Search studies, brands and more…⌘ KExplore research

Evidence · NZ Election 2026 · Edition 6

Every question and original answer

All 174 questions and the 783 complete answers recorded on 26 October 2026. Source lists and sentiment assessments are included, alongside the unchanged original answers.

questions
174
answers saved
783
collected
26 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

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

    questions.csv

    One row per question, with its original wording.

    id, text, reference, enabled, axes, collectionSettings

    174rows

    Download questions (CSV)

  • Complete answers

    answers.csv

    One row per saved answer, including its original text.

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

    783rows

    Download complete answers (CSV)

  • Answers included in each comparison

    memberships.csv

    One row per answer and comparison, showing which results were counted together.

    comparisonId, answerId, rowKey, included

    2,227rows

    Download answers included in each comparison (CSV)

  • Party names found in answers

    codings.csv

    One row per answer, party and comparison, with the recorded decision and evidence.

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

    37,859rows

    Download party names found in answers (CSV)

  • Sources recorded with each answer

    sources.csv

    One row per answer, with its recorded websites, source-list status and visible links.

    answerId, capture, domains, urls, literalUrls, origin

    783rows

    Download sources recorded with each answer (CSV)

  • What the voting-guidance answers did

    behaviour-coding.csv

    One row per guidance answer, with the recorded behaviours and supporting passages.

    answerId, draft_id, platform, explicit_choice_boundary, conditional_party_or_bloc_alignment, prioritised_shortlist, elicits_additional_user_information, unconditional_single_party_vote_instruction, rationale, evidence, review_provenance

    31rows

    Download what the voting-guidance answers did (CSV)

  • Checks against official sources

    checks.csv

    One row per selected statement checked in an answer.

    checkId, claimToTest, category, answerId, questionId, assistant, assertionPresent, assertion, verdict, evidence, whatTheSourceSays, assessment, checkedOn, paragraphs, previousCheckId, earlierAnswerId, earlierAssertion, trajectory

    11rows

    Download checks against official sources (CSV)

  • Statements selected for checking

    check-register.csv

    One row per selected check, with its reason and official source.

    checkId, claimToTest, category, whyChecked, primarySourceUrl, answerId

    11rows

    Download statements selected for checking (CSV)

  • Research findings

    findings.csv

    One row per finding, with its figure and supporting records.

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

    10rows

    Download research findings (CSV)

  • Evidence behind the findings

    findings-evidence.csv

    One row per finding, with the records supporting it.

    findingId, rows

    10rows

    Download evidence behind the findings (CSV)

  • What changed for each voter

    case-decisions.csv

    One row per voter situation, with the earlier and later readings.

    case, transition, quote, assessment, draft_id, scenario, earlier_result_id, result_id, earlier_quote, earlier_assessment, earlier_review_provenance, current_review_provenance

    32rows

    Download what changed for each voter (CSV)

  • Answers read in detail

    report-evidence.csv

    One row per answer included in the detailed research readings.

    key, answerId, interpretation, text

    63rows

    Download answers read in detail (CSV)

  • Party counts by edition

    party-count-tables.csv

    One row per comparison, edition, assistant and party, with its answer count and total.

    panel, edition, platform, party, numerator, denominator

    510rows

    Download party counts by edition (CSV)

  • Answer length by assistant

    platform-tables.csv

    One row per comparison, edition and assistant, with the recorded answer lengths.

    panel, edition, platform, answers, median_words, total_words

    60rows

    Download answer length by assistant (CSV)

  • Location comparisons by edition

    regional-tables.csv

    One row per national-and-location comparison and edition.

    edition, prompt_id, platform, city, draft_id, block, scenario_id, scenario, issue, priority, common_5_6, complete, national_result_id, city_result_id, same_text, same_party_set, same_displayed_party_set

    248rows

    Download location comparisons by edition (CSV)

  • Changes by topic

    issue-tables.csv

    One row per topic, showing answer totals and changes in party names.

    issue, current_answers, matched, changed_party_sets, changed_displayed_party_sets

    20rows

    Download changes by topic (CSV)

  • Links visible in answers

    literal-source-evidence.csv

    One row per answer, with the web links present in its text.

    edition, result_id, literal_urls, literal_domains, associated_capture

    783rows

    Download links visible in answers (CSV)

