Labour would need the support of the Greens to form a government, according to the latest 1 News-Colmar Brunton Poll.
With 46% support, Labour would receive 59 seats - two short of the 61 required to govern.
The Greens would receive 11 seats, leaving only 40 to National and 10 to ACT.
Support for National sat at 31% - one percentage point lower than the last 1 News-Colmar Brunton poll, conducted between October 3 and 7.
National hasn't polled this badly since mid-May, when support for the party dropped to 29%. Simon Bridges was rolled as leader days later. In February, National polled at 46%.
Coming back to the latest poll, support for the Greens was up two points to 8% - a relatively high level for the party.
National spent much of the polling period (Saturday through to last night) campaigning against the Greens' wealth tax, saying Labour would go against its word and adopt it, if elected.
Support for ACT remained elevated at 8%.
NZ First was up a percentage point to 3%. The New Conservatives was also up a point to 2%, while TOP, Advance NZ and the Maori Party were at 1%.
The undecideds fell to 7%.
While support for Labour was down a percentage point, Jacinda Ardern was up five points in the preferred prime minister ranks to 55%. Judith Collins was down three points to 20%.
David Seymour was up a point to 3%, while Winston Peters remained at 1%.
According to poll results on the two referendums, euthanasia would be legalised, but recreational cannabis use wouldn't be.
Support for the End of Life Choice Act was at 60%, versus opposition at 33%.
Support for the Cannabis Legalisation and Control Bill was up six points to 41%, but lagged opposition at 51%.
Here is a summary of the results:
Party:
Labour: 46% (down 1%)
National: 31% (down 1%)
ACT: 8% (no change)
Greens: 8% (up 2%)
NZ First: 3% (up 1%)
New Conservative: 2% (up 1%)
The Opportunities Party: 1% (down 1%)
Advance New Zealand: 1% (no change)
Māori party: 1% (up 1%)
Don’t know: 7% (down 1%)
Refused: 8% (up 3%)
Preferred PM:
Jacinda Ardern: 55% (up 5%)
Judith Collins: 20% (down 3%)
David Seymour: 3% (up 1%)
Winston Peters: 1% (no change)
Don’t know: 12% (down 2%)
Refused: 4% (up 1%)
1.57 million votes cast already
Record numbers of New Zealanders are continuing to vote early. 147,504 people cast their votes on Wednesday, brining the total number of votes cast up to 1.57 million.
85 Comments
Ah no, God defend actually, but it’s the same thing. Don’t know how many green contenders are counting themselves in but we are going to see an influx into parliament of zealots, previously unimaginable. A team of 5 million to be told sternly how they must live by eleven or so who know best. We had that, and more than enough of that, with the previous Labour government, but this lot will make them look like evangelical angels.
A tax imposition that would necessitate the government collating, storing and auditing the private financial assets of citizens, with right of entry to do so, is beyond any measure ever contemplated let alone proposed by any government in NZ be it conservative or liberal. The last regime that carried that doctrine and system in the free world was Nazi Germany. Any partisan views of other government failures and foibles are of little consequence in comparison to an invasion of civil liberties of such magnitude. It is pure Orwellian, and it is not welcome in New Zealand, past, present and future.
Excuse me as I'm not a tax expert, but what exactly is it about the Green's proposal that puts it more in line with Nazi Germany rather than the plethora of wealth taxes around the world (Argentina, France (discontinued), Spain, Netherlands, Norway, Switzerland and Italy)
The government knows how much we earn it always has as you know but explain beyond your tax PAYE or like return, how exactly the government is to obtain details of the worth of your assets as proposed by the Greens in order to assess your tax liability. That is the sum of the value of all of property owned, bank accounts, equity investments,trusts,vehicle,boat,artwork,jewellery,heirlooms. How are those details to be stored and how are they to be audited each year so as to know the status and/or fate of said assets. In other words what exactly will the government be authorised to do, to go looking for assets. And bear in mind most of NZ already has a wealth tax on property in so much that your council rates are based on the value, the more it is worth the more is paid, and the government gets 15% GST take on that.
