Evidence · NZ Election 2026 · Edition 4

Every question, every answer, every source

All 174 questions and the 776 answers produced on 19 October 2026. For the other 44 planned combinations, Google produced no AI Overview or AI Mode answer.

questions
174
answers saved
776
collected
19 October 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

    questions.csv

    One row per question, unchanged since 5 October.

    id, text, reference, axes, collectionSettings, enabled

  • Answers

    answers.csv

    One row per saved answer, with its complete original text.

    id, questionId, assistant, collectionSetting, askedFrom, text, words

  • Sources by answer

    source-associations.csv

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

    answer id, question id, assistant, domain, publisher

  • Checks against official sources

    checks.csv

    One row per selected statement and assistant, including those where the statement was not made.

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

  • Who to vote for: what each answer did

    behaviour-coding.csv

    One row per voting-guidance answer read in full, with each behaviour marked. Behaviours overlap; the original answers supply the evidence.

    prompt_id, draft_id, platform, region, explicit_choice_boundary, conditional_party_or_bloc_alignment, prioritised_shortlist, elicits_additional_user_information, unconditional_single_party_vote_instruction, excerpts, rationale, reviewer, reviewed_on, answerId

  • Location and national answers

    place-pairs.csv

    One row per national and location pair in this edition.

    question id, assistant, place, national answer id, place answer id, national entities, place entities, same entities

  • Changes between editions

    party-change-tables.csv

    One row per answer and earlier edition, with the parties named then and now.

    earlier_edition, earlier_result_id, current_result_id, prompt_id, platform, region, draft_id, block, scenario_id, scenario, issue, priority, same_text, same_party_set, earlier_parties, current_parties, added, removed

  • Changes across editions

    trajectory-tables.csv

    One row per pair of editions, with how many of the same 776 answers changed their party line-up.

    earlier_edition, current_edition, denominator, changed_all17, changed_seven

  • Party counts by edition

    party-count-tables.csv

    One row per comparison, edition, assistant and party, with the answers naming the party.

    panel, edition, platform, entity_id, party, numerator, denominator

  • Parties entering and leaving answers

    party-mention-flows.csv

    One row per party and assistant: answers that gained, lost or kept the party since 16 October.

    entity_id, platform, denominator, earlier, current, gained, lost, retained

  • Parties named by issue

    topic-presence-tables.csv

    One row per issue and party, with the answers naming the party.

    issue, entity_id, numerator, denominator

  • Location comparisons by edition

    regional-tables.csv

    One row per national and location pair, comparison and edition.

    panel, edition, prompt_id, platform, region, draft_id, block, scenario_id, scenario, issue, priority, complete, national_result_id, location_result_id, same_party_set

  • Answer length by assistant

    platform-tables.csv

    One row per comparison, edition and assistant, with answer length and the answers naming all six parties in Parliament.

    panel, edition, platform, answers, median_words, all_six_parliamentary

  • Voting guidance changes between editions

    guidance-change-tables.csv

    One row per voting-guidance answer and behaviour, on 16 and 19 October.

    draft_id, platform, measure, earlier_result_id, result_id, earlier, current, changed

  • What changed for each voter

    case-assessments.csv

    One row per voter: what changed in the answer to their main question.

    case, transition, earlier_quote, quote, assessment

  • Statements selected for checking

    check-register.csv

    One row per statement selected for checking, with why it was chosen and its primary source.

    checkId, claimToTest, category, whyChecked, primarySourceUrl, answerId

  • Answers paired with Edition 3

    pairs.csv

    One row per answer, with the 16 October answer to the same question, assistant and location.

    earlierAnswerId, answerId, questionId, assistant, collectionSetting, askedFrom

  • Source capture by answer

    sources.csv

    One row per answer, with whether its sources were captured and the websites recorded.

    answerId, capture, domains, urls, literalUrls, scope

  • Websites by reach

    source-reach-tables.csv

    One row per website, with the answers associated with it.

