Labour and Greens could form govt together, 1 News Colmar Brunton poll shows; NZ First not in Kingmaker position any more; Greens couple of points above threshold

Labour and Greens could form govt together, 1 News Colmar Brunton poll shows; NZ First not in Kingmaker position any more; Greens couple of points above threshold

Labour could form a government with the Green Party alone, or still turn to New Zealand First, the latest 1 News Colmar Brunton poll shows.

Jacinda Ardern's lot was up one point at 44%, ahead of National, up one at 40%. The Greens were up two points to 7%, New Zealand First down three to 6%, TOP steady at 2%, the Maori Party down one to 1%, and ACT steady on 0.6%.

1 News reported the corresponding seats as: Labour: 55, National: 48, Greens: 8, NZF: 7, and the Maori Party and ACT one each, based on electorate seat wins. The Maori Party is, however, polling ahead of Labour in two of the seven Maori seats.

This means National would not be able to form a government with New Zealand First. Labour would have a choice of NZF or the Greens.

An interesting development was that the 'undecideds' were up four points this poll to 14% (the headline numbers above are ex-undecideds). In contrast, this week's Newshub poll had an undecided contingent of only 4%. 

Jacinda Ardern was down a point in the preferred PM stakes at 34%, while Bill English was up a point at 32%. Winston Peters was steady on 5%.

Bill English speaking to 1 News said National's internal polling had the party slightly higher than Labour. Party insiders reckon the likely figure is thought to be in-between this week's Newshub Reid Research poll, which showed them on 47.3%, and tonight's Colmar poll with them on 40%.

Ardern said she was not taking any of the numbers for granted. Labour's lead comes as attention turns to its coalition options, with some senior caucus members being reported as keener on a combination with New Zealand First over the Greens. However, younger members of the caucus - like Ardern - are thought to believe that a tie-up with the Greens would be the easier combination. Read Alex Tarrant's views on that 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).

I think National is a much better party now that (((Key))) has left.


If the same poll was done today labour would even do better. And never rule out the green voters


That can't be! All the National punters have just announced Labour is gone-burger. Seriously though. Just wait until the next polls are in, when they take into account a foreign spy in the governing party. That said, he denyed it. So he can't possibly be lying. Must be racist for doing a background check and finding he actually is an Officer in the PLA Intelligence Services.


This election is for change.

Like it or not - Only thing that is constant is Change.

Deja Vu.......

Did you read my comment?

Or are you supporting foreign spy's in senior government positions?

Innocent until proven guilty. Give the guy a chance. Hes been investigated and nothing has come of that so far.

Dyed in the wool voters will simply decide it's a smear campaign.

Ain't that the truth. My man!


Ends up National are actually communists - Lol! Looking forward to boatman rationalizing having a Chinese intelligence officer in our parliament thanks to National.

Probably the most telling statement that then PM Bolger, ever uttered was, "bugger the polls." There it is.

Actually, his statement that neoliberalism is bunk, or words to that effect.

Neoliberalism is bunk.

I've got a feeling he'll be voting Labour after listening to his interview. The world is changing.

Well if you had been spread eagled by Ms Shipley, and nevertheless survived to breathe another day, then that is quite understandable!

Argghhhhh, the visuals...

Stuff have a finance debate at 7pm this evening. Should be a good watch.

That debate was quite fun actually - at least for someone who deals with them every day.

Labour is on top - YES!

LOL, I thought you were voting Greens few days ago ....

too close to call, but i reckon the amount of people voting will be up as now it is a 2 horse race and people can see there vote will count
i have voted already have to agree the early late night voting by supermarkets is the way forward


The usual suspects will be shrieking REEEEEEE!

Young Nats will go into overdrive with their brigading.


I went to university (early 2010s) with a few Young Nats. I wonder how they feel now being undercut for jobs with 300,000 extra people in the country and not being able to afford a house. Oh, and being called lazy and drug-addled by the PM.

Strongly-held beliefs take a very long time to change. And often quite some different life experiences.

Did for me.

I'm not sure they'll decide National is bad for them simply because they have to now compete with huge numbers of extra people for stagnant wages, and foreign millionaires for houses, or any of the other things that are making their opportunities fewer and worse.