History. In order to seize assets they had to first locate them. The Reich Flight Tax provided the mechanism. There is a world of difference between a government gathering tax from income and that of a government that demands a declaration of each citizens worth by way of their assets. No we are not talking about seizure, but the set up of a government agency to administer these private details is unheralded in this country.
This comes across as extreme paranoia. I've mentioned before on here I'd much prefer inheritance or land taxes over this wealth tax, but I can't get on board with this kind of reaction, especially to something which it appears will almost certainly not happen this term.
Do you have a better solution to broaden the countries tax base, especially targeting the artificial 'asset rich, income poor' strategy for wealth accumulation? Or do you think things are hunky-dory just as they are?
Ok fine you go ahead each year and happily and tell the government, how much your home is worth, how much your mortgage is, how much you have on term deposit, how much you hold in bonds and shares, what your car and boat is worth, how much you might have in a trust, how much you possess by way of jewellery, artworks, heirlooms and then account for and justify variations from the previous year. Not for me though.
I think you are being a little naive if you think any Western Government couldn't figure out most of that already. Certainly the council knows how much my house is worth, and any overseas shares that cost more than 50k are already reported and taxed based on an assumed return. The IRD knows about my UK house as I report the income in my income tax return, and pay the tax owing.
The issue of jewellery, artwork and antiques etc. are one of the main reasons I prefer a land or inheritance tax - much less bureaucracy.
Yes the council or anyone else can look up a property value but they can’t calculate your equity, how much you may have mortgaged. Yes they can assess investment holdings from income declared but they can’t know about an overdraft that might off set that. You may have a $90k Audi but they don’t know what you have borrowed against it, ditto for the 40ft yacht that you may co-own with three others. For the wealth tax to work you will need to supply the government with a statement of position. That is something a trading bank might need to know but pointedly, under the law at present they could not disclose that to any other party including the government unless under a warrant issued by a judge. The point is a wealth tax as proposed would legitimise the government acquiring information on citizens that they have not needed to have access to before. Sure Labour may reject it totally, but for me rather than the actual tax take involved, the proposition of the government holding dossiers on its citizens financial positions is abhorrent, and should never have been promoted by a parliamentary party in this good country.
Fair enough, I can understand that. A land tax is far easier as the council already has an estimate and the methodology could be quite similar to existing rates, and an inheritance tax is simpler as it only requires a one-time valuation rather than annual. I wouldn't necessarily oppose a straight-up wealth tax, but it's not my favourite and I understand your concerns.
I would suggest that jumping straight for the Nazi card does not strengthen your argument.
Because I could not find any more recent democratically elected government that has imposed such an incursion into confidentiality & civil liberties. Yes for example the Swiss have a wealth tax but it is assessed on a voluntary submission by the taxpayer(s) and because of that it leaks, substantially. From their pronouncements the Greens simply would not countenance that.
It would help the credibility of your comments if you had actually read the Green's proposal re wealth tax before commenting.
But it is a good point about record keeping. Would it be much the same as the way companies keep records for gst and company tax purposes, including keeping track of depreciation?
You should read it too. Especially the part that IRD will be newly empowered to investigate any subject if they “suspect” that they may be hiding assets. That is right of entry and that is what is threatening to all NZrs’ privacy and confidentiality. Everybody seems to be overlooking this feature. Somehow, by some perverted twist on natural justice, it will be justified on the grounds that benefit fraud is investigated. Candidly, any person who could promote such an Orwellian concept shouldn’t be living in this good country, let alone be in parliament. Cannot work out why the Privacy Commissioner or whoever has not made a relevant statement.
Funny how so many scared of labour / greens which will probably be a fairly benign coalition. Act / National is much more scary IMO. About the only thing they would agree on is massive tax cuts but with no plan to pay for it. The tax cuts would go straight into housing and all we would get to show for it is a government loaded with debt.
Spot on Jimbo. People need to change the radio away from 89.4
my 2p is that Nationals attack on the Greens in the last week has strengthened the greens even more because your average left/labour voter can see what a disaster it could turn out if the Greens don't get in and Lab don't get the numbers which then allows a National/Act govt.