    domain, answers, denominator

  • Websites by issue

    topic-source-tables.csv

    One row per issue and website, with the answers associated with it.

    issue, domain, answers, denominator

  • Party matches reviewed in context

    party-identity-decisions.csv

    One row per possible party match read in context, with whether it counted and why.

    result_id, party, include, state, reason, reviewer, reviewed_on, review_basis, contexts

  • Parties found in each answer

    codings.csv

    One row per answer, party and comparison, with whether the party counted and the passage that shows it.

    comparisonId, answerId, entityId, kind, measure, counted, quote, reason, evidence

  • Comparisons each answer is in

    memberships.csv

    One row per answer and comparison.

    comparisonId, answerId, rowKey, included

  • Claims Onsomble recorded

    raw-native-claims.csv

    One row per claim, with the parties it is about and its stance on each.

    claimId, claimText, quote, stance, platform, region, promptId, brands, sources, drivers, sourceResultId

  • Answers read in full

    semantic-review-ledger.csv

    One row per answer and question a reviewer read in full, with the decision and the passage.

    result_id, dimension, state, decision, rationale, excerpt, reviewer, reviewed_on

  • Passages quoted in the analysis

    report-evidence.csv

    One row per answer passage the analysis quotes, with its reading.

    key, answerId, interpretation, text

  • Analysis findings

    findings.csv

    One row per finding in the analysis, with its figure and the table it comes from.

    id, value, denominator, statement, summary, caveat, evidence, reportFile

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 have a long-term health condition that limits my ability to work. I rely on income support and need regular medical appointments. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How would parties change income support and work obligations for people who cannot work because of illness?

New Zealand 2026 election: income support and illness-related work obligations

If a long-term health condition limits your ability to work, the key election issues are likely to be how much financial support you receive, how often you must prove your medical circumstances, what work-related obligations apply, and whether you can attend regular medical appointments without risking your benefit.

For the 2026 New Zealand general election, it helps to distinguish three things:

  • Current rules: what you are entitled to under the law and existing Work and Income (MSD) policy.
  • Announced party policies: what parties have specifically committed to changing if they have the opportunity to govern.
  • Possible effects on you: how proposed changes might affect your income, medical certification, appointments and obligations.

A party's general promise to reduce welfare spending or improve disability support does not, by itself, establish exactly what would happen to someone who cannot work because of illness.

1. What the rules are now

The exact rules depend on whether you receive Jobseeker Support with a health condition or disability, or Supported Living Payment.

Issue Current position
If you cannot work Jobseeker Support can place you on work-preparation obligations rather than requiring you to seek a job, if your medical circumstances support that assessment.
Medical evidence Work and Income uses medical information to assess eligibility and work capacity.
Renewing certificates Jobseeker medical coverage may need to be renewed when it expires. Supported Living Payment recipients may be asked for updated medical information every two years.
If your condition prevents you meeting an obligation Exemptions may be available. If you cannot meet an obligation, tell Work and Income promptly and provide supporting medical evidence.

Sources: Work and Income's Jobseeker obligations and medical certificate renewal rules. Jobseeker Support obligationsRenew your medical certificate or informationUnable to meet work preparation obligations due to health condition, injury or disability

One important distinction: being exempt from looking for work does not necessarily mean being exempt from all work-preparation activities or appointments with MSD. The rules allow exemptions when your condition prevents you from meeting those obligations, too. Medical treatment itself is distinguished from work-related activities in the published rules. Jobseeker Support obligationsUnable to meet work preparation obligations due to health condition, injury or disability

2. How the main parties compare

The following comparison uses policies and published positions available as of October 2026. An important caveat is that not every party has published a detailed, standalone disability policy for this election. Where specific commitments are missing, I have distinguished a party's broader direction from a confirmed promise. Disability Policies of NZ Political PartiesPolicies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026

Will National Party Finish 2nd in New Zealand's 2026 Election?