Question for a future generation's POLS 399 paper - describe the difficulties which faced opinion pollsters in the 2017 general election and assess whether or to what extent they should have been recognised and compensated for in the lead up to the election.


Great, keep it up Jacinda


Where are they? Yoo hoo, Boatman, Passhass, Eco Bird et al.

Maybe we could offer them some smelling salts.


Give them time.
Right now they are looking up the appropriate response to the situation in their Chairman Key issued handbook.

They've had a busy day. A couple of them have been non stop on other interest pages and I presume they are all over other social media. They will now be regrouping with Nats Dirty Politics team and regrouping for tomorrow.

What will that bring? Don't be surprised by anything. They might even bring Smithy out of the dark room.

It's quite exciting all this, one day it's blue, next red, next neck and neck.

Neck minit.

No salts for me thank you - however if you offer popcorn I will accept.

Have just updated with the undecideds number here - it's 14%, up four points from a week ago. That's compared to 4% in the Newshub poll.

I've posted this before, but in case any stats geeks missed it.
(It's not mine, so isn't shameless self promotion)

Methodology is much better and more transparent than similar models available.

Good stuff.

Yup, Winnie will be the deciding factor as he will have poached a decent chunk of the previously-National votes. I wouldn't be surprised if he hits 15% and ends up in a coalition with National on 35%ish while firmly pulling the strings.

Yes, very cool. I'm not a statistician but I think I understand what he's doing to build this model. It follows that the coefficient estimate is based on observed (polls) vs actual outcomes (final results) based on time series data.


Property Speculators Investors Federation adds it's squeal to the scaremongering;

With respect Kate - squealing is more of your specialty .


I disagree, Kate has some of the most intelligent posts on here.

Anyway are landlords keeping rents lower than they could be out of the goodness of their hearts? Or are the rents limited by what the market can bear?

Also will landlords not be putting up rents when accommodation supplements get increased by National?


that is the simple logic that passes landlords by, rents are governed by the ability to pay, once you go pass that point the supply of good tenants diminishes until you reach the point where you price yourself out of the market.
its the same logic they use that well if all the landlords sell people would have nowhere to live, even though the number of houses stays the same, they just fall in price until they come into range of incomes and tenants are replaced by OO

Yes I agree with you. It's reactionary thinking and follows "If x happens, then y". That's as complex as it gets. It's easily rebutted with "If rents go up, then consumer spending will go down, which means that businesses will lose revenue. Furthermore, consumers will be more price sensitive to specific consumer goods, which also means that businesses will lose revenue. With less consumer spending in terms of volume and value, the whole economy will suffer. If there is any relationship between the health of the economy and house prices and rents, then there will be pressure for both to fall."

Not rocket science, but far more relevant than what you will read in the Herald.

Yes it seems that current rents are determined by incomes/ability to pay whereas rents+6months are determined by whatever level of threat is required politically.

Nicely stated!

Current rent = market price
Future rent = threat price based on desired political shift

Occurs to me you are talking of blackmail. I could have sworn it was illegal

The assumption that rents will rise faster then usual is based on increases to land lord costs and increases to renters income through WFF and best start etc.

Yeah put rents up so FHBers will get pissed and buy quicker in a falling market. Don't forget demand is extremely low, prices will fall so rents should fall and some landlords will be forced to sell. Later in the downturn of the cycle some will buy a rental probably of someone who bought pre 2012 and there's many of them and they'll set there rent according. So putting rent up would only push tenants into making a earlier decision in buying. I don't think many have seen how a market can slowly decay. It feeds on itself down with monthly bad news why'll most people say this won't last long. And it mighted. But we've broken every record in the not to do bubble book

I am keeping my rents lower out of the goodness of my heart thanks (and I'm sure I'm not the only one) One rent increase in 6 years= happy tenant/happy landlord. The house is at least 50 under the market rent and I think we are both just fine with that. #notalwaysaboutgreed


You'd think landlords would applaud laws that allow their tenants to have more security. It really shows the amount of dislike some of them have for renters.

With just the 2018 tax cuts to be reversed now - remember the greens voted in support of these.

Will be interesting to see if they do a 180 with Labour ?

When superannuitants realise they will miss out on over $ 13 a week for a married couple will not be too happy.

