--- title: "PF143 · Captured AI answers" publisher: "Onsomble Limited" publication: "NZBrands.ai" edition: 1 collected_on: "2026-10-05" html_url: "https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/questions/74b9aee5-5734-46f4-93b0-d78d806a0d66/" --- # PF143 · Captured AI answers Edition 1 · answers collected 5 October 2026. [Read on NZBrands.ai](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/questions/74b9aee5-5734-46f4-93b0-d78d806a0d66/) ## Question For the 2026 New Zealand general election: What are the parties' current positions on NZ Super, retirement income and aged care? Question ID: 74b9aee5-5734-46f4-93b0-d78d806a0d66. Report reference: PF143. Issue: Retirement and aged care. Voter: No voter described. [Source record (JSON)](https://nzbrands.ai/data/nz-election-2026/editions/1/answers/74b9aee5-5734-46f4-93b0-d78d806a0d66.json) ## How to read this evidence The answers below are shown as the assistants gave them, not a verified account or NZBrands.ai voting advice. They may contain errors or outdated claims. A recorded source association is not necessarily a link shown to the reader. Captured 5 October 2026. 4 answers were saved for this question. Missing answers have not been filled in. [Study methodology and limitations](https://nzbrands.ai/research/nz-election-2026/editions/1/method.md) ## ChatGPT · asked nationally Answer ID: 07209c7c-a222-4895-b5cb-2e809fc74416. Captured 5 October 2026. **Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified** As of **5 October 2026**, the parties are actually quite divided on the future of NZ Super. The biggest distinction is between **protecting the existing universal pension** and **shifting more retirement income onto compulsory private savings**. The 2026 election is on **7 November 2026**. [New Zealand Parliament dissolved ahead of tight November vote](https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/new-zealand-parliament-dissolved-ahead-tight-november-vote-2026-10-01/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) ## At a glance | Party | NZ Super eligibility age | Means testing? | Retirement income / KiwiSaver | Aged care | |---|---|---|---|---| | **National** | **65 for now; proposes eventual rise to 67** | No | Compulsory KiwiSaver; 6% employer + 6% employee by 2032 | More community/aged-care capacity; retirement-village reforms | | **Labour** | **65** | No | Compulsory employer contributions, reaching 6% by 2032; more flexibility for workers | Major boost to care/support workforce pay; retirement-village reform | | **Greens** | **65** | No | Keep universal NZ Super; broader redistribution/tax changes | Major expansion/reform of aged care and care-worker pay | | **ACT** | **67, phased in** | Not central to proposal | Wants KiwiSaver accessible at 65 even if Super starts later | Less detailed standalone aged-care policy | | **NZ First** | **65** | No | Compulsory KiwiSaver proposals, including higher contributions | Wants bipartisan aged-care reform | | **Te Pāti Māori** | Has advocated **much earlier eligibility for Māori** | — | Opposed to National's higher compulsory KiwiSaver contribution approach | Māori-led, whānau-centred care | | **Opportunity (TOP)** | Replaces current structure over time | More income/wealth-sensitive | Citizen's Income + compulsory **KiwiSaver 2.0** | Less prominent than retirement-income restructuring | There is an important caveat: **National's position has evolved during 2026**, and some details remain less explicit than those of Labour, ACT and NZ First. Grey Power's September survey found Labour, Greens, NZ First and TOP explicitly committing to retaining 65, while National supported universal Super but had not yet given the same explicit commitment at the time of its questionnaire. [How parties stand on issues affecting older New Zealanders - Grey Power](https://greypowermag.co.nz/politics/how-parties-stand-on-issues-affecting-older-new-zealanders/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) ## 1. National ### NZ Super National's current direction is **not to means-test NZ Super**, but it envisages eventually increasing the eligibility age. The more recent policy reporting indicates **65 would be retained until 2044, followed by a gradual increase to 67**, affecting younger cohorts rather than people already retired. [Dentons in New Zealand - Employment Echo – August Edition](https://www.dentons.co.nz/en/insights/newsletters/2026/august/6/the-employment-echo/employment-echo-august-edition?utm_source=chatgpt.com) So this isn't an immediate "Super goes to 67" proposal. It is essentially: - universal NZ Super; - no asset/income test; - 65 retained for a long transition period; - eventually move toward 67. ### Retirement income National is making a much bigger push into **compulsory private