Search studies, brands and more…⌘ KExplore research

Evidence · NZ Election 2026

Every question, every answer, every source

Everything the study collected, as it was collected on 5 October 2026. Read any answer in full, or download the tables behind every figure in the study.

questions
174
voters the questions were written as
32
answers collected, of 820 planned
815
answers compared like for like
800
pairs of national and town answers
124
answers with sources recorded
774
answers that showed a link
304

01

Every question, with its answers

Each question was written as a voter would ask it and went to all four assistants. Some were also asked from a town. Open a question to read every answer to it in full.

Showing 20 of 174 questions

Show all 174

02

The tables behind the study

Every figure on the study page comes from these tables. They are CSV files, which open in any spreadsheet.

  • Questions

    nz-election-2026-questions.csv

    One row per question.

    Question id, report reference, question, voter, issue, towns it was also asked from, answers per assistant

    174rows

    Download questions (CSV)

  • Answers

    nz-election-2026-answers.csv

    One row per answer, with its full text.

    Answer id, question id, assistant, town, words, parties named, showed a link, websites recorded as sources, compared like for like, full text

    815rows

    Download answers (CSV)

  • Sources by answer

    nz-election-2026-sources.csv

    One row for each website recorded as a source of an answer.

    Answer id, question id, assistant, town, website, publisher type

    4,216rows

    Download sources by answer (CSV)

  • Checks against official sources

    nz-election-2026-checks.csv

    One row per statement checked.

    Check, answer id, assistant, what the answer said, verdict, what the source says, source, date

    17rows

    Download checks against official sources (CSV)

  • Who to vote for: coding

    nz-election-2026-guidance.csv

    One row per answer to the eight questions that asked who to vote for.

    Answer id, question id, assistant, what the answer did, the words that show it

    32rows

    Download who to vote for: coding (CSV)

  • Location and national answers

    nz-election-2026-towns.csv

    One row per question asked both nationally and from a location, for each assistant.

    Question, town, assistant, both answer ids, parties named nationally and from the town, same parties

    124rows

    Download location and national answers (CSV)

Use these tables to trace findings back to the original questions and answers. The full text of each answer is also on this page, under its question.

03

Read in full and checked

Some answers were read in detail or checked against official sources. Those appear on the study page, beside the findings they support.

ChatGPT · No location

I rent with my partner and work rostered hours that change from week to week. Our pay can drop unexpectedly, but rent and bills don't. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties would change rules around guaranteed hours, casual work and sick leave, and what are the trade-offs?

Your situation — variable rostered hours, income dropping unexpectedly, but fixed rent and bills — maps most closely onto policies about casual employment, minimum/guaranteed hours, roster changes, and how leave is calculated. I’ll compare the main parties where there are clear positions or recent actions, rather than telling you how to vote.

A note on timing: New Zealand’s 2026 election is scheduled for November 7, 2026. New Zealand Parliament dissolved ahead of tight November vote Party policies can still change during campaigning, so treat this as a snapshot of announced positions and recent employment-law changes. Labour's 2026 Election Policies

The key questions for someone with unstable hours

For a renter with fluctuating pay, the important differences are:

Issue Why it matters for you
Guaranteed or predictable hours Reduces the risk that your income suddenly falls below rent and bills
Casual work rules Determines whether an employer can keep you “as needed” without committing hours
Sick leave Determines whether illness means losing pay
Roster cancellations Matters if you organise your life around shifts that can disappear
Employer flexibility Matters if you value being able to pick up extra shifts

Labour Party

Labour has generally favoured stronger minimum employment protections. Its workplace policy platform has included increasing worker protections, supporting sector-wide bargaining arrangements, and expanding sick leave entitlements. Supporting workers and valuing their contribution - NZ Labour Party

For someone in your position, the likely direction under Labour would be:

Trade-offs often raised by critics:

  • Employers, particularly small businesses with unpredictable demand, may face higher labour costs or less flexibility.
  • Some businesses argue that tighter rules can make it harder to hire quickly or adjust staffing.

National Party

National has taken a different approach, emphasising simpler employment rules and business flexibility. Its government passed the Employment Leave Act 2026, replacing the Holidays Act framework. Labour's 2026 Election Policies

Relevant changes include:

For someone with changing rosters, supporters of this approach argue it could:

  • Make payroll simpler.
  • Better match leave payments to actual hours worked.
  • Give employers more ability to manage staffing.

Trade-offs raised by critics:

Green Party

The Greens have generally supported stronger worker bargaining rights and protections. Their 2026 manifesto and workplace announcements emphasise reducing inequality and increasing worker power. Manifesto 2026 - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand They have also supported making union membership easier through an automatic membership model for new employees. Green Party calls for union membership as default setting for new employees - Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

For your situation, the Green approach is likely to appeal if your priority is:

  • Stronger worker voice.
  • More collective bargaining power.
  • More intervention to reduce insecure work.