May not in fact happen so then steady as she goes - plus regional fuel, water, ETS mods.

and you think national will not try to sell more assets and raise taxes

Sources (unnamed) suggest National is considering a secret fuel tax to fund its controversial Roads of National Significance (RONS) programme.

National Government will help young families into their first farms by allowing young farmers to buy state owned farms after they’ve worked the land for five to ten years

as an aside i am not against the state selling its dairy farms, that is not something they should own, but they need to be upfront about it and not try to do on the sneaky snaeky


Actually the fact that national sold out power companies and didn't seem to invest the money in something productive seems to have been avoided in the election debates. Power companies now worth 11 billion, what did we get for that money?

NZ got higher dividends than before from those companies being forced through open market part ownership to apply commercial disciplines, plus genuine competition for consumers. Your power bill would look rather different if the old model had stayed in place.

I'm certainly getting higher dividends. Total return on Meridian since listing is 127%. Have made enough to pay my electric bill for the rest of my life

We got a slush fund for 10+ irrigation schemes TBA/

Are they the same schemes that now deliver $2bn pa in GDP for NZ ?

Irrigation schemes - the great scam.
With reliable water, overnight a marginal farm value gets an instant nudge, nudge, wink wink, capital gain well into several millions.

CGT - we aren't paying that
Water taxes - forget it.
Dying rivers, pollution - necessary evil - we need to flood the world with milk
Conservation areas - we will change the law (Nats supposed Min of Conservation - hilarious) so we can dam it

Homeless, youth suicide, health - forget it - our mates need a few extra mill.

Kiwis so dum lah!

So here's a thought; maybe you should volunteer for Labours committee that will decide how many surgical operations we will need to cut, which schools will close and the infrastructure projects that can no longer proceed, due to irrigation schemes being canned, farming being included in the ETS and Parkers vicious kick rural communities in the teeth water tax just because we hate them.

So, what's your answer?
Keep on subsidising them ad infinitum?

Unlike industry where we don't provide a loss making rail freight service and a tax environment that is highly favourable compared with many jurisdictions or tourism that provides little of the input infrastructure costs that sustain its business .....etc ? Of course we 'subsidise' them because of the wider public good. Irrigation schemes by their capital intensive nature require initial capital support that is beyond the means of individual farming communities and provinces.

Dirty kulak lover. Quit harping on about your outmoded ideas of investing to grow the pie, create jobs and increase the tax base. We're from labour and we're here to help (ourselves and our urban voting base only).

MM - Bit off tangent there - Lets get back to my point on irrigation schemes.

If an irrigation scheme makes sense then it is funded by those that benefit - user pays, not the taxpayer.
Pollution is fully taken into account and conservation land is left alone.

Then you get into a definition of who is the 'user'. A narrow definition is the farmer but of course that ignores the prosperity that accrues to downstream communities and the wider nation. Many of the large hydro electric schemes and other public works would never have been built if a strict user pays/viability test approach had been taken.

MM I have just read your post at 09:09.
If initial taxpayer money is used then why is there a reluctance then to pay market rates for this water over time that will eventually pay back to the taxpayer their money. Remember - there is a large capital gain instantly to the user when the water is available.
An example would be the AKL harbour bridge with its initial tolling that was run from 1959 till 1984 until the bridge was paid off. This bridge "brought immense prosperity to downstream communities and the wider nation."
With your example of the hydro schemes was this not the same scenario - well at least until Key came along?

JJ -What did we get with the tax cuts and the 90 odd billion of debt. I know it was supposed to trickle down but all we got was a flood into housing - great stuff.

Supporting 300,000 beneficiaries and their zillions of kids isn't cheap you know. Neither is the other free stuff given by government to win votes, but all you can see is property investors making money, and it makes you sad.

David Parker on water royalty: Mr Parker said the royalty was targeted not just at farmers but at any large user who gained private profit from the use of water. Any royalty would be ''fair and affordable'', he said.
edit - add url

So Labour is now going to charge large water users e.g. brewerys, soft drink manufacturers etc, who use urban water, a water royalty?

Those polls are so bad - they are good . Are all of them wrong - or just some ? I do not pretend to know.
This is becoming fun to watch .


That's the spirit - relentlessly positive - it's catching.