National Party

Emphasis: employment support and stricter expectations for long-term beneficiaries

National has announced more intensive employment support for 30,000 work-ready people who have received benefits for over a year. It also proposes lowering Jobseeker Support from 1 April 2028 for people who have received it for two of the previous three years, with a smaller reduction for households with dependent children. A firm, fair and affordable welfare systemA firm, fair and affordable welfare system

What this could mean for you: the proposed lower payment is explicitly directed at Jobseeker recipients, so your benefit type and eligibility would matter. The announcement does not establish that every person with a long-term illness would face the same reduction, nor does it specify a new medical-certification rule for people unable to work.

South Island Election Conference 2026

Labour Party

Emphasis: disability rights and changes to disability support services

Labour has pledged to repeal the Government's disability support legislation and work with disabled people and disability organisations to design replacement legislation. Its published election commitments also include three free GP visits a year for every New Zealander, planned from July 2028, and removing the $5 prescription charge from July 2027. Disability Policies of NZ Political PartiesLabour's Cost of Living Plan

What this could mean for you: the healthcare commitments could reduce some costs of regular appointments and prescriptions. However, these are not the same as a promise to increase your main benefit or remove Jobseeker work-preparation obligations. I could not verify a specific Labour commitment to overhaul sickness-related benefit obligations from the sources reviewed.

Green Party NZ (@NZGreens) on X

Green Party

Emphasis: higher income support and fewer punitive welfare rules

The Greens' published disability policy supports significant benefit increases, movement towards a Guaranteed Minimum Income, reform of partnered means testing, and removing punitive sanctions. It also supports more individualised disability support and stronger disability rights. Disability Policies of NZ Political PartiesPolicies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026

What this could mean for you: these proposals are directly relevant if your concerns are benefit adequacy, deductions or sanctions, and whether a partner's income affects your support. The precise payment increase, eligibility criteria and implementation timetable need to be checked against the party's detailed policy.

New Zealand Legislative Election Winner 2026 Odds | Polymarket

ACT New Zealand

Emphasis: personal responsibility, spending oversight and work participation

ACT's broader welfare approach favours tighter benefit obligations and reducing long-term reliance on income support. The disability-policy comparison reviewed did not identify a specific 2026 ACT commitment to substantially increase benefits for people unable to work because of illness. Disability Policies of NZ Political PartiesPolicies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026

What this could mean for you: it is particularly important to establish whether any proposed obligation or sanction applies to people medically assessed as unable to work, rather than assuming all benefit recipients are treated alike. A specific new illness-related exemption policy was not established by the sources reviewed.

New Zealand legislative election winner? Predictions & Od... 2026 | Polymarket

New Zealand First

Emphasis: public services and support for older people

The available disability-policy review did not identify a detailed New Zealand First policy for increasing working-age disability benefits or changing illness-related work obligations. Its disability-related positions are more evident in broader health and older-person policies. Disability Policies of NZ Political Parties

What this could mean for you: there is insufficient specific published information to confidently quantify how your benefit or medical-review requirements would change under a New Zealand First-influenced government.

Te Pāti Māori (@Maori_Party) on X

Te Pāti Māori

Emphasis: income security, Māori-led services and less punitive welfare settings

Te Pāti Māori supports broader income-guarantee-style approaches and reducing punitive welfare settings. Its disability approach emphasises self-determination and Māori-led services. Disability Policies of NZ Political Parties

What this could mean for you: its stated direction is relevant to income adequacy and the treatment of people facing barriers to employment. The available evidence does not establish a precise new payment rate or a detailed set of medical-review exemptions for this election.

The Opportunities Party (TOP)

Emphasis: structural income reform

The disability-policy review describes TOP as addressing disability within wider reforms, including a citizen's income, rather than through a detailed disability-specific programme. Disability Policies of NZ Political Parties

What this could mean for you: an income guarantee could be relevant to the security of income for someone unable to work, but the actual effect depends on the proposed payment amount, how it interacts with existing benefits and disability-related costs, and whether it replaces other assistance.