retirement saving**. Its June policy announcement says that from **1 July 2028 all workers would have to contribute to KiwiSaver or an equivalent scheme**, with employer and employee contributions ultimately reaching **6% each by 2032**. It also proposes extending employer contributions to workers over 65. [National to further boost Kiwis’ financial security | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/260621-national-to-further-boost-kiwis-financia?utm_source=chatgpt.com) National has also proposed a **$1,500 KiwiSaver "Baby Boost"** for newborns. [Dentons in New Zealand - Employment Echo – August Edition](https://www.dentons.co.nz/en/insights/newsletters/2026/august/6/the-employment-echo/employment-echo-august-edition?utm_source=chatgpt.com) So National's model is increasingly a **two-pillar system**: universal public Super + substantially larger compulsory private retirement savings. ### Aged care National's approach is more incremental than the retirement-income changes. It points to increasing health capacity and making it easier to move elderly patients from hospital into aged care/community settings. [National is delivering quality healthcare | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/healthcare?utm_source=chatgpt.com) It is also reforming **retirement-village regulation**. Its September policy reduces the maximum repayment period for residents leaving villages to nine months and requires 10% of net termination proceeds to be paid within four weeks. [Faster and fairer retirement village repayments | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/260918-tamapotaka?utm_source=chatgpt.com) --- ## 2. Labour ### NZ Super Labour is drawing a very clear line at **65**. It says it will **not raise the NZ Super eligibility age and will not means-test it**. This is one of the clearest differences from National and ACT. [Where the parties stand on New Zealand Super - Local Matters](https://www.localmatters.co.nz/general_elections_2026/where-the-parties-stand-on-new-zealand-super/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) ### Retirement income Labour is also strengthening KiwiSaver, but without tying that explicitly to a later Super age. Its 2026 policy would: - make **employer contributions compulsory from 1 July 2028**; - increase employer contributions to **6% by 2032**; - set the employee default at 4%; - allow employees to reduce their own contributions without losing the employer contribution; - contribute to KiwiSaver while parents are on paid parental leave; - continue employer contributions for people working beyond 65. [Strengthening KiwiSaver for the Future - NZ Labour](https://www.labour.org.nz/election-policy-pages/kiwisaver/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) Thus Labour is **not opposing greater retirement saving**. The difference is that it wants to strengthen KiwiSaver **while retaining NZ Super at 65**, rather than using compulsory saving as part of a transition toward a later pension age. ### Aged care Labour has made a particularly concrete commitment around the **aged-care workforce**. On 4 October it announced that it would restore pay-equity legislation and give about **65,000 care and support workers an immediate $4/hour increase from 1 January 2027**. [Release: Labour to restore pay equity, immediate pay rise for care and support workers](https://www.labour.org.nz/news/release-labour-to-restore-pay-equity-immediate-pay-rise-for-care-and-support-workers/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) It also wants to regulate retirement-village repayments much more tightly: a Bill in its first 100 days would require departing residents to receive their money within **three months**, with an independent dispute-resolution service. [Release: Labour to reform retirement village repayments](https://www.labour.org.nz/news/release-labour-to-reform-retirement-village-repayments/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) --- ## 3. Green Party ### NZ Super The Greens are firmly in the **protect-and-retain** camp: - keep NZ Super at **65**; - retain its universal nature; - no means testing. That position is consistent with their 2026 responses and current public statements. [How parties stand on issues affecting older New Zealanders - Grey Power](https://greypowermag.co.nz/politics/how-parties-stand-on-issues-affecting-older-new-zealanders/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) Their broader approach is to fund social services through substantially more progressive taxation rather than reducing the universal pension. Their 2026 manifesto proposes significant taxation of high wealth/income and says the proceeds would help fund public services. [Manifesto 2026 - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com) ### Retirement