Not so keen on the relentless naiveté though. How the captains caller could have thought the electorate was going to buy a secret convocation of hooded eminences making behind closed doors decisions on how we are to be taxed, is an enduring mystery.

Agreed Middleman, but perhaps more green than naive. It is very concerning that an identity could stand in an election with potential to be PM with an ill considered and flippant attitude to a vital element such as taxation. Immature actually, arrogant probably, thinking to take the electorate for granted on the back of, shall we say, a self orchestrated, sense of popularity. Small as it may be NZ needs, must have, greater calibre than that in its leadership.

I don't think John Key's running this election?

Are you referring to all Key's flip flops during electioneering " responding to voters concerns"

Think that is included & it is fair comment. Key certainly exploited what he perceived as a "popular" advantage in the electorate, and he & National came to take that for granted, arrogantly so because the lack of effective opposition in parliament allowed National to puff up themselves & egos, accordingly.That did none of us any good & in my opinion is the main reason why the electorate has turned anti National. Think in fact it is more anti National than pro Labour.

Funny that Taxinda abandoned it after a single bad poll.


Be good if English could do the same.

Yeah one of these polls is seriously bad. Undecided 4% in one poll, 14% in another! I've done a bit of work in this area and it's amazing how a small skew in your sample set can significantly influence the outcome. The landline vs mobile vs web survey must be hard to get right. My guess is the polling favours national and nz first as old people are more likely to have a landline and answer it. But I guess we will find out soon enough.

"My guess is the polling favours national and nz first as old people are more likely to have a landline and answer it" - I guess this could in theory be true .. although I am not convinced ; young people answering the call but not actually turning up to vote may balance this out to some degree.

The largest relative inconsistency is with "undecideds" ( 4% in one poll vs 14% in the other ) ; try and explain this out - I know I cannot.

Yes, that's why YouGov does all its polling via mobile and panels as opposed to random sampling.

I think the number of young people answering and not turning up to vote would be quite small as it's limited to 18+ adults living at home with their parents who use a landline (most would just use a cellphone). Any young people living away from their parents in a flat/house together wouldn't have a landline, so would be underrepresented.

The "undecided" percentage would partly be explained by people not wanting to disclose who they will/want to vote for.

"The "undecided" percentage would partly be explained by people not wanting to disclose who they will/want to vote for." - the percentage could be , but not the variation of it from one poll to poll to another .

Why ever not, everything else did

the young people problem has been around for many years now and yet in the past polls were pretty accurate. The landline issue is a new one.

From the 2013 census, 85% of homes have a landline. Note that the number would have declined a little since then and 85% of homes is likely less than 85% of the voting population.

Yes, the polling data appears to be quite misleading, or at least, some polls may have a higher correlation with reality!

Prior polling *malfunctions* suggest that the skew may be to the left, where the polling tends to favor the media defined popular outcome (generally to the left), and the voting result is a bit different. This was true in Brexit as well as Trump. At present Labour is most popular in the media with the Jacindamania phenomenon proclaimed near and far. We will know in a week and a half as to whether which set of crystal balls were appropriate for prognostication.

My experience suggests that older people are more likely to tell a stranger to bugger off when contacted via phone. The really smart elder is likely to provide misdirection in their answer just because it is fun to do, and provides personal amusement.

I have to say that the few times that I've been contacted by pollsters in the past, I've not once provided any correct and appropriate answers. Then again, I may not be the target population for said polls!

JimboJones. I wonder if a reasonable chunk of the 14% undecided are wavering Peters supporters ?

...or NZ First voters who are not bothered to answer as they are going to split their vote. I suspect that many will be Farmers who were out on the farm when the phone rang who will Party Vote Winston. Then there is the rest of the Provinces who are laughing at the current lolly scramble, much based on Winston's Policies that have been in place for many months, if not years. Stuff are freaking out for sure.

I quizzed David P Farrar about this recently and he insists the mobile phone sampling removes the bias. I am skeptical though, the people who answer may not be representative of the whole.

Strange this pops up given its date. In any event the results on the day seem to say the polls were accurate enough still despite what various ppl seem to be claiming otherwise at the time.

Betting sites have flipped so often in the past few days it is more exciting than a horse race, (with unfit old ponies).


change is in the air, talking to a mate today, he played golf yesterday, all conservative types but none were going to vote for National on Sunday and all voted for National in the past.

