New Zealand First has emerged as the biggest winner in post-Budget voter polls published by TVNZ and RNZ this week.
The party polled at 8% and 9.1% respectively, the latter a high for this election cycle. NZ First received 6.1% of the vote in the 2023 election and has polled between 8% and 5% ever since.
If an election were held today, these polls suggest the party could win 10 or 11 seats, up from the eight it currently holds.
Both the TVNZ and RNZ polls had bad news for the major parties, with National dropping about 2%, and the ACT Party down 1% or 2% — but a positive result for the Green Party.
As if to prove the variation in individual polls, TVNZ’s result showed the coalition could hold onto power, while RNZ’s numbers gave the Labour-led bloc a majority. But both polls showed declining support for National and ACT, with gains for NZ First and the left-leaning parties.
Interest.co.nz’s own polling average shows the Coalition two percentage points ahead of their rivals, with NZ First’s gain mostly making up for National and ACT party losses.
Other polls suggest Budget 2025 and the pay equity reforms needed to fund it may be to blame for the dent in National–ACT’s numbers.
An RNZ Reid Research poll found 43.2% of New Zealanders opposed the recent changes to pay equity, compared to 25.5% support, and 68% thought it should have gone through a consultation process before being passed into law.
A Talbot Mills Research poll released to NZ Herald found Budget 2025 was the least popular since 1996 with 33% of 700 respondents saying it would be “bad for New Zealand overall” to just 22% saying it would be good.
Only two other Budgets—1999 and 2012—were seen by more voters as bad for the country than good, and even then the numbers were evenly split. The most popular Budgets were in 2014 and 2020.
NZ First may have benefited from being the least visible coalition partner during the Budget period, picking up support at the expense of National and ACT. All the polls were conducted in the week following the Budget’s release.
Party leader Winston Peters gave the usual dismissal of polls, but party president Julian Paul sent out a newsletter boasting about the result, and claiming actual support was much higher.
“Everyday New Zealanders can see the impact we are having in Parliament and as part of this coalition government. They can see that New Zealand First pragmatism has shone through Budget 2025. They can see the experience and effectiveness that our team brings to the table.”
The good poll result will be a morale booster for the party as Peters steps out of the Deputy Prime Minister role and begins campaigning for another term in government.
26 Comments
Polls at this stage of proceedings are little more than a whistle in the wind and as the Grand Old Duke of York rhyme explains, when you’re only halfway up you’re neither up nor down. Winston Peters is canny, experience, tactics & strategy brimming over. For example he has put a rake handle through Labour’s bike front wheel with his dismissal of any future while Labour has Hipkins as a leader. Resultantly if there is no change Labour are doomed to combination with the Greens &TPM. Should Hipkins depart then Winston can claim to be running the show for them. On top of that Winston is unquestionably doing NZ proud as an outstanding and effective Foreign Minister.
My bet is he won't be at the next election, he doesn't look like he has much runway left.
And I'm betting that Jones - who is being used as a blunt club by those who don't want blood on their own hands - will be facing a fierce backlash by then.
As will the whole 3-ring circus, of course. Facing something they didn't understand while belonging to a religion back at the flat-earth stage (otherwise known as economics), trying to bail the Titanic with buckets but ensuring the buckets are all owned on B Deck (property-rights and digital numbers vs livable habitat - what could possibly go wrong?
Imagine have the Greens and TPM as your only coalition options. Poor Chippy. Lol.
Try widening perspective.
Humanity is traversing the Limits to Growth.
Do you think the current lot are qualified to see us through that morph?
Remembering they wanted to 'get back' - which isn't 'getting forwards'.
They're a wasted space, given where we're headed. A complete waste of precious adaption-time.
Limits to growth aside, and focusing on the human behavioural aspect, we are seeing lowering levels of education, low engagement in local and central politics, and a hangover from the good old days where each generation seems to think they will have the same opportunities to the last (and yes limits to growth can ties into this). How are we supposed to work together as a nation and come to real, practical solutions, when we have a less educated populace exercising their right and power to vote, for those whose targets appear to be less about the greater good of NZ, and more about winning the next election to hold their power and income. The only answer I see is to educate the populace, each other, and engage more. This however, is no easy task given the education system currently has fallen to ideology over academia.
The economy is pretty flat out there. The budget was a chance to inject some life into it but just rearranged the existing monies.
The RBNZ interest rate and credit controls are not neutral they are restrictive, govt fiscal policy is somewhat restrictive, exports are somewhat expansionary and the housing market is treading water. The overall effect on the economy is somewhat restrictive.
Somewhat restrictive when you have an election in 2026 is not good. NZ First are the only political party talking about expansionary measures be it regional development or mining. I think NZ First have become more popular because they are the only party with policies for economic growth, and people are yearning for some economic growth and more economic activity.
It was not inspirational
According to the current polls, half the people are yearning for more "free" socialist helicopter money (= grandchildrens debt) from Labour, communist envy theft from the Greens & taxpayer funded racist separatism from TPM.
Probably the same half of households who pay no net income tax after credits & transfers.
How's the other shoulder?
kiwikidsnz,
I wish you would tell us what you really think, but reading between the lines, I suspect that you don't really like the parties to the left of the political spectrum-or those who might vote for them.
