Evidence · NZ Election 2026 · Edition 3

Every question, every answer, every source

All 174 questions and the 793 answers produced on 16 October 2026. The 27 remaining cells produced no AI Overview.

questions
174
answers saved
793
collected
16 Oct 2026

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

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 unchanged question.

    id, draft, text, voterCode, issue, towns

  • Answers

    nz-election-2026-answers.csv

    One row per produced answer, with its complete original text. Parties covers all 17 tracked parties; displayed parties covers the seven charted parties.

    result id, prompt id, draft id, scenario id, platform, region, words, parties, displayed parties, literal url answer, temporal pair, common four platforms, response text

  • Sources by answer

    nz-election-2026-sources.csv

    One row per website associated with an answer; repeated citations count once.

    answer id, question id, assistant, region, domain, publisher

  • Checks against official sources

    nz-election-2026-checks.csv

    One row per reviewed claim and assistant, including cells where the assertion was not stated.

    checkId, claimToTest, category, answerId, questionId, assistant, assertionPresent, assertion, verdict, whatTheSourceSays, checkedOn, evidence

  • Who to vote for: coding

    nz-election-2026-guidance.csv

    One row per manually reviewed guidance answer. Codes overlap; original answers supply the evidence.

    draft, assistant, q, voter, a, declined, matched, shortlist, asked, chose, extract

  • Location and national answers

    nz-election-2026-towns.csv

    One row per matched national/location pair in this edition.

    edition, prompt id, platform, city region, national result id, city result id, same party names, same text

  • Changes between editions

    nz-election-2026-comparisons.csv

    All 17 tracked parties; one row per identical question, assistant and location across the 12 and 16 October collections. Earlier coding restated after the 20 October identity correction.

    earlier edition, prompt id, platform, region, draft id, block, scenario id, scenario, issue, priority, earlier result id, current result id, same party set, added, removed, earlier parties, current parties

  • No AI Overview produced

    nz-election-2026-coverage.csv

    One row per planned cell where no AI Overview was produced.

    questionId, assistant, collectionSetting, askedFrom, availability

  • Party-identity corrections

    nz-election-2026-party-identity-corrections.csv

    Ten reviewed false matches removed from the restated Edition 2 and current Edition 3 comparisons; original answer text is unchanged.

    edition, result id, party, before present, include, reason, reviewer, reviewed on

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've recently been made redundant after years in the same industry. I have rent to pay, and I'm unsure whether to retrain or keep looking for similar work. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on support for someone between jobs, including eligibility rules and obligations?

I'm sorry you're facing this after years in the same industry. Redundancy can leave you with two competing priorities: keeping rent paid now, and deciding whether your experience is best used in another similar job or in a new career.

For New Zealand's 2026 general election, one useful way to compare parties is to ask three questions:

  1. Income security: How easy is it to qualify for financial support while you look for work?
  2. Obligations: How much flexibility do you have to retrain, and what happens if you don't meet job-search requirements?
  3. Getting back into work: Will policy help you find a similar role, gain new qualifications, or move into a different industry?

The election is scheduled for 7 November 2026. The key distinction is between the support you can access under current rules and the changes parties are proposing for the next parliamentary term.

Ask anything

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Captured 16 October 2026 · shown as ChatGPT gave it, not a verified account

Gemini · No location

I've recently been made redundant after years in the same industry. I have rent to pay, and I'm unsure whether to retrain or keep looking for similar work. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on support for someone between jobs, including eligibility rules and obligations?

Navigating redundancy after years in the same industry is a major life disruption, and balancing immediate financial survival (like paying rent) with long-term decisions about retraining or re-entering the workforce is a tough spot to be in.

In New Zealand, political parties offer starkly contrasting philosophies on welfare, benefit settings, sanctions, and retraining support.


1. National and ACT (Centre-Right / Right)

  • Philosophy: Focus heavily on fiscal restraint, incentivizing rapid entry or re-entry into work, and implementing stricter obligations or oversight for benefit recipients.
  • Benefit Indexation: Favor indexing main benefits to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rather than wage growth. They argue this is fiscally sustainable, though critics note it can lead benefits to lag behind rising living costs over time.
  • Obligations & Sanctions: Strongly emphasize active work-test obligations. National has historically pushed for structured sanctions for non-compliance (particularly targeting youth and long-term beneficiaries) and outcome-based incentives (such as work-readiness bonus structures).
  • ACT's Approach: Focuses sharply on tightening criteria for health-related benefits, independent medical verification, and introducing card-based spending controls (restricting purchases on things like alcohol and gambling) for certain long-term or category-specific benefit recipients.
  • Retraining vs. Work: Generally emphasize programs that steer people straight into active employment or targeted industry training modules tied directly to open roles rather than open-ended study.