Slave Labour, is two people trying to pay for a HOUSE...under National....whether a Rental, by a Speculator or a Mcmansion on over priced land and always competing with Land Bwankers. and over priced bits and pieces..

Plus fees for Land Agents...Lawyers, Councils ...and Bwankers.....who want a cut of the process.

Capital Gains, one and all...for flipping include any overseas INVESTOR, not over seen nor ever, ever National.

Just had a call from the National Party advising me of my closest polling booth - bless their little cotton socks - the only poll that matters is on the 23rd.

I was asked if I was enrolled to vote - I said unfortunately.

National is actually on the up - and will continue to rally until the election. (Jacinda's honeymoon has ended in the divorce courts: the electorate now wants to divorce her.)

As we have all observed, Labour has dug itself in donkey-deep.

Advice to Labour: "When you're in a hole, don't keep digging."

the trend is your friend

I love your input TTP, you're like a turkey cheering on Christmas. I really want to buy a house oooh yay look at the house prices rise, I'll now have to move to Palmerston North, yay!

They are digging, but digging graves for National's destructive policies that need to be buried with a wooden stake through the innards. Garlic is optional but may protect from recent 贪婪.


What a turn around !!!
Finally a chance to change this government after 9 years of inaction on housing

Lets not forget Nationals promises in 2007 on housing

They failed so now it is time to Vote Labour and allow them to fix the wrongs
- Ban foreign Students and Temp workers from buying existing homes
- Reduce immigration to more manageable levels.

Give young kiwis a shot at home ownership again

Anyone else watching the Youth Debate on Duke TV?


Yep, I did.

David Seymour/ACT very good in dominating others. It was interesting - he had such an assertive/aggressive style compared to all the others, but spoke really well and in accordance with his convictions. Only Chloe/Greens attempted to take him on and she did an amazingly good job of it too.

So, so sad how not one young person in the audience raised their hand as imagining that they'd ever own a home. And of the 7 politicians (most in their 30s) only two owned a home. David Seymour explained he was renting because on his politicians salary he couldn't afford to buy in Auckland. Was renting a $2+ million dollar mouldy dump (I assume in Epsom).

All in all I found the whole thing quite depressing - the cost of rent and housing in Auckland seemed to have drained all hope from the young generation in the room. And then they talked about the level of some of their student debt and that trained counselors are needed in their schools and that people with depression reach out for help and can't get an appointment. Derek Ball/NZ First said of the 600+ who committed suicide last year - half had sought help and the problem is clear: under-funding. Chris Bishop/National just seemed lost - no answers regarding what National was doing for any of these massive failures - he looked very unsettled and I felt sorry for him. Very difficult being the incumbent - David Seymour did a better job talking up/defending Chris and National than Chris did for himself.


That is sad. Maybe they don't realise that if they band together they can actually change things and bring about a return to affordability?

It seemed the strongest support in the room was for the Greens and Chloe was very good - knew their policies well. When the audience was asked if they thought climate change was the "nuclear-free" moment of their generation - there wasn't a single one approached that said no. One guy (a National party supporter) said he wasn't an expert on it so didn't know. I thought - gee, he's been well trained in denial. The ACT supporters in the audience were pretty noisy (clapped David a number of times) as well.

Wonder if that response from the National supporter is a sign we're seeing the American "I'm not a scientist" fad hitting the NZ political right.

I must check out this related book sometime.

Or maybe it was just an honest response. I got the impression he really didn't want to answer because he really didn't know what to say.

It's "learned helplessness." Eventually if things are bad enough for long enough, people lose their happiness, motivation, enthusiasm and will to change things for the better. Eventually the doubt, self deprecation, apathy, depression and acceptance occur and then their lives become black pit of nothingness.

The "prisoners" in the 1970s Standford prison experiment is an example of this.

True...could well be...I think most people are unaware just how hard some of the fights in NZ's history were, for things from voting rights to rights to a decent wage and working conditions.

Back in the same sort of times the US industrialists, their pet polis, and some early recruits in the newly sprouting Hollywood were really getting stuck into demonising any discussion of wage increases or workers' rights as evil communism - the driving force ultimately resulting in McCarthyism and the support of many Americans (e.g. Henry Ford) for Nazism for a good while there.