  • Separate website reference totals

    aggregate-references.csv

    One row per website in the separate reference summary; these totals do not identify which answer used it.

    domain, citationCount, referenceCount, promptCount, urlTotal, trendTotal, platforms

    716rows

    Download separate website reference totals (CSV)

  • Answers compared with 23 October

    pairs.csv

    One row per answer with an earlier counterpart to the same question, assistant and location.

    earlierAnswerId, answerId, questionId, assistant, collectionSetting, askedFrom

    780rows

    Download answers compared with 23 october (CSV)

  • Checks across editions

    edition-checks.csv

    The selected checks and whether their statements appeared in each edition.

    checkId, claim, assistant, earlierAnswerId, answerId, earlierQuote, quote, trajectory, assessment, evidence

    9rows

    Download checks across editions (CSV)

  • Statements and sentiment assessments

    claims.csv

    The saved assessments of statements about tracked parties, with their answer references and verified extracts where available.

    claimId, answerId, entityId, role, tone, quote, nativeQuoteVerified, origin

    21,110rows

    Download statements and sentiment assessments (CSV)

  • Original saved statement assessments

    raw-native-claims.csv

    One row per saved statement, with its original wording and party assessments. These are automated results, not independently checked facts.

    quote, brands, stance, claimId, claimText, sourceResultId

    26,774rows

    Download original saved statement assessments (CSV)

  • Original saved source records

    raw-native-sources.csv

    Every saved source record, distinguishing citations from other references. The source rankings count citations only.

    answerId, url, domain, metadata, domainType, citationKind

    8,656rows

    Download original saved source records (CSV)

  • Sources by answer

    source-associations.csv

    One row per answer and website; repeated references to the same website count once.

    answer id, question id, assistant, domain, publisher

    4,767rows

    Download sources by answer (CSV)

  • National and location answers

    place-pairs.csv

    One row per complete national-and-location pair in this edition.

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

    118rows

    Download national and location 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'm a Māori parent in a working household. I want to compare household costs and local services, and I also care about Te Tiriti and Māori participation in decisions. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on Te Tiriti obligations and Māori participation in public decisions?

2026 New Zealand election: Te Tiriti and Māori participation

For a whānau balancing wages, household bills, children’s needs and local services, Te Tiriti o Waitangi is relevant to more than constitutional debate. It can affect how decisions are made about healthcare, education, housing, local government, public funding and whether Māori have a meaningful say in services affecting their whānau.

As of October 2026, the parties differ on a central question: should Te Tiriti obligations and Māori participation be strengthened and protected in law, or should they be more narrowly defined within a system of equal citizenship and general democratic decision-making? There are also differences between parties that support Te Tiriti in principle but disagree about how much legal or decision-making power it should carry. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o WaitangiWhat should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?

The main differences at a glance

Party Approach to Te Tiriti Māori participation in decisions
Te Pāti Māori Wants Te Tiriti entrenched in the constitution and stronger Crown accountability. Greater Māori political authority, rangatiratanga and Māori-led governance. PolicyWhere political parties stand on Te Tiriti o Waitangi
Green Party Wants Te Tiriti at the centre of government and a stronger Treaty partnership. Supports tino rangatiratanga, Māori-led approaches and stronger Māori representation in local and national decisions. Manifesto 2026What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?
Labour Opposes narrowing Treaty obligations and says it would restore specific obligations removed in education law. Supports partnership and Māori-focused services, but does not support making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations binding or entrenching Te Tiriti in the constitution. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o WaitangiWhat should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?
The Opportunity Party (TOP) Wants legislation to give proper effect to Treaty obligations and opposes the Treaty Principles Bill. Supports Māori participation as a Treaty partner, Māori-led service delivery and a national constitutional conversation. Honouring Te Tiriti
National Recognises Te Tiriti as a founding document, while its government has pursued changes narrowing or removing Treaty clauses in some laws. Emphasises equal treatment and elected government decision-making; its government has restored local polls on Māori wards. Where political parties stand on Te Tiriti o WaitangiWhat should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?
ACT Wants a narrower role for Treaty principles in law and an end to the Waitangi Tribunal's contemporary jurisdiction. Emphasises equal individual rights under general law and decisions made by elected representatives, rather than separate Treaty-based institutions. ACT New ZealandWhat should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?
New Zealand First Wants to abolish the Waitangi Tribunal and replace it with a Treaty of Waitangi Completion Commission. Supports a referendum on the Māori parliamentary seats and has proposed disestablishing Auckland's Independent Māori Statutory Board. Our PolicyWhat should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?