3. The four questions most relevant to your circumstances

Rather than comparing parties on disability policy in general, these are the specific differences worth investigating before voting.

  1. Will your regular income be enough to live on?

Look for commitments to raise main benefit rates, introduce a minimum income guarantee, change accommodation assistance, or adjust means testing. A general cost-of-living tax cut may help, but it is not equivalent to a guaranteed increase in your benefit.

  1. Will you face fewer work-related obligations?

Check whether a party would exempt people who cannot work medically, reduce mandatory work-preparation activities, or change sanctions and benefit reviews. Being unable to work and being unable to undertake any preparation for work are distinct under current rules.

  1. Will medical reviews become less burdensome?

Ask whether parties intend to change certificate renewal frequency, accept longer-term medical evidence for stable conditions, or make assessments more responsive to fluctuating illness. I did not find verified, detailed election commitments from the major parties that settle this question.

  1. Will it become easier to afford treatment?

Labour's announced free GP visits and prescription-charge removal are concrete examples of healthcare cost proposals. Compare these with other parties' commitments on GP fees, medicines, specialist access and transport to appointments. Labour's Cost of Living PlanPolicies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026

4. Where to check the actual commitments

These resources let you verify policies directly rather than relying on campaign summaries alone.

These sources are useful starting points, but party policies may be updated and coalition agreements can affect what is ultimately implemented.

5. A useful way to narrow the comparison

One detail would make a substantial difference to which policies matter most to you: which benefit do you currently receive?

Your benefit type matters because a proposal aimed at long-term Jobseeker recipients may affect you differently from a proposal aimed at people receiving Supported Living Payment. The distinction can help make the comparison much more precise without assuming that your medical condition automatically determines which rules apply.

Ask anything

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Captured 19 October 2026 · shown as ChatGPT gave it, not a verified account

Gemini · No location

I have a long-term health condition that limits my ability to work. I rely on income support and need regular medical appointments. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How would parties change income support and work obligations for people who cannot work because of illness?

In the context of the New Zealand general election, political parties offer contrasting visions for how income support, medical obligations, and welfare rules should apply to people who are unable to work due to sickness, injury, or long-term health conditions.

The major parties generally fall into two distinct ideological camps regarding welfare: parties on the right emphasize tighter work obligations, fiscal restraint, and administrative accountability, whereas parties on the left and center-left focus on adequate income floors, reducing punitive sanctions, and protecting health-compromised beneficiaries.


Centre-Right Parties (National, ACT, NZ First)

Parties on the right generally approach the welfare system with an emphasis on economic responsibility, ensuring support is targeted, and establishing clear pathways back into the workforce for those with any capacity to work.

  • National Party: National focuses on maintaining a "firm, fair, and affordable" welfare system. While they recognize the necessity of support for those genuinely unable to work, their overall welfare approach heavily emphasizes work-test obligations for jobseekers and ensuring that the welfare system actively encourages independence and fiscal sustainability. For those with health conditions, they focus on administrative consistency and keeping support tightly managed within economic bounds.
  • ACT Party: ACT advocates for stricter benefit obligations and a sharper focus on reducing long-term reliance on income support. Their policies emphasize reducing state dependence through tighter management, rigorous work-test requirements where any functional capacity exists, and avoiding broad-based benefit increases in favor of lowering taxes to reward work.
  • New Zealand First: NZ First traditionally centers its social welfare focus on protecting New Zealand Superannuation and supporting older citizens and veterans. They generally align with a more regulated, cautious approach to main benefits, though they place high priority on public health access and regional healthcare infrastructure to help people manage medical needs.

Centre-Left and Left Parties (Labour, Green Party, Te Pāti Māori)

Parties on the left view long-term illness and disability through a rights-based framework, arguing that benefit levels are currently too low to live with dignity and that medical obligations should not impose undue stress.