Trade-offs often discussed:

  • More regulation can increase costs for employers.
  • Some businesses argue it may reduce flexibility, particularly in sectors with seasonal or fluctuating demand.

New Zealand First and ACT

These parties can matter because New Zealand uses MMP and smaller parties can influence coalition agreements. A tight election looms in New Zealand. This time, overseas voters could be bad news for the big parties

Broadly:

  • ACT New Zealand has generally favoured reducing regulation and increasing employer flexibility.
  • New Zealand First has often positioned itself around worker, regional, and economic concerns, but specific employment proposals vary by election agreement.

(Their detailed 2026 employment positions may not yet cover every issue you mentioned.)

How the choices translate to your household

If your biggest concern is:

“I need my income to stop swinging so much”

Look closely at parties proposing:

  • minimum guaranteed hours,
  • limits on casualisation,
  • stronger roster protections.

“I need my employer to keep offering me shifts”

Look closely at:

  • flexibility rules,
  • casual work arrangements,
  • employer-side arguments about hiring and scheduling.

“A sick week could mean missing rent”

Look closely at:

  • sick leave eligibility,
  • whether leave is based on hours worked,
  • protections for irregular workers.

A useful way to compare manifestos as they come out is to ask each party:

  1. Can an employer keep someone indefinitely on variable hours without offering a minimum commitment?
  2. What happens if a rostered shift is cancelled?
  3. How much paid sick leave does a part-time/casual worker actually receive?
  4. Does the policy make your weekly income more predictable, or just change how benefits are calculated?

Those four questions are likely to be more relevant to your household budget than broader employment slogans.

Ask anything

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Captured 5 October 2026 · shown as ChatGPT gave it, not a verified account

Gemini · No location

I rent with my partner and work rostered hours that change from week to week. Our pay can drop unexpectedly, but rent and bills don't. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties would change rules around guaranteed hours, casual work and sick leave, and what are the trade-offs?

Navigating rostered hours, fluctuating weekly pay, and fixed living expenses like rent and bills is a stressful financial tightrope. In New Zealand’s employment landscape, the rules around guaranteed hours, casual work, and sick leave are subject to distinct ideological approaches across political parties.

The political parties generally fall into two blocs with opposing philosophies regarding employment law, minimum standards, and workplace flexibility.

1. National, ACT, and New Zealand First (The Coalition Government)

The current governing parties lean toward employer flexibility, administrative simplification, and economic competitiveness.

  • Key Actions & Policies:
    • The Employment Leave Act: The coalition government passed the Employment Leave Act, which replaces the legacy Holidays Act. It transitions leave calculations (like sick leave and annual leave) strictly to hours rather than days, aiming to fix long-standing payroll compliance headaches for businesses.
    • Leave Compensation for Variable Hours: For casual, irregular, or additional hours, the framework introduces a specific leave compensation payment model (set at a percentage, e.g., 12.5% for additional/casual hours) instead of complex average-weekly-earnings back-calculations.
  • Trade-offs for Rostered/Variable Workers:
    • Pros: Greater predictability and transparency for payroll software, which reduces systemic employer underpayment errors and makes it clearer how leave is accrued on non-standard hours.
    • Cons: Unions and worker advocacy groups argue that shifting to rigid hour formulas can result in lower overall leave entitlements and lower payouts for workers whose weekly rosters fluctuate heavily or who rely on irregular shifts. Critics contend it prioritizes business administrative ease over the income security of part-time and rostered workers.

2. Labour, the Greens, and Te Pāti Māori (The Opposition Parties)

The opposition parties advocate for stronger collective worker rights, income security, and enhanced minimum statutory safety nets.

  • Key Actions & Policies:
    • Protecting and Expanding Leave: These parties generally oppose rollbacks to leave entitlements and have historically campaigned against legislation that reduces holiday or sick leave calculations for part-time, casual, or variable-hour employees.
    • Collective Bargaining & Fair Pay: They support mechanisms that empower workers to bargain collectively for more stable hours and secure conditions (such as previous Fair Pay Agreement frameworks or strengthening union rights).
    • Income Security: Their approach often targets strengthening safety nets for low-income or insecure workers through enhanced welfare or minimum wage protections.
  • Trade-offs for Rostered/Variable Workers:
    • Pros: Aims to protect overall leave volumes and secure better baseline compensation for irregular hours, helping cushion the blow when weekly pay drops unexpectedly.
    • Cons: Business groups and centre-right parties argue that heavy-handed regulations, prescriptive scheduling rules, and mandates on employers increase the cost of doing business, which can lead employers to cut back on total staff hours, reduce hiring, or rely less on flexible rostering altogether.