income The Greens aren't proposing the National/ACT model of raising the pension age. They favour maintaining universal NZ Super while dealing with retirement security through the wider welfare, tax and public-service system. Their 2026 manifesto specifically identifies seniors as a priority group requiring greater support and dignity. [Manifesto 2026 - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/manifesto_2026?utm_source=chatgpt.com) ### Aged care This is one of the areas where the Greens have been particularly explicit. They want a **long-term redesign of aged care**, including both: - aged residential care; and - **in-home care**. Their stated objective is a system allowing people to receive "the right care, in the right place, at the right time", with greater dignity and autonomy for older people. [Long-term investment in aged care can't wait - delaying it will only increase the cost - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/long_term_investment_in_aged_care_can_t_wait_delaying_it_will_only_increase_the_cost?utm_source=chatgpt.com) They have also just committed to restoring pay-equity legislation and setting aside approximately **$1.1 billion annually** toward settling the care-and-support workers' pay-equity claim. [Greens commit to pay equity for care workers - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand](https://www.greens.org.nz/greens_commit_to_pay_equity_for_care_workers?utm_source=chatgpt.com) --- ## 4. ACT ACT has perhaps the clearest position on **raising the pension age**. David Seymour said in September that ACT wants to consider increasing the NZ Super eligibility age by **two months each year until it reaches 67**. Existing retirees would not be affected. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/speech-to-deloitte-chapman-tripp-business-nz-election-conference?utm_source=chatgpt.com) Other reporting of ACT's proposal says people could continue accessing KiwiSaver from **65**, even if NZ Super did not begin until 67; ACT has also discussed an exception for people with long histories of physically demanding work. [Where the parties stand on New Zealand Super - Local Matters](https://www.localmatters.co.nz/general_elections_2026/where-the-parties-stand-on-new-zealand-super/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) That creates a significant philosophical difference: > **ACT:** retirement doesn't necessarily mean government pension at 65; people would increasingly bridge the gap with their own retirement savings. ACT has been much less detailed than Labour, Greens or National on a standalone aged-care programme in 2026. It declined Grey Power's questionnaire because it did not have capacity to complete it. [How parties stand on issues affecting older New Zealanders - Grey Power](https://greypowermag.co.nz/politics/how-parties-stand-on-issues-affecting-older-new-zealanders/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) --- ## 5. New Zealand First NZ First is the strongest **defender of the existing NZ Super settings** among the major parties. Winston Peters has explicitly said NZ First: - does **not** support raising the age to 67; - does **not** support means testing; - does not believe NZ Super is unaffordable; - supports retaining existing entitlement settings. [Winston Peters - “Seniors Sole Defender” - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/winston_peters_seniors_sole_defender?utm_source=chatgpt.com) There is, however, a significant **new 2026 restriction**. NZ First now proposes that **from 2029 only New Zealand citizens would be eligible for NZ Super**. This targets people who migrate to New Zealand later in life rather than changing the basic pension entitlement for citizens. [NZ Super for Citizens Only - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/nz_super_for_citizens_only?utm_source=chatgpt.com) ### Retirement savings NZ First also supports more compulsory retirement saving. Current reporting says it proposes compulsory KiwiSaver, including automatic enrolment at birth with a **$1,000 Crown contribution for NZ citizens**, and higher combined employee/employer contributions. [Tax Tips: 2026 General Election - Tax Policy Update](https://www.pwc.co.nz/insights-and-publications/regular-publications/tax-tips/2026-general-election-tax-policy-update.