If young Kiwis start to realise they do actually have some power and could effect some change, things could get interesting. Hopefully not in a neo-Nazi way as we're seeing a bit in the USA...hopefully a bit more constructive. At least the young seem to be generally empathetic in their social thinking, from what I've seen so far.

It was quite refreshing to see/hear the younger generation politicians.

It was great that TVNZ canvassed opinions of young farmers as well. It was a reminder that farmers are also young people.

I was impressed with the NZ First guy and also Carrie from the Maori Party

Yes, they didn't seem to get as much time to speak - but when given the floor were really refreshing and thoughtful. Neither of them were comfortable with jumping in/interrupting/criticising others. Qualities I liked about them.

Haha so even with Labour’s tax backtrack, they are still going to get rid of negative gearing and ring-fencing losses to each property this/next year if they get voted in? Man that’s definitely going to screw sooooo many people, especially the ones that bought within the last 2 years in Auckland. A spectacular way to crash the housing market and bankrupt a whole bunch of people :D but we must feed the poor and their 6 kids so they can have more kids that needs to be fed!


House prices down $60k this month according to Harcourts, last time I checked National were still in power, houses have been falling for at least the last quarter. Maybe take a look at the people, both private individuals and the government enablers, who drove the prices up to the point where we're facing this?


If removing negative gearing (that doesn't exist according to Property_king) and ring-fencing losses causes NZ's housing market to crash, then it's not exactly a healthy or stable market. Besides, the fault lies squarely with National for their denial and complacency for letting the bubble get this big. If they didn't let house prices and debt escalate this far, then (assuming Labour gets in and acts on these policies) the outcome wouldn't be as bad.


Your comment was an arsy bit of negativity. You piss-take on those with 6 kids but save the empathy for a few property owners that might lose a bit of equity. Rich.

If youth actually vote, Labour/ Greens are in with a grin. If they don't , it will probably be Winston as the kingmaker.
However there is a money or the bag situation for National . People saying they will vote for the "No tax cuts to help the poor ", but when it comes to the crunch when they get in the polling booth , and think bugger them, a tax cut would be nice. .


Not me...I think we have some fundamental issues when we want to cut taxes when we're putting so much pressure on our medical services that people are dying because of it. $20 a week is worth more than funding our health system more appropriately?

Just because I have private medical insurance doesn't mean I have no regard for others who do not.

i hope you are right, i think acts 0.6% support suggests low tax is not an important issue for NZERS. 5

Is there much difference now between Labour and National after Labour dropping their guts on the capital gains tax?

This poll was conducted before labours flip flop, hence why they announced it now to make it look like no ones cares, not true the flip flop will stuff them, quite sneaky of labour and good politics by them


Yes, tricky lot these far lefties (Labour/Greens and any other of the assorted Loony Left). They will be economical with the truth as the day is long all the while plotting to tax and redistribute. That is their main and only real policy position. Anything else from them is s sideshow.

Pot kettle black.

On this site you see people spouting dishonest rubbish perpetuated by Joyce and others, e.g.

1. Inheritance tax will be brought in

2. Ridiculous claims of the cost of any water tax, 3-4 times what it would actually be at max

3. Economically illiterate suggestions of vege price increases, e.g. $3 cabbages to $6 because a produce grower might pay $884 per year on a 20-hectare farm

4. National lying on social media that Labour is going to increase income tax:

5. Stephen Joyce's similarly economically illiterate $11 billion hole (turned out to be an estimation of the inverse of the value of the hole in his head)

Lest we forget National's own track record on honesty and tax, of promising not to add or increase taxes then increasing/adding tax 18 times over 3 terms.

And lest we also forget Bill English's creative statements to the public over Todd Barclay...

Then, most ironically, with all the "communist!" name-calling, we find it's National with the very interesting connection to China.

Now it's "Loony Left" name-calling. It's very notable to see National and many supporters peddling lies against the left-leaning parties.

Notable because there must be a good reason they're doing this instead of debating actual facts. Is discussing actual facts a bit hard, maybe? One can only conclude that were facts on their side they'd debate them instead of resorting to propaganda. Or is it just they can't do maths?

I have noticed from this campaign that National seems only to be appealing to its own voters and talking negatively about everyone else. There has been no attempt by them to claim the middle ground and bring new supporters to their side. I guess you would call this arrogance but it will be their undoing.

