the polls (including this one) have the parties polling about where they have been for the last 10 years - the Green/Labour switching a few points.