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com) ### Aged care NZ First says it wants **bipartisan agreement on aged-care reform**. It secured a select-committee inquiry and ministerial advisory group on the issue, and says the ageing population requires a more systematic response. [Winston Peters - “Seniors Sole Defender” - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/winston_peters_seniors_sole_defender?utm_source=chatgpt.com) It is therefore relatively conservative on the pension itself, but acknowledges that **aged-care funding and capacity are a separate long-term problem**. --- ## 6. Te Pāti Māori This is the least straightforward comparison because **Te Pāti Māori did not respond to Grey Power's 2026 policy questionnaire**, so there isn't the same level of directly comparable party-by-party documentation. [How parties stand on issues affecting older New Zealanders - Grey Power](https://greypowermag.co.nz/politics/how-parties-stand-on-issues-affecting-older-new-zealanders/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) Its position has nevertheless been distinctive on retirement age. It has advocated a **substantially lower NZ Super eligibility age for Māori**, roughly 7–10 years below the general age, on the basis of differences in life expectancy. Contemporary reporting puts the proposal in the vicinity of **55–58**. [What should we do about New Zealand’s soaring superannuation bill? | The Spinoff](https://thespinoff.co.nz/politics/09-06-2026/what-should-we-do-about-new-zealands-soaring-superannuation-bill?utm_source=chatgpt.com) On care, Te Pāti Māori's broader policy framework emphasises **Māori-led, whānau-centred health and disability services that are culturally safe and accountable**. [Te Pāti Māori is the assertion of our mana motuhake and our liberation](https://www.maoriparty.org.nz/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) It has also opposed National's proposed increase in compulsory KiwiSaver contributions, arguing that Māori are disproportionately represented among lower-income workers who have less capacity to save. [KiwiSaver - Retail NZ](https://retail.kiwi/insights-media/election-hub/policy-positions-kiwisaver/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) --- ## 7. Opportunity / TOP TOP is proposing the most radical restructuring of retirement income. Its **Tax Reset** would introduce: - a universal **Citizen's Income of up to $370/week ($19,400/year)**; - a compulsory **KiwiSaver 2.0**; - employer and employee contributions ultimately reaching **6% each**; - additional support for superannuitants so nobody currently relying on NZ Super receives less initially. [Tax Reset - Opportunity Party](https://www.opportunity.org.nz/tax-reset?utm_source=chatgpt.com) The important distinction is that TOP is proposing to **replace the current architecture**, rather than simply tweaking NZ Super. Under its proposal, NZ Super would effectively become the Citizen's Income **plus a top-up** bringing the payment up to the current NZ Super level. In the longer term, that top-up could be reduced for wealthier retirees as KiwiSaver balances grow. [Tax Reset - Opportunity Party](https://www.opportunity.org.nz/tax-reset?utm_source=chatgpt.com) So TOP is considerably more open to **retirement income becoming less dependent on an unconditional pension** over the long term. --- # The underlying debate If you strip away the party branding, there are roughly **three competing models**: ### A. Keep NZ Super broadly as it is **Labour, Greens, NZ First** are the clearest examples. - 65 - universal - no means test - improve retirement savings alongside it NZ First goes further by restricting future eligibility to citizens. ### B. Keep universal Super but gradually make private saving much more important **National** sits here, with **ACT** further along the spectrum. - compulsory KiwiSaver; - much higher contributions; - eventually later access to NZ Super for younger generations. ### C. Fundamentally redesign retirement income **Opportunity/TOP** is the clearest example. - universal basic income; - compulsory private retirement saving; - progressively less reliance on the existing Super model. Te Pāti Māori represents a fourth, more targeted approach: **different retirement-age treatment based on Māori longevity**, alongside Māori-led approaches to care. ## The biggest practical differences for someone approaching retirement If you're thinking about this from the perspective of an individual rather than party ideology, the questions that matter most are: 1. **Are you already 65 or close to it?** ACT/National's proposed changes are primarily relevant to younger cohorts; existing retirees aren't being targeted. [ACT New Zealand](https://www.act.org.nz/news/speech-to-deloitte-chapman-tripp-business-nz-election-conference?utm_source=chatgpt.com) 2. **Do you expect to rely heavily on NZ Super rather than KiwiSaver?** Labour, Greens and NZ First offer the clearest commitment to retaining the existing universal 65-based system. 3. **Are you still working and contributing to KiwiSaver?