2. Labour and The Greens (Centre-Left / Left)

  • Philosophy: View benefit adequacy as a core safety net and tool to prevent poverty, focusing on higher baseline support and fewer punitive measures.
  • Benefit Indexation: Labour supports indexing benefits to average wage growth to ensure recipients don't fall behind working households, alongside adjustments to abatement thresholds so part-time work doesn't immediately strip away support.
  • The Greens' Approach: Proposes replacing standard tier benefits with a universal guaranteed minimum income framework (e.g., removing complex category distinctions and lifting baseline support), paired with wealth/corporate taxes to fund it. They also advocate heavily for job and apprenticeship guarantees, focusing heavily on state-backed workforce re-entry and training pathways.
  • Obligations & Sanctions: Generally favor removing or softening punitive sanctions, lowering administrative barriers to accessing hardship assistance, and reducing intrusive relationship-status investigations for benefits.
  • Retraining vs. Work: Support permanent funding boosts for micro-credentials, targeted industry retraining, and free or subsidized vocational pathways (such as expanding apprenticeship schemes) to help displaced workers transition into growth sectors.

3. New Zealand First and Te Pāti Māori (Cross-bench / Independent perspectives)

  • NZ First: Generally balances a nationalist/conservative approach to work-testing and fiscal management with a strong protective stance on superannuation and core New Zealand industries, often prioritizing local workers in transition schemes.
  • Te Pāti Māori: Advocates for sweeping overhauls of the welfare system—including doubling baseline benefit levels, wiping MSD-held debt, and removing standard work-test obligations and punitive rules entirely.

Practical Reality Right Now (Work and Income / MSD)

Regardless of the election landscape, if you have recently been made redundant and have immediate rent to pay, the current system through Work and Income (MSD) provides immediate avenues:

  • Jobseeker Support: Available if you are actively looking for work or undertaking approved short-term training. Note that redundancy payouts or final holiday pay can sometimes affect your immediate stand-down period or waiting period before payments kick in.
  • Accommodation Supplement: A weekly payment to help with rent or board if your income and assets fall below certain thresholds.
  • Transition to Work Grants / Training Support: MSD offers specific grants to help cover costs associated with interview clothes, transport, or transitioning into a new career path or study.
Ask Gemini

Gemini is AI and can make mistakes.

Captured 16 October 2026 · shown as Gemini gave it, not a verified account

Google AI Mode · No location

I've recently been made redundant after years in the same industry. I have rent to pay, and I'm unsure whether to retrain or keep looking for similar work. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on support for someone between jobs, including eligibility rules and obligations?

Navigating redundancy after a long tenure in one industry is a stressful crossroads, especially when managing immediate living costs like rent. In the context of the 2026 New Zealand general election , political parties present sharply contrasting philosophies on welfare, obligations, retraining, and support for people between jobs.

The major political blocs approach support for those between jobs through distinct lenses:

1. National and ACT (Centre-Right / Right)

  • Welfare Approach: Focuses heavily on fiscal restraint, stricter work-test obligations, and targeted incentives to transition people back into employment quickly.

  • Obligations & Sanctions: National has campaigned on tighter welfare measures, including stricter requirements, random drug testing for Jobseeker recipients with sanctions for repeat failures, reduced payments for long-term beneficiaries, and doubled stand-down/waiting periods for individuals who repeatedly leave jobs without good reason. [Isentia]

  • Retraining & Economy: Prefers market-led economic growth, freezing or tightening certain baseline government expenditures, and lowering specific training or minimum wage structures to encourage hiring. They argue that strict work obligations ensure fairness for taxpayers and speed up re-entry into the workforce.

2. Labour and the Greens (Centre-Left / Left)

  • Welfare Approach: Focuses on strengthening the social safety net, increasing baseline financial support, and opposing punitive sanctions or benefit cuts.

  • Obligations & Sanctions: Critiques National and ACT's welfare stances as punitive ("punching down"). They advocate for reducing compliance pressure and removing harsh penalties for beneficiaries, favoring supportive case management over punitive sanctions. [Isentia]

  • Retraining & Economy: Emphasises large-scale public investment in job creation, industry transition, and removing financial barriers to education or upskilling. For instance, the Greens have proposed targeted economic packages, abolishing the lower training wage to boost apprentice take-home pay, and providing universal weekly payments for certain practical training sectors (such as health and education placements) to make retraining viable without going broke.