Going to be quite exciting watching the election unfold next weekend! I have to say I think national will swan in...They will see it through as most people respect Daddy even if he is the supernatural believing statue called bill English

what labour supporters here who get excited dont realise is that sometimes one can make a lot of money as a market inflates and can make money as it deflates....the last week has been very profitable for making money off jacinda...the more the polls show labour pulling ahead the greater the opportunity there is to make money...$$$$ and if the labour policy for labour REFORMS come into effect and we get strikes.... well i cant wait... more opportunities to make money...nothing like a volatile currency .... keeping stock prices lower...and here i was worried stock prices would go higher and higher and higher... nothing to worry about now.....$$$$$ Oh will we can a correction soon? well ......will china being pressure on markets? ....does it really matter if labours get in? thats the system..thats the risk...and 3 term governments in new zealand? well you do the stats.....

And this is where election gambling is seen as the more reliable form of making money off the election. The complex systems above exist beyond clear predictions and the number of independent and codependent variables is high. Plus many elected governments can take years to put in place large policy changes. Not to mention the election promises which get broken and delayed eternally till the next election and then the one after that ad nauseam. One of the few benefits of taking the higher risk is the variety and size of trades, that not all are influenced by the election and government performance (as if we had an accurate measure of their performance) and there is the added benefit if going into a long term investment where further benefits can be achieved. Considering that trade with a country is a flexible and ever changing process, (much like say negotiating and renegotiating trade agreements, changing export/ import standards etc), it is unlikely to be in a fixed state forever. No one sane would ever bet that trade policies and standards are fixed forever in time. Not even the Bible's interpretation remained singular and unchanged. While I normally do not recommend gambling it might be a better fit with your comfort zone.

accountingsoftwaremodels: much more clarity in your comment today, it shows more of the process behind your ideas and not just the competing output thought streams. Which of your investments do you prefer in pre-election states? (currency, stocks, assets, etc)

stock markets via set statistical trading models..these model provide guidance weekly,monthly and six monthly trading cycles.. These variations have increased in the last 4 weeks.

My preference is stocks as well but more from the engineering side of things and for the diversity offered. (Recent large scale NZ company failures aside). Developments in analytical models have improved far beyond the capability of a human based company (not hard though, a cat has been tested to perform better than a few as well). Having researched and worked with similar model setups on the backend the potential for more development in the technology is far more interesting than most ICT roles. Not as interesting as biotech and medical research but most Phds have to leave NZ for roles with research centers overseas. It is a shame that NZs market players in tech solutions are generally still decades behind. But then that is the same for medical research as well (as a recent conference in genetic modification curing life threatening diseases in humans just highlighted).

There'll certainly be some short-term volatility in the NZD if Labour win, mind you the NZD is at all time highs and folks have being saying it's over-priced for a while, which is not so great for exporters, would a downward trend in the NZD put pressure on some of the banks and the govt debt?

In my amateur trading status (gambling) I"m thinking of shorting the NZD over the next few weeks, and I'm considering changing banks to one that isn't AU owned as well. Is there information available as to who has the most mortgages on their books anywhere, and who has the most interest only mortgages? If so I'll avoid those like the plague.

I took out a 100k short on the NZD/USD pair about a week ago just as it was coming down from above 73 cents.
Planning on keeping it until at least market open on the 25th.

If you are that paranoid, buy physical Gold. Transaction costs are high, but it's the most fungible store of wealth there is. With interest rates so low, the effective opportunity cost is low and the Government of the day can't tax what they can't find.

Gold is subject to capital gains taxation (it is considered financial arrangements) under the current National legislation.

Correct, it is considered an investment. However, there is no register for gold holdings and it can just as easily be sold in Paris as Auckland.

if labour/greens win i expect the market to drop on the Monday in reaction, and already have some buys that i want ready to go, if national win will have to wait for north korea to send off another rocket.

That is terrible!

Using leverage for your own selfish gains :)

Property bulls will be redoing their sums with Taxinda and god knows who in support seriously looking like taking over the drivers seat. Reckon the tax working group will recommend a lot of structural changes for domestic and foreign specuvestors, and i reckon they will craft an excuse to do it immediately vs the recent promise of waiting another three years.