Summary of Trade-offs for Your Situation

  • If you vote for parties favoring market flexibility (National/ACT/NZ First): You are backing systems designed to lower compliance costs for employers and streamline variable-hour calculations, with the trade-off that statutory protections for irregular workers may feel less protective or result in tighter leave accruals during lean weeks.
  • If you vote for parties favoring worker protection (Labour/Greens/Te Pāti Māori): You are backing policies aimed at bolstering minimum leave entitlements, safety nets, and collective bargaining power, with the trade-off that stricter employment mandates can sometimes disincentivize businesses from offering flexible, roster-based arrangements.

How do you typically weigh the importance of business flexibility versus direct income security when managing your household budget?

Ask Gemini

Gemini is AI and can make mistakes.

Captured 5 October 2026 · shown as Gemini gave it, not a verified account

Google AI Mode · No location

I rent with my partner and work rostered hours that change from week to week. Our pay can drop unexpectedly, but rent and bills don't. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties would change rules around guaranteed hours, casual work and sick leave, and what are the trade-offs?

Working rostered hours with fluctuating pay while household overheads remain fixed is a stressful position, especially when trying to weigh how different political parties approach employment standards, security, and flexibility.

The major political blocs in New Zealand offer fundamentally different visions for the balance of power between worker security and business flexibility.

1. Left-Bloc Parties (Labour, Greens, Te Pāti Māori)

These parties generally advocate for strengthening individual employee protections, tightening rules around insecure or casual work, and expanding safety nets.

  • Guaranteed Hours & Casual Work:

  • The Approach: Historically and programmatically, parties like Labour and the Green Party lean toward limiting the over-use of casual or "as-and-when" arrangements where workers are economically dependent on a business but lack stable hours. They support pathways that require employers to offer more predictable, regular hours after a qualifying period, and they oppose the misclassification of regular workers as independent contractors (common in the gig economy).

  • Sick Leave: They champion robust baseline standards. Labour previously increased sick leave to 10 days, and both Labour and the Greens strongly oppose any proposals to reduce or prorate sick leave down for part-time or variable-hour schedules, arguing that illness costs the same regardless of how many hours you are rostered.

  • The Trade-Offs:

  • For Workers: Greater income predictability, stronger safety nets when hours drop or you fall ill, and legal avenues to challenge insecure status.

  • For Employers / Economy: Businesses—particularly small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs)—argue that mandatory minimum hour guarantees or restrictions on casual arrangements remove the flexibility they need to cope with seasonal demand, tourism shifts, or economic volatility. Critics contend this can result in businesses hiring fewer total people or raising prices to offset the fixed labor costs. [Facebook·Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand]

2. Right-Bloc / Governing Parties (National, ACT, NZ First)

The current center-right coalition focuses heavily on business confidence, economic growth, and removing regulatory "red tape" to make hiring easier for employers.

  • Guaranteed Hours & Casual Work:

  • The Approach: These parties favor contractual flexibility. They have supported measures like the re-implementation of 90-day trial periods and oppose rigid scheduling mandates. Their philosophy is that if employment rules are too restrictive or costly, businesses will hesitate to take on staff with marginal or variable hours. They prefer voluntary arrangements negotiated directly between the employer and employee rather than prescriptive statutory hour guarantees.

  • Sick Leave & Holidays: While National previously noted it did not intend to scrap the baseline 10 days of sick leave enacted under the previous government, the ongoing reforms (such as the recent implementation framework of the Employment Leave Act/Holidays Act overhaul) aim to modernize and simplify compliance for businesses. Debates persist regarding how entitlements are calculated or adjusted for part-time/irregular work to reduce administrative friction for employers.

  • The Trade-Offs:

  • For Employers / Economy: Lower regulatory and financial risk when taking on new or variable staff, potentially boosting hiring numbers and business adaptability during uncertain economic cycles.

  • For Workers: Less predictability in weekly take-home pay, higher vulnerability when hours fluctuate unexpectedly, and fewer statutory protections if an employer decides to alter or cut back on casual shifts.

Summary Checklist for Your Vote

  • If your primary goal is income stability and stronger floors: Parties on the left (Labour , Greens) are more likely to pursue legislation that forces predictable hours and protects leave entitlements, at the risk of slower business hiring.

  • If your primary goal is economic growth via business flexibility: Parties on the right (National , ACT) prioritize reducing compliance costs and keeping arrangements flexible, at the risk of leaving irregular workers more exposed to fluctuating income.