3. Alternative Approaches (e.g., The Opportunities Party / TOP)

  • Welfare Approach: Some minor parties advocate for structural overhauls, such as a universal Citizen's Income or guaranteed baseline income model designed to replace traditional main benefits (like Jobseeker Support) with a streamlined system that removes complex eligibility traps and allows people to retrain or earn supplementary income smoothly.

Practical Eligibility & Next Steps Right Now

Regardless of party policies, current standard eligibility for Jobseeker Support through Work and Income (MSD) depends on your partner’s income (if applicable), your cash assets, and your active commitment to finding work or engaging in an approved training/up-skilling activity. Redundancy payouts can affect your initial stand-down period before payments begin.

To help tailor this to your situation, tell me:

  • Are you leaning more toward immediate re-employment in a similar role, or are you hoping to retrain in a completely different industry?
  • Would you like information on how your redundancy payout or KiwiSaver might impact your immediate benefit stand-down period?
Ask anything

Captured 16 October 2026 · shown as Google AI Mode gave it, not a verified account

AI Overviews · No location

I've recently been made redundant after years in the same industry. I have rent to pay, and I'm unsure whether to retrain or keep looking for similar work. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on support for someone between jobs, including eligibility rules and obligations?

AI Overview

In the 2026 New Zealand general election , political parties offer starkly different approaches to supporting people who have been made redundant or are between jobs. These range from stricter work-readiness mandates to guaranteed incomes and state-backed job pathways.

The primary policy differences regarding Jobseeker Support eligibility and obligations are structured below to help inform your decision.

National Party: Work Readiness & Strict Obligations

The National Party takes a highly conditional approach, emphasizing a return to the workforce through tighter compliance, enforcement, and mandatory testing.

  • Random Drug Testing: National plans to introduce random drug testing for 10,000 beneficiaries on Jobseeker Support in the first year to ensure they are "work-ready". Beneficiaries who fail or refuse tests could face financial benefit cuts.
  • Sanctions and Benefit Cuts: National has proposed cutting the core Jobseeker benefit rate by up to $81 per week starting in 2028. They also propose increasing the mandatory benefit waiting period to 26 weeks for individuals who leave employment voluntarily.
  • Eligibility Tightening: Following changes enacted by the coalition government, a "Parental Assistance Test" blocks 18- and 19-year-olds from receiving Jobseeker Support if their parents earn over roughly $65,529.
  • Early Support: They aim to implement earlier work-focused case management support for up to 30,000 job seekers to accelerate re-employment.

Labour Party: Workforce Investment & Moderated Rules

The Labour Party focuses on active labor market spending, retraining incentives, and targeted assistance rather than increasing punitive measures.

  • No Reversed Parental Test: In a significant fiscal concession, Labour confirmed it will not campaign on reversing the coalition’s Parental Assistance Test for young job seekers, choosing to prioritize other areas in its budget.
  • Support for Retraining: Labour focuses heavily on upskilling options, promising to expand the Apprenticeship Boost program to encourage those between jobs to pivot into high-demand trades.
  • Opposition to Drug Testing: Labour strongly opposes National's proposed random drug-testing regime, arguing it penalizes individuals who are out of work due to macroeconomic conditions rather than choice.
  • Cost-of-Living Relief: To alleviate pressure on renters and households while job hunting, Labour's platform includes policy staples like free doctor's visits and a $20 public transport fare cap.

Green Party: Income Guarantees & Job Pledges

The Green Party advocates for a complete restructuring of the welfare system, viewing unconditional financial security as the baseline right for job transitions.

  • Income Guarantee Scheme: The Greens propose replacing the existing welfare structure with an "Income Guarantee". This ensures a minimum post-tax weekly income of $385 for individuals and $770 for couples, removing the current conditional obligations and welfare sanctions.
  • Jobs Guarantee Program: For younger workers, the Greens announced a Jobs Guarantee giving 16- to 24-year-olds who have been out of work for six months a direct pathway into community, council, or environmental restoration jobs.
  • Paid Placements: If you choose to retrain, the Greens propose a universal weekly payment for students completing practical training in critical sectors like nursing, teaching, and social work.
  • Unemployment Stance: The party strongly rejects benefit sanctions and drug testing, advocating instead for a $6 billion economic development plan designed to naturally generate 284,000 green and infrastructure jobs.

If you would like to explore specific resources for your immediate situation, I can help you find information on current redundancy support services or Work and Income emergency assistance.

Would you like to narrow your focus to retraining options/student support or look into current Jobseeker application criteria?

Ask anything

Captured 16 October 2026 · shown as AI Overviews gave it, not a verified account