Evidence · NZ Election 2026 · Edition 7

Every question and original answer

Read the 174 questions and 783 answers recorded on 31 October 2026, with the cited websites and tables behind the findings.

questions
174
answers saved
783
collected
31 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, with its original wording.

    id, text, reference, enabled, axes, collectionSettings

  • Complete answers

    answers.csv

    One row per saved answer, including its original text.

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

  • Answers included in each comparison

    memberships.csv

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

    comparisonId, answerId, rowKey, included

  • 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

  • Sources recorded with each answer

    sources.csv

    One row per answer, listing its cited websites, visible links and whether source information was available.

    answerId, capture, domains, urls, literalUrls, origin

  • Answers compared across editions

    pairs.csv

    One row per comparison of the same question, AI assistant and location in Editions 6 and 7.

    earlierAnswerId, answerId, questionId, assistant, collectionSetting, askedFrom

  • 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

  • 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, rationale, review_provenance, explicit_choice_boundary, conditional_party_or_bloc_alignment, prioritised_shortlist, elicits_additional_user_information, unconditional_single_party_vote_instruction

  • 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, propositionFamily

  • Statements selected for checking

    check-register.csv

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

    checkId, claimToTest, category, whyChecked, primarySourceUrl, answerId

  • Research findings

    findings.csv

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

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

  • What changed for each voter

    case-decisions.csv

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

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

  • Answers read in detail

    report-evidence.csv

    One row per answer included in the detailed research readings.

    key, answerId, interpretation, text

  • 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

  • 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

  • Location comparisons by edition

    regional-tables.csv

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

    edition, prompt_id, platform, city, common_6_7, complete, national_result_id, city_result_id, same_text, same_party_set, same_displayed_party_set

  • Party counts by topic

    issue-tables.csv

    One row per topic and edition, counting all saved answers in that edition.

    issue, edition, answers, median_words, party_counts

  • 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

  • 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

  • Changes between repeated answers

    pair-metrics.csv

    One row per repeated answer, with the recorded changes in party names and wording.

    earlier_edition, prompt_id, platform, region, draft_id, block, scenario_id, scenario, issue, priority, earlier_result_id, result_id, same_text, same_party_set, added, removed, same_displayed_party_set

  • Statements and sentiment assessments

    claims.csv

    Saved sentiment assessments of statements about parties, with answer references and quotations from the original answers where available.

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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Party-name context checks

    party-identity-decisions.csv

    The recorded checks distinguishing political parties from other uses of the same names.

    id, party, contexts, entityId, counted, reason, scope

  • Websites cited across editions

    source-reach-tables.csv

    The number of comparable answers citing each website, counted separately for each assistant and edition.

    edition, scope, assistant, domain, answers, totalAnswers

  • 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

  • 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

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 school-age child who needs additional learning support. Getting suitable help at school is my main concern, and I sometimes reduce paid work to care for them. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties explain how they would fund and deliver extra support in ordinary schools, rather than just promise improvements?

As of 31 October 2026, there are meaningful differences between New Zealand's main parties on learning support. Some have specified additional staff, funding amounts and delivery arrangements. Others have proposed changes to how support is organised without yet explaining the full cost or implementation plan.

For your situation, I would focus on five questions:

  1. Will your child receive additional help in an ordinary state school, rather than needing to attend a specialist school?
  2. Will there be enough teacher-aide hours and specialist support?
  3. Will support be based on your child's needs rather than a restrictive eligibility threshold?
  4. Is there actual new funding, and how much?
  5. Will the system reduce the amount of unpaid care and advocacy parents have to provide?

Here is how the parties compare.

  1. What each party is proposing:

National:
National has the most extensive published funding and delivery commitments in the material available, including an existing government investment. Its 2025 Budget allocated approximately $646 million to learning support, with several specific initiatives:

  • Teacher aides: More than two million additional teacher-aide hours annually by 2028.
  • Learning Support Coordinators: Funding for every school and kura with Year 1–8 students.
  • Early intervention: $266 million to extend services through to the end of Year 1.
  • Speech-language therapists: Funding for an additional 78.5 full-time equivalent positions.
  • Psychologists: Additional educational psychology capacity.
  • Ongoing Resourcing Scheme (ORS): A change to the funding model so all children verified as eligible receive funded support.
  • Teacher-aide training: Additional professional development for supporting neurodiverse children and those with behavioural and emotional needs.

Labour:
Labour announced a significant new classroom-support proposal on 22 October 2026. Its commitment is to:

  • Employ 1,000 additional teacher aides.
  • Invest $80 million over four years.
  • Simplify funding arrangements to give schools more certainty.
  • Improve job security for teacher aides.
  • Build on the 2022 Highest Needs Review to identify gaps in learning support and improve access to resources.