The minister for Oravida as our primeminister?
Most of her own party hate her so why would anyone want her as our PM.
If the Greens don't get in, then from the latest poll results Lab 46%, Nat 31%, Act 8%, Green 8% Also rans =7%. So if the greens drop to 4.9%, and all of that went to Nat/Act You'd end up with NAT+ACT=42%, Labour =46%, Wasted Votes the rest. Labour would rule alone with 62 seats, NAT+ ACT = 58 seats.
It would take a huge last minute swing for even the slightest chance of Nat getting in.
In 2017 the polls were a bit out compared to Election Day.
“With Labour rarely polling more than 30%, mostly in the mid to high 20s, there was scepticism about the Party’s ability to lead a coalition. National continued to poll in the 40s, usually at the higher end of that range”
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1177083X.2018.1443472
on polls against result, greens s drop and NZ first normally rises,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2017_New_Zealand_…
i still think NZ first are gone for good, but if the maori party picks up a electorate MP they could get two seats
the only thing left now is will jacinda keep her word on the wealth tax (i think she will as she will want a third term) and how long before judith and gerry get rolled
The Nats would be fools to roll Judith within 18 months. If there was an obvious new leader it would be Bridges, but he should bide his time. Luxon would need to get his feet under the desk. Muller has a lot to account for - I think Bridges would have recovered a bit of ground, especially since Goldsmith wouldn't have been Finance spokesperson.
The cannabis result may hurt the Greens, if the young voters who may have voted for change , don't bother voting. a high % of them would vote for the Greens. OTOH, they may not have voted nayway , or may have already voted.
Got to hand it to Winston, he knows how to campaign , still unlkely to get 5 % though .
National supporters who are saying they will vote ACT, may still vote National when faced with the ballot in the polling booth,
I Predict ,
Labour 47 %
Greens 7%
NZfirst 4 %
National 33%
Act 6%
all others 3 %, 1 electoral seat to the Maori party.
Labour needs the Greens like National needs ACT. Having a more extreme party allows Lab/Nats to hold the middle ground while appeasing those who are more left- or right-leaning.
You see it happen all the time. When there is something that needs to be said that it a bit more controversial, they can the supporting party to do it while not approving or denying it so they can pretend they either supported it or not as required later on.
Looking forward to a progressive government of Labour and the Greens. This election may herald the increasing political awareness and action of younger generations, the growing consciousness of many in society of the road to collapse we are currently travelling on and the increasing irrelevance of purely growth driven policies.
Well she's the consummate politician, so of course she has. Winston put her in the driver's seat without a majority back in 2017. She's played the cards she was dealt cannily and cautiously as she's steadily built her political capital. Those of us with our ears open pre-2017 heard her talk about her hero: Peter Fraser. Transformational with a capital 'T' that man. If we get a Labour-Greens coalition on Saturday night, I predict that this election will be as significant a sea-change as 1984.
That's what has got me. Stability means the status quo. The status quo for the last political term has been underperformance. She's saying keep us, we'll keep you safe, and we will get things done really slowly or not at all. And people buy into it. Todd Muller has a lot to answer for.
Retiring journo Colin James predicted exactly that share trader, last year. Demographics.
http://www.colinjames.co.nz/2019/05/19/ardern-transformation-now-or-a-p…
the funny thing about that is he only needed to put the rail line in to carry the containers to auckland , the port would have done the rest , they are 1/2 owned by the port of tauranga so would have slowly invested to steal the shipping lines from auckland that did not want to go to tauranga.
all he had to do was look at the long game and supply the infrastructure and the business would have taken it up
Amazing to see Labour share continue to decline.
Interesting the PM is so poor in leaders debates, part is the terrible record she has to defend part could be, outside of scripted narrative and stage managed walking tours she just doesn't have the depth of awareness & skills.
Its still funny to think for her most important UN speech, James Shaw had to write it for her. Can't see Kelvin Davis doing that.
No wonder she will happily resign after a poor election result.