Would you like to explore how these policies specifically affect part-time versus casual classifications , or dive into what recent holiday and leave legislation changes mean for irregular work patterns?

Ask anything

Captured 5 October 2026 · shown as Google AI Mode gave it, not a verified account

AI Overviews · No location

I rent with my partner and work rostered hours that change from week to week. Our pay can drop unexpectedly, but rent and bills don't. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties would change rules around guaranteed hours, casual work and sick leave, and what are the trade-offs?

AI Overview

In the lead-up to the 2026 New Zealand General Election , rules around leave and working hours are a primary battleground. A major catalyst for this debate is the Employment Leave Act 2026 , passed by the coalition government to replace the Holidays Act 2003, with an implementation timeline set for 2028.

How different political factions plan to handle guaranteed hours, casual arrangements, and sick leave going forward—along with the economic trade-offs of each approach—can be broken down below.

The Current Right-of-Center Coalition Policy (National / ACT)

The National and ACT coalition focus on reducing compliance costs for businesses and simplifying calculations. Under the Employment Leave Act 2026 , leave is split into "Standard Hours" (guaranteed contracted hours) and "Additional/Casual Hours".

  • Sick Leave & Casual Work: Instead of part-time and casual workers accumulating 10 standard days of sick leave a year after meeting a threshold, leave accrues pro-rata based strictly on hours worked (0.0385 hours of sick leave per standard hour). For casual or irregular overtime hours, workers do not accrue leave. Instead, they must be paid an upfront 12.5% Leave Compensation Payment (LCP) on top of their pay for those hours.

  • Guaranteed Hours: The current framework maintains that workers cannot be placed on "zero-hour" contracts where they must be available but have no guaranteed hours. However, the new law heavily incentivizes structuring agreements around a core set of "Standard Hours," with any volatile rostered hours treated under the LCP payout system.

The Trade-offs:

  • Pros: Immediate income boost via the 12.5% LCP cash injection on any extra or casual hours worked, helping cover immediate bills. It also removes the complex calculation errors that historically plagued payroll systems for variable workers.

  • Cons: Reduces paid time off safety nets. If you are sick and need to take a day off, you will have fewer actual paid sick days banked if your "standard" baseline hours are low, forcing you to rely on past cash savings to cover bills during an illness.

The Left-of-Center Opposition Policy (Labour / Greens)

The Labour and Green parties heavily opposed the 2026 legislative overhaul and are campaigning to roll back or significantly modify these changes ahead of the 2028 implementation.

  • Sick Leave: Both parties argue that sick leave is a fundamental health and wellbeing right that should not be diluted or pro-rated. They advocate for a flat, guaranteed minimum safety net (such as the previous 10 days of sick leave per year for anyone meeting minimum service thresholds) regardless of whether hours are standard, variable, or additional. The Green Party has also pushed for expanded baseline leave, such as moving to five weeks of annual leave.

  • Guaranteed Hours & Roster Stability: They support stricter rules regarding shift cancellations, roster predictability, and robust protections ensuring that variable, rostered workers cannot have their livelihoods abruptly destabilized by sudden pay drops.

The Trade-offs:

  • Pros: Income security and physical health safety nets. If your pay drops or you get sick during a week with heavy rostered hours, your baseline expenses remain protected by stable, mandated paid days off rather than leaving you to manage the risk out of pocket.

  • Cons: Lower immediate take-home pay during high-demand weeks because the 12.5% cash loading is replaced by banked leave time. Employers may also respond to higher mandatory leave overheads by reducing overall rostered hours to keep labor costs predictable, potentially restricting your ability to pick up extra shifts.

Direct Policy Comparison

Policy Feature National / ACT (Status Quo / 2026 Act) Labour / Greens (Proposed Changes)
Sick Leave Calculation Accrues continuously by standard hours worked (0.0385 hrs/hr). Capped at 160 hours. Propose returning to a flat, un-diluted day-based safety net (e.g., minimum 10 days).
Variable & Extra Hours No sick/annual leave accrued on extra hours; compensated with an upfront 12.5% pay premium. Oppose the 12.5% payout swap; argue it entrenches unequal access to actual rest and recovery.
Roster / Casual Focus Maximizes business flexibility and payroll clarity; workers manage cash flow via LCP cash-outs. Focuses on worker security; advocates for stronger fair-pay conditions and rigid roster stability.

If you want to look at how these policies affect your specific situation, tell me:

  • What are your minimum standard hours vs. your average variable hours each week?

  • Do you currently rely on overtime rates or special shift allowances to pay your core bills?

I can help break down exactly how your weekly budget might change under either framework.

Ask anything

Captured 5 October 2026 · shown as AI Overviews gave it, not a verified account