** National and Labour both want much greater employer contributions and continued contributions for people working past 65. [National to further boost Kiwis’ financial security | National Party](https://www.national.org.nz/news/260621-national-to-further-boost-kiwis-financia?utm_source=chatgpt.com) 4. **Are you likely to need residential or home-based aged care?** The parties' differences become less about the pension itself and more about **workforce pay, home support, residential-care capacity, and who pays for the system**. 5. **Are you a recent migrant or considering retirement in NZ after migrating later in life?** NZ First's proposed citizenship requirement is a particularly important difference from the other major parties. [NZ Super for Citizens Only - New Zealand First](https://www.nzfirst.nz/nz_super_for_citizens_only?utm_source=chatgpt.com) **One important caveat:** election policies are still being released and amended in October 2026. I've treated the positions above as the parties' **current published/announced positions as of 5 October 2026**, rather than relying on their 2023 manifestos or older policies. Grey Power's comparative survey is useful as a cross-check, but it predates some subsequent announcements. [How parties stand on issues affecting older New Zealanders - Grey Power](https://greypowermag.co.nz/politics/how-parties-stand-on-issues-affecting-older-new-zealanders/?utm_source=chatgpt.com) If useful, I can next turn this into a **detailed comparison specifically for someone aged 50, 60, 65 or 70**, showing what each party's proposals would mean for **NZ Super, KiwiSaver, retirement-village costs and aged-care costs**. **End captured answer** ## Gemini · asked nationally Answer ID: ce2e1500-1393-491c-986a-af851ef8bd5b. Captured 5 October 2026. **Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified** Ahead of the **2026 New Zealand General Election**, political parties have staked out distinct positions regarding New Zealand Superannuation (NZ Super), retirement savings (KiwiSaver), and aged care. While there is general cross-party consensus on maintaining the baseline structure of NZ Super (including keeping the eligibility age at 65), parties diverge significantly on future adjustments, KiwiSaver settings, and aged-care reform. --- ### **1. National Party** * **NZ Super & Eligibility Age:** National remains committed to keeping the eligibility age at **65** and opposes sudden structural overhauls. * **KiwiSaver & Savings:** National has proposed making KiwiSaver **compulsory for all workers starting 1 July 2028**, alongside progressively increasing default employer and employee contribution rates. * **Aged Care & Cost of Living:** National’s core focus centers on growing the economy, keeping housing affordable, and improving healthcare access to support older citizens dealing with inflation. ### **2. New Zealand Labour Party** * **NZ Super & Eligibility Age:** Labour supports keeping NZ Super universal and at age 65, rejecting suggestions to raise the age. * **Retirement Income & Tax:** Labour’s broader tax and income framework features a targeted **capital gains tax** (explicitly excluding the family home, farms, and KiwiSaver). Revenue generated is ring-fenced to fund free GP visits and healthcare improvements, which heavily benefits fixed-income retirees. * **Aged Care:** Labour emphasizes alleviating cost-of-living pressures and expanding healthcare accessibility, aiming to make primary care more affordable for seniors. ### **3. New Zealand First** * **NZ Super:** NZ First continues to champion its historic role in protecting retirement settings, fiercely advocating to keep NZ Super locked at **66% of the net average wage** and protecting the SuperGold card ecosystem. * **Aged Care & Housing:** NZ First has explicitly identified **aged-care reform** and better coordination between primary, community, and aged care as a major priority. They propose a dedicated **Seniors Housing Plan** and increased support options for "ageing in place", alongside removing local government rates from standard domestic rates to help retirees on fixed incomes. ### **4. ACT New Zealand** * **NZ Super & Eligibility Age:** ACT has historically argued that the current trajectory of NZ Super is fiscally unsustainable without structural adjustments. They have favored longer-term measures to manage fiscal burdens, such as gradually increasing the eligibility age or indexing adjustments to ensure affordability. * **Retirement Spending:** ACT champions lower government spending subsidies and more streamlined market-driven settings, focusing heavily on broad economic productivity to alleviate fiscal pressure. ### **5. Green Party** * **NZ Super:** The Greens strongly support a **universal state pension** at age 65 and explicitly **oppose raising the age of eligibility**, arguing that higher ages disproportionately disadvantage Māori, Pasifika, and manual laborers with lower life expectancies. * **Tax & Retirement Wealth:** The Greens' economic package includes a **net wealth tax** (2.5% on net assets above $10 million, with family homes exempt) and a capital acquisitions tax, paired with a tax-free income threshold ($10,000) aimed at easing the burden on low- and fixed-income seniors. ### **6. Minor Parties (TOP & Alliance)** * **The Opportunities Party (TOP):** Focuses on structural tax-and-transfer resets, proposing a universal Citizen’s Income model alongside an interest-free rates deferral scheme for older homeowners to ease property cost pressures. * **Alliance Party:** Campaigns on expanding NZ Super for couples to 72.5% of the after-tax average wage, eliminating asset testing for rest-home and long-term aged care, and supercharging KiwiSaver. --- *Are there specific policy areas—such as KiwiSaver compulsion thresholds or rest-home asset testing—that you would like to explore further?* **End captured answer** ## Google AI Mode · asked nationally Answer ID: 50508f7e-85f8-4ff8-b392-d350b715a481. Captured 5 October 2026. **Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified** As the _2026 New Zealand General Election_ approaches, responses to sector groups like [Grey Power New Zealand](https://www.greypower.co.nz/election-2026) outline where the major political parties stand on New Zealand Superannuation (NZ Super), retirement income, and support for older Newers. The current stances of the main political parties include: * * **New Zealand First:** Explicitly committed to retaining the age of eligibility at 65 and maintaining NZ Super at 66% of the net average wage. They also announced a policy to restrict NZ Super eligibility exclusively to New Zealand citizens starting in 2029 (excluding permanent residents). They oppose raising the retirement age to 67. * **Labour Party:** Committed to keeping the age of eligibility for NZ Super at 65 and maintaining universal entitlement regardless of a recipient's other income or assets. [greypowermag.co.nz] * **Green Party:** Supports keeping the eligibility age at 65 and universal superannuation. The Greens have also expressed openness to exploring individual payment rates rather than couple-based rates in the future. [greypowermag.co.nz] * **The Opportunities Party (TOP):** Supports retaining the age of eligibility at 65 in the short-to-medium term, viewing any long-term structural changes as part of a potential future Citizens’ Income model rather than an immediate change. [greypowermag.co.nz] * **National Party:** Affirms support for universal superannuation and states it will not means-test NZ Super. However, the party has not formally locked in a definitive stance on whether it will keep the age of eligibility at 65 versus gradually raising it, pointing to comprehensive policy rollouts. [greypowermag.co.nz] * **ACT New Zealand:** Has historically advocated for gradually lifting the age of eligibility for NZ Super to 67 (to match increasing life expectancies and fiscal sustainability), though they did not complete the 2026 Grey Power questionnaire due to capacity constraints. [greypowermag.co.nz] * **Te Pāti Māori:** Did not respond to the 2026 Grey Power policy survey. [greypowermag.co.nz] * Would you like to dive deeper into the specific **cost-of-living, housing, or aged-care/health policies** for a particular party as the campaign heats up? **End captured answer** ## Google AI Overviews · asked nationally Answer ID: 6613ed40-c385-41ec-8691-720487559df2. Captured 5 October 2026. **Begin captured answer — shown as given, not verified** Heading into the **November 7, 2026, New Zealand general election** , retirement income and aged care have emerged as key debate topics. The political parties’ current stances on **NZ Super** , **KiwiSaver** , **aged care workforces** , and **retirement village regulations** highlight distinct ideological splits. * * * **National Party** * **NZ Super Eligibility:** National has historically advocated for lifting the pension age from 65 to 67. While leadership previously hinted at a faster implementation, National has recently softened its language, stating that raising the age "probably" needs to happen but requires a **broader political consensus** that currently does not exist. The party maintains that superannuation will remain a **universal entitlement** with no means-testing. * **[KiwiSaver](https://www.westpac.co.nz/kiwisaver-investments/kiwisaver/understanding-kiwisaver/) :** National is heavily focusing on boosting retirement income via KiwiSaver. Their signature campaign policies include making worker and employer contributions **compulsory** across the workforce (including for those aged 65 and older) and introducing a **$1,500 "Baby Boost"** investment at birth to maximize compounding interest. * **Aged Care & Retirement