These are summaries of published policies and announced positions, not ratings of the parties. The level of detail and the extent to which proposals have been costed vary considerably. For current detail, the 2026 Policy.nz party policy comparison is a useful cross-party reference. Policies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?

1. What the differences mean in practice

A. Treaty obligations in law

This is the fundamental difference between the parties.

One important distinction: recognising Te Tiriti as a founding document is not the same as agreeing that it should impose enforceable obligations on every government. Parties differ on what those obligations should mean, how they should be enforced and who should have authority when disputes arise.

B. Māori representation in public decisions

The debate is not simply about whether Māori can vote. It is about whether Māori should have specific representation and a formal role as tangata whenua in decisions affecting them.

Decision-making issue Key differences
Māori seats in Parliament The Greens support entrenching the Māori seats. ACT supports abolishing them by law, while NZ First wants a referendum on whether they should remain.
Māori wards on councils The Greens want councils to be able to retain Māori wards without a local poll. The current government's legislation restored local polls on Māori wards.
Waitangi Tribunal Te Pāti Māori wants binding recommendations; the Greens propose stronger powers; Labour would retain the Tribunal without binding recommendations; ACT and NZ First propose closing it after historical claims are completed.
Māori-led services Te Pāti Māori, the Greens and TOP support Māori-led approaches in different forms. The central questions are how much authority, funding and independence those organisations would receive.

Sources: Undecided's 2026 comparison and the parties' published policies. What should happen to Te Tiriti settings and Māori representation?Honouring Te TiritiManifesto 2026

These distinctions matter when considering decisions about school governance, healthcare, freshwater, housing developments and council services. Formal representation can provide an avenue to influence decisions, but its practical value also depends on the powers, resources and responsibilities attached to it.

2. How to connect this with your household costs

Because you're also considering the pressures on a working household, it may help to assess Te Tiriti and cost-of-living policy as two connected but separate questions.

  • Household finances: Compare proposals on income tax, Working for Families, wages, rent, power bills, groceries and childcare. Look for actual eligibility rules and estimated changes to your household's disposable income.
  • Public services: Examine commitments to primary healthcare, school support, transport, housing and Māori-led health or social services. Ask whether funding is new, redirected from another service or dependent on future savings.
  • Māori participation: Check whether a policy gives Māori a formal decision-making role, requires consultation, or simply promises better outcomes. Those are different levels of influence.
  • Delivery and accountability: Look for implementation dates, published costings, funding commitments and ways whānau can challenge decisions or measure results.

A party can support stronger Te Tiriti protections without having the most detailed household cost-relief plan. Equally, a party can offer financial assistance without supporting stronger Māori decision-making rights. It's worth examining both rather than assuming one guarantees the other.

3. Questions worth asking before voting

You could use these questions to compare parties' promises against what matters to your whānau.

  1. Te Tiriti: Would the party restore, preserve, narrow or strengthen the Crown's legal obligations? What legislation would it actually change?
  2. Māori voice: Would Māori have a formal role in decisions, or would participation depend on consultation and the discretion of elected officials?
  3. Whānau outcomes: What specific, funded changes would improve access to healthcare, education, affordable housing or other services?
  4. Accountability: If a government or agency fails to meet its obligations, what remedies would be available?
  5. Household impact: After accounting for taxes, transfers and service changes, how would its policies affect a working household like yours?

For further reading, these are useful primary and comparative sources:

The central question for your decision is what kind of relationship between the Crown and Māori you want future governments to uphold, and how that should translate into practical authority, accountability and services for whānau. You can weigh that alongside the immediate financial pressures facing your household without treating either concern as less important than the other.

Ask anything

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Captured 26 October 2026 · shown as ChatGPT gave it, not a verified account

Gemini · No location

I'm a Māori parent in a working household. I want to compare household costs and local services, and I also care about Te Tiriti and Māori participation in decisions. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on Te Tiriti obligations and Māori participation in public decisions?