You could see this coming six months ago, even though all the bulls denied it was possible. Mind you the bulls probably thought Hillary and Brexit were an impossibility as well.

Agree that change creates opportunity. Buying the dip is always the trick in any asset class. If our dollar tanks taking specuvestor funding with it, and a significant decrease in immigration and foreign demand occurs, opportunity will be the word. Great time to be poised with a vulture find to pick the bones of leveraged specuvestor land.

Kinda surprised that there are not more clearly unmaintained rentals being dumped on the market at this late stage. money probably cashed up pre Christmas.

The problem NZ First has, apart from the Shane Jones opportunistic appointment, is Winston. NZF has some good talent incl the young guy on the TVNZ Duke channel last night. Problem is Winnie is past it and his belligerence and obfuscation is just getting worse. His last interview with Espiner was a disgraceful performance on Winnies part, and zi am no Espiner fan.

Bad news

I'd count myself firmly in the 14% undecided column.

National strike me as the cosy political establishment, happily asleep at the wheel and coasting along.

Labour are closest to my political viewpoints but lack experience and detail

Green, would get my vote if they had any credible candidates but they are lacking woefully in the credibility stakes.

TOP speak a lot of sense but is it a wasted vote?

The rest do nothing for me.

Housing cost in Auckland will always be out of whack with rest of NZ-- SIMPLE ECONOMICS 101--the very reason why it is in Sydney, New York, San Francisco etc etc. The demand, and the associated price rises, is where the jobs are-end of story- nothing to do with who is in govt. But come elections, the obvious happens--they will come out of the wood works and will offer solutions. Dont be fooled and go for Billy to keep the economy cruising along. He has a fine track record in sound economic management, may be needs a bit of tweaking. Neither party can or will turn off immigration tap - otherwise who will flip burgers etc or for that matter build houses.

yes of course......its on the edge of a huge mass of people call?

You would have to stop them coming here and buying anything....

notice no one is talking the huge changes coming in technology and society in new zealand..Do these people understand what a reserve bank does? Do they understand whats been happening in Japan? I understand that basic needs are in the front of people minds... You all want your own houses... but do you need them... can people live in other types of dwelling and over the centuries various types of houses have been created. It might be time that new zealanders started to think beyond the current housing model. It only been four years since house prices took off in auckland. Hardly a long enough period of time for governments to react when they have to give the market the first go at solving the problem. I doubt that labour would have done anything differently because they would be busy arguing with local councils...

"notice no one is talking the huge changes coming in technology and society in new zealand."
Have you not watched any of the debates? Or read policy?
Possibly not the case with the incumbents, but that has been a key rhetoric in the Labour party's messages under Ardern.

Anyway Helen C is back and running the show now that she has all the time in her hands!

In hindsight it's a pity she didn't get the top UN job. I wonder whether her strategy is to push for a republic so she can be the first president?

Stuff poll is quite interesting. 33K votes and National has 46% compared to Labour's 36%.

Greens are 8% Labour 37% so 46% to 47%. Winston and Top are kingmakers.

Both TOP and Winston want lower immigration.

68K voters

I actually think thats probably a good result for Labour as I am presuming most of the demographic that read online political news would be more educated and enjoy reading political articles. Its a long straw I know.

That poll is cookie based, so has flaws - you can vote on multiple devices; work, home, mobile, you can clear your cookies and vote again. Not saying that behavior has happened, or if it did, that only one side did it of course.

Other polls are flawed because they rely on landlines. Myself and my husband are 37, we haven't had a landline for 5 years. Those younger are even less likely to have landlines.

I have one, but the thing's been unplugged for 2 years! I know of no-one in the millennial age range who has one.

I checked the stuff poll at 7am this morning and there had been 71k votes. I checked it just now at 8am and there had been 81.8k votes.

Are we really supposed to believe that 10800 individual NZ-ers voted on one website between 7-8am on a Saturday morning and that 10800 votes maintained the exact same percentages that already existed???

The stuff poll is clearly a work of stuff fiction.

I believe it would maintain the same percentages. It's probably a sign that it is pretty accurate.

Your access to our unique content is free - always has been. But ad revenues are diving so we need your direct support.

Become a supporter

Thanks, I'm already a supporter.