I think people (esp Mike Hosking) are missing the subtlety of Prime Minister Ardern around resignation,the comments are really directed at Judith;
"But she believed the electorate decided when a politician was finished."
"If you aren't able to bring your party into government, you need to reassess and think who is the best placed to do that," she told TVNZ."
Matthew Hooton NZ Herald today;
The origins of the catastrophe to befall National tomorrow night lie in its attitude towards its 2017 ejection from power. Similar denial is already apparent towards tomorrow's disaster, creating the conditions for another calamity in 2023.
..National didn't think the 2017 result was fair. It made up a new "convention" that the party with the most votes should form a government.
...But Christchurch and Covid did happen, and the world will remain in turmoil for some years. Ardern has proven herself globally unparalleled at providing comfort, a sense of national unity and even some direction amidst crisis. This should not be scoffed at.
The comparisons will enrage everyone across the political spectrum, but Churchill did not personally plan the Battle of Britain or D-Day landings, nor Reagan personally design his economic strategy or military build-up. It irritates partisan opponents, but national leadership can be largely about words, hugs and personal connection. The citizens of other democracies are not wrong to wish for a leader with Ardern's communications talent.
...But, already, National MPs are telling themselves they have been cheated again. Had Bridges not been rolled, the May polls and approval ratings would have been mere aberrations. The public would have seen through Ardern by now, voted reluctantly for Bridges and the Key-English era would be restored. Looking ahead, they say, if the party just returns to the status quo ante, National already has 2023 in the bag.
This view will likely be the majority view of National MPs elected tomorrow. Among them is a growing faction of evangelical Christians, who are motivated less by economic policy than the American culture wars, and who have been dubbed the Taliban by more mainstream party members.
he is kind of right, they dont understand MMP and have never fostered relationships with minor parties but rather treated then as lackies.
and they have not rejuvenated the front bench, you have some people there that should have gone by now, that used to be the criticism of labour and it took them a few elections losses to get rid of the hanger on.
its like the all blacks sometimes star players need to be moved with a gentle nudge to let new stars blossom
something the greens understand, but NZ first star player will not let happen
Ardern has already said they will bring the Greens into the fold, and frustrated Labourites are voting Greens to ensure Labour gets dragged to the left and delivers something other than tepid tax increases and nothing more. The whole thing falls to pieces when you don't vote for who bests actually represents your interests, but MMP encourages second-guessing coalition negotiations and other factors voters can't possibly know, nor things MPs are apparently that hung up on being accountable for (like actually delivering on campaign promises).
Meanwhile the labour supporters are voting green. bahhahahaha
As much as I'd like to say - Suck it hard National, it's not a good thing for the country that they are so dysfuntional atm.
National deserve another 3 years in the wilderness, time to cull some deadwood and to get their act together.
RIP Jacinda the Radical, replaced by Jacinda the Steady Hand on the Tiller, who took precisely one term to abandon talk of transformation and become a much more appealing version of Bill English, who ironically enough beat her in 2017. Let's not forget that this will be the first election Ardern will actually win as Labour leader, and what is she promising? No real reform, no accounting for the promises she made and didn't deliver, no explanation why non-performers have been promoted and no inclination explain why NZ is going backwards in all the ways she angrily painted as being shameful in 2017. At some point, the worm will turn. There was a point when the media didn't love John Key anymore. There was a point where every story on RNZ was about the housing crisis, or living costs, or poverty. That doesn't happen anymore, but some day people will get tired of being gaslighted by Ardern as she tells them not expect her to do the things she said would do.
Well, I'm sick of being patronised and mollycoddled by the lefty Labour govt -
what have they delivered? nothing...!
Frankly. I think they were saved by crises and excused from accountability of poor performance... where incompetence is rewarded and accountability is flouted
Likewise the Greens move on 'wealth tax' and 'funding private schools' has been equally disingenuous, and sadly I think they have strayed off their reservation -
Despite the fact I actually like the idea of doing things more sustainably and protecting nature...
The rights are either extremists, ACT or New Conservtives, or simply Lost without a rudder i.e. National
The whole election is a debacle of blame, non accountability and shortsightedness...
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.