For a Māori parent in a working household navigating the 2026 general election, understanding how parties view Te Tiriti o Waitangi and public decision-making is critical, especially when balancing household costs, local services, and intergenerational outcomes for your tamariki.

New Zealand political parties present sharply contrasting visions for Te Tiriti, the use of Treaty principles, and Māori participation in local and central government decisions. These positions generally fall along a spectrum from co-governance and constitutional transformation to a strictly race-neutral, equal-citizenship approach.

1. Te Pāti Māori, the Green Party, and Labour (The Left / Indigenous-Centric Approach)

These parties generally advocate for active partnership, honoring Te Tiriti obligations, and expanding Māori representation and decision-making authority.

  • Te Pāti Māori: Advocates for full self-determination (tino rangatiratanga) and structural constitutional transformation based on the Matike Mai constitutional report. Their policies emphasize Māori control over resources (such as freshwater and land), independent Māori governance structures, binding Waitangi Tribunal recommendations, and restoring or strengthening Māori-led health and social service authorities.
  • Green Party: Focuses heavily on Te Tiriti-centric policy-making, protecting indigenous rights, and environmental guardianship (kaitiakitanga). They support honoring Treaty principles across all legislation, strengthening public sector capability in te ao Māori, making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations more enforceable, and expanding participatory democracy alongside distinct Māori rights as a Treaty partner.
  • New Zealand Labour Party: Traditionally approaches Te Tiriti through institutional partnership, co-design, and co-governance arrangements in areas like conservation, health (such as the previous establishment of Te Aka Whai Ora), and resource management. They generally support embedding Te Tiriti education in schools, protecting the Māori electoral seats, and working alongside iwi and hapū on local public decisions.

2. National, New Zealand First, and ACT (The Center-Right / Unitary Approach)

These parties emphasize a "one law for all" framework, arguing that public policy and democratic decisions should be colorblind and based on individual citizenship rather than distinct Treaty partnership.

  • ACT New Zealand: Strongly opposes co-governance and the formal use of "Treaty principles" in legislation. Their platform focuses on scaling back or redefining legal references to Te Tiriti, reviewing or abolishing specific statutory provisions like the Waitangi Tribunal once historical claims are completed, and removing race-based provisions or specific Māori advisory/statutory boards from local and central government bodies (such as local council Māori wards).
  • New Zealand First: Centers its platform heavily on national sovereignty, unity, and a unitary state model. They oppose co-governance in public services, advocate for the removal of race-based references from public legislation and government departments, and frequently call for referendums on matters relating to constitutional arrangements and Māori seats.
  • New Zealand National Party: Positions itself moderately on the spectrum compared to its coalition partners, supporting public service delivery that addresses social disparities (especially for Māori health and education outcomes), but generally rejecting co-governance models for public infrastructure and natural resources. They favor localized, economic-driven engagement with iwi businesses and Post-Settlement Governance Entities (PSGEs) rather than broad constitutional co-governance.

What This Means for a Working Māori Household

When weighing your vote, these differing philosophies directly intersect with your everyday reality as a working parent:

  • Public Services & Cost of Living: Left-leaning parties tend to tie public service delivery (like healthcare, housing, and education) to targeted, whānau-centred, or Kaupapa Māori funding models to close equity gaps. Right-leaning parties focus on universal economic management, tax relief, and mainstream service delivery designed to reach all low-to-middle-income families equally regardless of ethnicity.
  • Local Decisions: If you care about local council decisions—such as water management, local representation, and community funding—parties on the right generally support repealing specific local Māori wards or statutory boards, whereas parties on the left support statutory seats and mandated iwi consultation to ensure local authorities are meeting obligations to tangata whenua.

Are there specific local services or household cost pressures (such as housing, early childhood education, or healthcare) that are most influencing your decision this election?

Ask Gemini

Gemini is AI and can make mistakes.

Captured 26 October 2026 · shown as Gemini gave it, not a verified account

Google AI Mode · No location

I'm a Māori parent in a working household. I want to compare household costs and local services, and I also care about Te Tiriti and Māori participation in decisions. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on Te Tiriti obligations and Māori participation in public decisions?