  • Labour Party: Labour takes a rights-based and equity-focused approach aligned with the Enabling Good Lives principles. Historically, Labour has favored incremental increases to main benefits and targeted cost-of-living assistance. For the 2026 election, Labour’s platform heavily emphasizes easing the direct cost of healthcare—such as introducing free GP visits and free prescriptions—which directly benefits those managing chronic health conditions who require frequent medical appointments.
  • Green Party: The Greens advocate for major structural overhauls to the welfare system. Their platform includes significant baseline benefit increases, moving toward a Guaranteed Minimum Income, and removing punitive sanctions or bureaucratic barriers. Crucially for individuals with partners, the Greens propose reforming or removing partnered means testing, arguing that disabled or chronically ill people should not be financially penalized or stripped of autonomy based on a partner’s income. They also support moving away from rigid, deficit-based medical assessments.
  • Te Pāti Māori: Te Pāti Māori frames poverty and welfare adequacy as structural issues. They support broad income-guarantee style policies and the elimination of punitive welfare settings, pushing for a culturally safe, Māori-led approach to health and social support that reduces the administrative and financial hurdles faced by vulnerable whānau.

Summary of What This Means for Medical Appointments and Obligations

  • If you want lower barriers to healthcare: Parties like Labour and the Greens have prominent policies aimed at reducing out-of-pocket medical costs (such as free GP visits or expanded primary care funding), which would directly lower the financial strain of regular medical appointments.
  • If you are concerned about benefit security and sanctions: Left-leaning parties propose raising baseline benefit levels and removing punitive rules or partner-income penalties. Conversely, right-leaning parties focus on strict fiscal management, targeting support strictly to those who qualify, and reinforcing expectations around work capacity where applicable.

Are you looking for how these policies might specifically impact a particular type of benefit or support service?

Ask Gemini

Gemini is AI and can make mistakes.

Captured 19 October 2026 · shown as Gemini gave it, not a verified account

Google AI Mode · No location

I have a long-term health condition that limits my ability to work. I rely on income support and need regular medical appointments. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How would parties change income support and work obligations for people who cannot work because of illness?

For voters navigating the welfare system with a long-term health condition or disability, the political landscape in the 2026 New Zealand general election presents a stark contrast in philosophies. Parties generally fall into camps emphasizing tighter work obligations and expenditure control versus those proposing structural welfare overhauls, income guarantees, or rights-based frameworks.

The key approaches and proposed changes from major and minor political parties regarding income support and obligations for those affected by illness include:

  • National / Governing Parties: Focuses heavily on mutual obligations, accountability, and consistent nationwide assessment processes. While maintaining core safety nets, the current National-led administration has actively expanded welfare accountability frameworks (such as the "traffic light" sanction system for job-seekers failing obligations). Their platform generally prioritizes administrative consistency, stabilizing support systems, and encouraging a transition into work where medically feasible rather than broad, unfunded baseline benefit increases.

  • ACT New Zealand: Emphasizes significantly tightened benefit obligations, reducing overall reliance on state income support, and curtailing welfare expenditure. ACT’s fiscal and social policy platform proposes bringing disability and main benefits "under control" to find substantial savings, favoring strict work-test alignment and a reduction in structural welfare dependency.

  • Green Party: Proposes a fundamental transformation of the welfare system. The Greens support significantly increasing main benefit levels toward a livable income/Guaranteed Minimum Income, abolishing benefit sanctions entirely, and removing partnered means-testing. Their disability and health income policy seeks timely, easily accessible income support that covers all disability- and medical-related costs without being conditioned on rigid work tests.

  • Labour Party: Approaches welfare and disability support from a rights-based, equity-focused perspective grounded in the Enabling Good Lives principles. Labour has committed to repealing recent government disability support legislation to co-design a replacement with the disabled community. Historically, Labour supports lifting main benefit paths in alignment with advisory group recommendations and maintaining individualized funding models rather than implementing punitive work obligations for those with genuine health barriers. [Disability Responsiveness New Zealand]

  • The Opportunities Party (TOP): Proposes replacing traditional categories of benefits (including the Supported Living Payment) with a universal, non-abating Citizen’s Income (up to $370 a week) for adults, paired with a specific universal disability allowance and targeted needs-based top-ups. Under this structural model, conditionality and traditional work tests for baseline survival income would be phased out in favor of a universal baseline.