Villages:** The National-led government recently proposed reforms to **retirement village payouts** , introducing rules that would require operators to pay departing residents an average upfront sum of $60,000 by 2028/29. National has explicitly **ruled out retrospective changes** , stating they cannot interfere with existing contracts. **Labour Party** * **NZ Super Eligibility:** Labour has drawn a hard line against National's rhetoric, offering a clear commitment to **keep the eligibility age firmly at 65**. They have also explicitly **ruled out means-testing** or asset-testing NZ Super, arguing that seniors deserve absolute income certainty. * **KiwiSaver:** Labour supports KiwiSaver (having introduced the scheme in 2007) but **opposes making it mandatory**. They express concern that compulsory contributions would disproportionately burden low-income earners and small business employers. * **Aged Care & Retirement Villages:** Labour has targeted aged care sector reforms as a major campaign pillar. They have pledged to **overturn the current government's 2025 pay equity changes** within their first 100 days. This includes spending **$2.5 billion** over four years to give an immediate pay rise to 65,000 care and support workers. On retirement villages, Labour has promised **retrospective legislation** to force operators to repay departing residents' capital within three months. **ACT New Zealand** * **NZ Super Eligibility:** ACT supports **raising the pension eligibility age to 67** , proposing a gradual transition phase spread over eight years. However, they include an exemption framework where individuals who have spent at least 20 years doing physically demanding manual labor could still access NZ Super at 65. * **KiwiSaver:** ACT supports KiwiSaver but wants to scale back government subsidies to make the overall retirement system more fiscally sustainable. They advocate allowing workers to continue accessing their KiwiSaver balances at age 65, even if the NZ Super age rises. **Green Party** * **NZ Super Eligibility:** The Greens strongly **oppose raising the retirement age** above 65 and support a universal pension system. They have indicated openness to exploring **individualized payment rates** in the future rather than standard couple rates. * **Aged Care & Retirement Villages:** Similar to Labour, the Green Party has heavily criticized the government's recent changes to the Equal Pay Act. They have pledged **$4.5 billion over four years** to fund pay equity settlements for care and support workers, intending to finance the package via their proposed wealth tax. Their broader health framework also advocates transitioning private aged care and palliative care into fully funded, free public health services. **New Zealand First** * **NZ Super Eligibility:** NZ First **staunchly opposes raising the eligibility age to 67** and is a key blocker to a political consensus on the matter. However, they have introduced a major policy shift: **restricting NZ Super exclusively to New Zealand citizens from 2029**. Leader Winston Peters argues that full pension access for migrants who have not spent their entire working lives paying taxes in New Zealand is an unsustainable burden. They also pledge to protect the universal pension at **66% of the net average wage**. * **KiwiSaver:** NZ First supports a **compulsory KiwiSaver scheme**. They propose enrolling all citizens at birth with a $1,000 Crown contribution. Over time, they want to lift mandatory employee and employer contribution rates to **10% each** , offsetting the cost through targeted tax cuts for both workers and businesses. * * * **Summary of Party Alignments** Policy Dimension| National| Labour| ACT| Greens| NZ First ---|---|---|---|---|--- **NZ Super Age**| Wants 67, but delayed by lack of consensus| **Keep at 65**| **Raise to 67** (with manual labor exemptions)| **Keep at 65**| **Keep at 65** **Means Testing**| No| No| Open to long-term changes| No| No **KiwiSaver**| **Compulsory** ($1,500 at birth)| Voluntary| Voluntary (reduce subsidies)| Voluntary| **Compulsory** ($1,000 at birth) **Aged Care Pay Equity**| Reformed the framework in 2025| **Vows to restore** ($2.5B package)| Supported 2025 reforms| **Vows to restore** ($4.5B package)| Part of current coalition **Retirement Villages**| Upfront payout rules; no contract changes| **Mandatory 3-month repayment** (retrospective)| Favors balanced regulation| Supports stronger resident rights| Favors balanced regulation **End captured answer** ## Publication and corrections Published and funded by Onsomble Limited. NZBrands.ai takes no view on any party or policy. [Independence](https://nzbrands.ai/about/independence/) · [Corrections](https://nzbrands.ai/about/corrections/) · [Contact](https://nzbrands.ai/about/contact/)