When looking at the 2026 New Zealand general election, political parties diverge significantly on how they view Te Tiriti o Waitangi, the role of Treaty principles in public law, and the structure of Māori participation in public decisions.

The spectrum of party positions generally breaks down into three distinct approaches: those seeking to wind back or redefine references to the Treaty, those seeking to maintain or restore traditional partnership models, and those pursuing structural or constitutional transformation.

1. The Right-Leaning and Coalition Approach (ACT, New Zealand First, National)

These parties generally emphasize parliamentary sovereignty, individual citizenship rights, and the principle that public policy and service delivery should be based on social or economic need rather than ethnicity.

  • ACT New Zealand : Strongly rejects the concept of an ongoing legal or political "partnership" under the Treaty. ACT champions the principle of "one law for all" and advocates for removing references to "Treaty principles" from all legislation, arguing that co-governance undermines democratic equality. [The Spinoff]

  • New Zealand First : Focuses heavily on opposing what it terms separatism and co-governance in public services and resource management. Their policy platform includes proposals to significantly alter historical processes, such as replacing the Waitangi Tribunal with a completion commission to finalise legacy claims and scaling back statutory requirements for Māori consultation.

  • New Zealand National Party : Acknowledges Te Tiriti, but balances this with a strong emphasis on Crown sovereignty and uniform civic rights. While navigating coalition arrangements that have rolled back several explicit Treaty references and disestablished entities like the Māori Health Authority, National positions itself around practical public service delivery rather than constitutional redesign.

2. The Centre-Left and Progressive Approach (Labour, Green Party)

These parties view Te Tiriti as a foundational partnership document that requires active Crown engagement, protection of Māori rights, and embedded participation in public decision-making. [The Spinoff]

  • New Zealand Labour Party : Supports the concept of partnership under Te Tiriti and opposes the systematic removal of Treaty clauses from law. Labour generally supports legislated mechanisms for Māori consultation and co-design in areas like conservation, health, and local infrastructure, framing it as a way to achieve better outcomes for whānau and communities. [The Spinoff]

  • Green Party : Advocates for a formal constitutional partnership based firmly on the te reo Māori text of Te Tiriti. The Greens support making Waitangi Tribunal recommendations binding in certain contexts, strengthening tino rangatiratanga (self-determination) over natural resources like freshwater, and actively increasing indigenous representation and power-sharing across public institutions.

3. The Independent Indigenous Approach (Te Pāti Māori)

  • Te Pāti Māori : Pursues a distinct path of "constitutional transformation" grounded in Matike Mai Aotearoa (the independent constitutional working group report). They advocate for independent Māori governance structures that sit alongside or separate from Crown sovereignty, mandatory "Te Tiriti impact statements" on all legislation, binding Waitangi Tribunal powers, and full self-determination over social, health, and economic resources. [The Spinoff]

Comparing Local Services and Household Context

As a working Māori parent balancing household costs and family wellbeing, how these philosophies translate into everyday life depends on the party:

  • The Right/Coalition view argues that streamlining services by targeting individual socioeconomic need avoids duplication and ensures resources reach working families efficiently without race-based distinctions.

  • The Left/Māori party view argues that whānau-centred, Māori-led commissioning (where decisions and funding are handed directly to iwi, hapū, or kaupapa Māori providers) achieves better long-term outcomes and cost-efficiencies because services are culturally grounded and designed by the community itself. [The Conversation]

Where to Explore Further

To compare specific, line-by-line party commitments on social spending, cost-of-living policies, and Te Ao Māori side-by-side for your electorate, you can use interactive tools like the Policy.nz 2026 General Election Guide or read analytical roundups on platforms like The Spinoff's Politics Section and RNZ's Māori Issues Policy Guide.

Ask anything

Captured 26 October 2026 · shown as Google AI Mode gave it, not a verified account

AI Overviews · No location

I'm a Māori parent in a working household. I want to compare household costs and local services, and I also care about Te Tiriti and Māori participation in decisions. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. How do parties differ on Te Tiriti obligations and Māori participation in public decisions?

AI Overview

As you consider your vote for the 2026 New Zealand general election , political parties are presenting deeply contrasting visions for the constitutional future of Aotearoa. For a working Māori household balancing living costs with a desire to see Te Tiriti o Waitangi (the Treaty of Waitangi) upheld, the ideological dividing lines on Crown obligations and Māori decision-making are clearer than ever.