I wonder what you would make of me? I have come to so dislike and fear the ACT party and their policies that I am now prepared to consider voting Labour-and swallow lots of dead rats in the process-in the hope of seeing them removed from parliament. I believe that they represent a real threat to what is left of our democracy and their influence on the coalition is already out of all proportion to the votes they secured at the election.
The key to where ACT want to take the country lies in Seymour's membership of the Mont Pelerin Society.
You don't help yourself with exaggeration, the greens may be radically left but they aren't communist and I think you overestimate the extent to which they are motivated by envy, although no doubt a few of them are.
If you took the time to understand left wing voters I think you'd find that at heart their core motivation is usually similar to your own - a desire to preserve the kiwi way of life. And like you their vote depends on their fears about threats to that way of life. They just disagree on what the biggest threats are. Left wing voters see unchecked neoliberalism with its ever worsening inequalities, mass exodus of young Kiwis, and social problems like homelessness etc as more of an existential threat than Māori separatism or poorly designed wealth taxes.
I would love to hear a coherent argument on why taxes on capital gains or wealth are necessarily driven by envy, while taxes on income earned from doing actual hard work is just a normal fact of life.
To me it's just a discussion about the best way to raise the necessary money to maintain a decent society - there's no need to get so emotive. No-one is out to get you personally, some people just want to make some tweaks to keep us somewhat in the realms of an egalitarian society.
The economy is pretty flat out there. The budget was a chance to inject some life into it but just rearranged the existing monies.
The RBNZ interest rate and credit controls are not neutral they are restrictive, govt fiscal policy is somewhat restrictive, exports are somewhat expansionary and the housing market is treading water. The overall effect on the economy is somewhat restrictive.
It's almost as if we had a government thats just spent years incinerating money, just to keep the lights on.
Whatever recovery is possible must foremost be well considered and careful rather than introducing hasty and shallow policies. A lot of damage needs to be repaired. Reminiscent of the doctor warning his depressed patient of resorting to alcohol as a quick fix - yes it will lift you out of a dark hole but then it will dump you back into a deeper and darker one.
It is kinda weird that the bashing we're getting now is because of loose as government fiscal policy, and people want more of it.
Except we are past - PAST - the global Limits to Growth.
The list of 'journalists' who told those folk this fact, I include between the following brackets ( )
So they know no better.
We are actually late - perhaps too late - to organise what will inevitably be needed next. Degrowth isn't a choice - the choice is whether we smooth the change.
You'll be sure to let us know when the price of fossil fuels reflects the fact they're now mostly used up and harder to come by.
Also, I don't believe any civilisation in history has actively managed its descent. Why you'd think it'd be any different the next time it happens... Well that probably explains a bit.
Try listening please - if energy underwrites money 100% (as I've pointed out on this site for well over a decade) then how can it get 'too expensive'?
Only via unrequitable debt.
There being not enough future energy to do the future work to do the future repayment.
Some in Rome tried, some even got close to identifying the predicament. So too Greece. But this time there is nowhere else to go - this is the first and only time we can run overshoot at a global scale. Which is why I holler.
That's not why you holler. It's why you tell yourself you holler. The actual underpinnings of the incessant desire to be the doomsayer on the mountain, are the same primal drivers of man's incessant need for more than they already have.
There's a change in motivation all of us could adopt, that also solves much of the problems you feel the need to speak of incessantly. The education of which, is experiential, rather than data driven.
Try listening please - if energy underwrites money 100% (as I've pointed out on this site for well over a decade) then how can it get 'too expensive'?
A central point of your view is that we're past the halfway mark, and the remaining resources are exceeding harder to extract. This should relate to the cost of the resources. Which it is, in some areas, usually involving a finished product, but not in the actual cost of the energy. The energy is the cheap bit.
Figure 7 is of note as is the fact there is no mention (or relevance) of 'money' ...EROI
P/ s1+s2
https://2021conf.sesoc.org.nz/PDFs/S3A%20P1%20-%20Donnell_Krumdieck_Nei…
And we go deeper in debt..
Mack and the Boys and the IOU...
Many seem to be turning off from msm such as tvnz and RNZ and now listen to the likes of 'the platform'.
I suspect they are also the ones abandoning Nat for NZ First and Act.
Any wonder why!
The Platform is John Laws, for those who did an Australian stint and noted the style of propaganda.
Truth-seeking, it is not.
As with all social media, it panders to a pre-disposed echelon and drags them - willingly - down a partisan rabbit-hole. Note, though, that RNZ is just as rapidly doubling-down its own partisan rabbit-hole.
Our whole narrative - that humans are superior to nature, physics, everything - is less than 10,000 years old (the religions based on it are younger again) and it was falsely-based. And is now obsolete - although still peddled by those who see themselves as 'winners' in the existing narrative
Not John Laws, you are on the wrong station.
Michael Laws who was educated in Wanganui.
Listen.
Carefully.
Read it again. Yes, they share surnames. And agenda. But one set the pace for the other.
It would probably help National's cause if they could demonstrate constructive and innovative behaviour - anything! - other than using the same old adversarial strategies and thinking that just defer important change and development, while kludging up assorted legislation to cover doctrinal deficiencies in an only marginally functional status quo.
But that's not really the brand, is it.
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.