  • New Zealand First: Maintains a primary focus on protecting New Zealand Superannuation and general economic nationalism, without a dedicated platform proposing major structural reform or expansion for sickness- and disability-related welfare categories.

  • Te Pāti Māori: Frames poverty and welfare access as structural issues, advocating for mandated income guarantees, the removal of punitive sanctions, and self-determination (tino rangatiratanga) for whānau hauā (disabled Māori) within the welfare framework. [Disability Responsiveness New Zealand]

To help narrow down which party platform best aligns with your situation, would you like to explore:

  • Specific party policies on pharmac/medical cost subsidies or disability allowances?
  • How different platforms approach the transition from benefit to part-time work?
Ask anything

Captured 19 October 2026 · shown as Google AI Mode gave it, not a verified account

AI Overviews · No location

I have a long-term health condition that limits my ability to work. I rely on income support and need regular medical appointments. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How would parties change income support and work obligations for people who cannot work because of illness?

AI Overview

In the 2026 New Zealand general election , political parties propose starkly different paths for the welfare system, specifically affecting income support, medical assessments, and work obligations for people with long-term health conditions or illnesses.


🔵 National Party

The National Party focuses on a "firm, fair, and affordable" welfare system centered on workforce participation.

  • Work Obligations & Sanctions: National has implemented a Traffic Light System that imposes clearer obligations and stricter consequences for non-compliance. Their platform includes tougher sanctions and potential payment reductions for long-term beneficiaries, alongside proposals like random drug testing for certain jobseekers.
  • Income Support: They maintain that employment is the main route out of hardship and aim to tighten long-term dependency on welfare.

🟡 ACT New Zealand

As a coalition partner, ACT New Zealand pushes for a significant restructuring of how health-related benefits are managed.

  • Medical Assessments: ACT proposes that independent, MSD-approved designated doctors conduct assessments for health and disability benefits using objective criteria, rather than relying solely on a person’s usual GP. They also want a phased reassessment program, specifically targeting those who received grants for mental health conditions, while keeping protections for enduring conditions.
  • Income Support Limits: They want to introduce mandatory electronic income-management cards for long-term Jobseeker recipients to restrict spending entirely to essentials (groceries, rent, healthcare) and block cash withdrawals.

🔴 Labour Party

The Labour Party platform emphasizes removing "hidden costs" and expanding healthcare access to alleviate pressure on those with long-term conditions.

  • Healthcare Access: Labour has pledged to introduce a Medicard system providing three free GP visits per year for all New Zealanders. They also plan to permanently remove the $5 prescription fee starting in July 2027.
  • Work Obligations: Labour opposes National's benefit crackdowns and sanctions, arguing that punitive measures cause severe financial hardship. They propose focusing on job creation, infrastructure investment, and support rather than penalizing beneficiaries.

🟢 Green Party

The Green Party advocates for an unconditional, dignity-first approach to welfare and opposes compliance-driven obligations.

  • Income Support: The Greens propose an Income Guarantee , which ensures a minimum weekly after-tax income of $385 for individuals and $770 for couples, funded by taxing the wealthiest individuals and corporations.
  • Obligations and Automation: The party strongly opposes the current sanction and Traffic Light settings. Furthermore, they have pledged to ban the use of AI or automated decision-making by the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) to cancel, suspend, or sanction welfare payments.

If you would like to explore further, I can provide more details on how these parties plan to address public health system wait times or look into specific disability accommodation supports in the workplace. Which of those would be most helpful?

Ask anything

Captured 19 October 2026 · shown as AI Overviews gave it, not a verified account