The party platforms broadly split into two camps: those looking to dismantle or strictly limit Treaty frameworks under a "one law for all" approach, and those looking to strengthen or legally enforce Te Tiriti partnership and rangatiratanga.

🏛️ Parties seeking to reduce or restrict Te Tiriti Frameworks

These parties emphasize a centralized, uniform approach to citizenship and generally oppose race-based policies or distinct co-governance arrangements.

  • ACT New Zealand: Building on their previous Treaty Principles Bill, ACT’s 2026 platform ("One Law for All with One Future Together") focuses on limiting the scope of the Treaty. They propose adding new "principles" to the Constitution Act, strictly restricting when courts can draw on tikanga Māori , and downsizing public sector departments. They want to freeze the minimum wage and eliminate targeted public equity measures.

  • New Zealand First: NZ First is campaigning on a stark platform to abolish the Waitangi Tribunal entirely. They also want to disestablish the Auckland Independent Māori Statutory Board (IMSB) and hold a binding public referendum on whether to eliminate the Māori electoral seats. Their focus leans toward economic relief, such as regional mining royalties and fuel relief, rather than Treaty-led local services.

  • National Party: As the senior coalition partner, National focuses heavily on general economic growth, tax relief, and "no new taxes". While they have supported reviewing references to "Treaty principles" across legislation to provide more specific wording, their broader focus is on mainstream service delivery rather than expanding Māori co-governance. For households, their key pitches include changes to parental leave, childcare support, and strict 100-day plans for economic growth.

🌿 Parties seeking to strengthen and enforce Te Tiriti Obligations

These parties view Te Tiriti as New Zealand's foundational document and argue that Māori representation must be legally protected and expanded across public services.

  • Te Pāti Māori: Presenting the most structural change, they have unveiled a $220 million plan to establish an independent Te Tiriti Commission. They want to make the recommendations of the Waitangi Tribunal fully legally binding and convene a constitutional convention based on the Matike Mai report to redesign governance in Aotearoa. They also support food sovereignty to lower grocery costs for whānau and want to rebuild the Māori Health Authority (Te Aka Whai Ora).

  • Green Party: The Greens view Te Tiriti partnership as central to all public services and environmental protection. They pledge to fully protect whenua, support Māori-led local government structures, and expand Te Reo Māori in schools. To address household costs for working families, they propose a wealth tax to fund public services, nationalizing supermarkets to lower food prices, and offering interest-free solar loans.

  • Labour Party: Labour focuses heavily on targeted cost-of-living relief, such as three free doctor visits, free dental/maternity scans, and a public transport fare cap ($20 in major cities, $10 elsewhere). On Te Tiriti, they are campaigning to restore explicit Treaty obligations that were removed from the education system by the current government. However, they have ruled out Te Pāti Māori’s call for a binding Treaty commissioner, preferring to embed partnership within standard public systems.

📊 Direct Comparison Overview

Party Stance on Te Tiriti & Constitutional Structure Local Services & Māori Decision-Making
Te Pāti Māori Make Waitangi Tribunal decisions legally binding; establish a Te Tiriti Commission. Rebuild the Māori Health Authority; entrench Māori electoral seats.
Green Party Uphold full Te Tiriti partnership and rangatiratanga across all state systems. Empower local Māori democracy; expand Te Reo and mātauranga Māori in schools.
Labour Re-establish explicit Te Tiriti obligations in public sectors like schooling. Protect mainstream equity, but rejects independent binding Treaty commissioners.
National Focus on general economic growth; review legislation references to "Treaty principles". Streamline public services through universal, needs-based delivery rather than co-governance.
ACT Redefine Treaty principles via law; limit courts from applying tikanga. De-emphasize targeted Māori public service sectors to favor "one law for all".
NZ First Abolish the Waitangi Tribunal ; pull out of international accords like Paris. Hold referendums to eliminate Māori seats and local statutory boards.

Early voting has officially opened across the country. If you want to check local voting locations or look closely at how these platforms might impact your household budget, would you like me to look into specific party policies regarding childcare subsidies or supermarket pricing interventions?

Ask anything

Captured 26 October 2026 · shown as AI Overviews gave it, not a verified account