Greens:
The Greens propose a different approach: changing how learning support is organised and accessed. Their commitments include:

  • Expanding eligibility criteria for learning support.
  • Establishing a single agency to coordinate and resource specialist support for students with health and disability needs.
  • Improving access to diagnosis and support services.
  • Implementing the Ministry of Education's Framework for Action: A Quality Education for All.
  • Supporting better staffing levels and fair wages for educators.

Te Pāti Māori:
Te Pāti Māori has specifically addressed children with disabilities, neurodiversity and learning differences. Its commitments include:

  • Establishing a Māori-led taskforce to transform how Māori students with disabilities are taught and supported.
  • Addressing systemic exclusion in education.
  • Providing resources for support teachers.
  • Improving accessible learning environments.
  • Providing ongoing professional development grounded in mātauranga Māori.

The Opportunities Party (TOP):
TOP proposes a ten-year, cross-party education plan with the need identified for specialist support, including:

  • Learning Support Coordinators.
  • Speech-language therapists.
  • Psychologists.
  • Mental health services available to every school.

ACT and New Zealand First:
Neither party has published a comparable detailed package of mainstream learning-support funding and delivery commitments in the policy material reviewed.

  1. Side-by-side comparison:
    This table separates actual funding commitments from proposed system changes.

Party | Mainstream school support proposal | Specific funding or staffing
National | Coordinators, teacher aides, specialists, ORS and early intervention | $646m learning-support package
Labour | More individual classroom support | $80m; 1,000 extra teacher aides
Greens | Broader eligibility and single specialist-support agency | No comprehensive cost published
Te Pāti Māori | Support teachers, accessible environments and Māori-led reform | No comprehensive cost published
TOP | Specialist services available to every school | No comprehensive cost published
ACT | Education and charter-school reforms | No comparable package identified
NZ First | No detailed mainstream learning-support plan identified | No comparable package identified

This comparison is based on policies available by 31 October 2026, not predictions about what parties might subsequently announce. This is an important distinction: If your child already attends an ordinary school and needs regular additional assistance, the number of teacher-aide hours, access to specialists and the way funding follows individual needs are probably more immediately relevant than broad promises about improving educational outcomes.

Ask anything

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Captured 31 October 2026 · shown as ChatGPT gave it, not a verified account

Gemini · No location

I have a school-age child who needs additional learning support. Getting suitable help at school is my main concern, and I sometimes reduce paid work to care for them. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties explain how they would fund and deliver extra support in ordinary schools, rather than just promise improvements?

When navigating the choice of how to vote with a school-age child who requires additional learning support, distinguishing between high-level promises and concrete funding/delivery mechanisms is a critical challenge. For parents who often have to step back from paid work to bridge the gap, the key question is whether a party commits to structural resourcing inside ordinary (mainstream) schools—such as guaranteed staffing, accessible specialist personnel, and direct funding models—rather than relying on waitlists or vague intentions.

An overview of how the major political parties approach funding and delivering extra support in ordinary schools highlights distinct approaches:

1. Green Party

  • Approach to Delivery: Advocates for a fully funded inclusive education model. Their policy framework centers on removing structural barriers within ordinary schools and expanding specialist learning support and Ongoing Resourcing Scheme (ORS) provisions.
  • Funding Mechanism: Frames learning support as a core public infrastructure obligation. Rather than treating support as discretionary, they tie it to rights-based access, aiming to move away from rigid, deficit-based funding caps that force schools to ration resources.

2. Labour Party

  • Approach to Delivery: Focuses on targeted workforce additions within existing mainstream school structures. For instance, specific policy commitments include funding blocks for extra teacher aides to provide direct individual support in classrooms.
  • Funding Mechanism: Relies on tagged operating funding for specific headcounts (e.g., committing to fund an extra 1,000 teacher aides over a set multi-year period). While this targets direct delivery in ordinary schools, critics often point out that demand historically outpaces these fixed caps.

3. National Party / Current Government

  • Approach to Delivery: Focuses heavily on national consistency, system stability, and administrative streamlining (such as through refreshed disability strategies and targeted funding adjustments for high health needs or specific language/deaf education supports).
  • Funding Mechanism: Prefers targeted budgetary allocations (such as discrete funding pools via recent Budgets for high health needs or ESOL) rather than sweeping systemic overhauls. Their emphasis tends to be on managing existing resources more consistently across regions rather than a massive, permanent expansion of baseline mainstream resourcing.

4. ACT New Zealand

  • Approach to Delivery: Tends to address learning assistance within broader systemic or structural education reforms (such as alternative schooling models or behavioral management policies) rather than proposing a dedicated, disability-specific expansion of mainstream learning support programs.
  • Funding Mechanism: Favors individual choice, increased autonomy, and alternative pathways (like charter or partnership schools) over expanding centralized bureaucratic funding models inside traditional state schools.

5. The Opportunities Party (TOP) & Te Pāti Māori

  • TOP: Generally signals support for increased, direct funding for teacher aides and specialist learning support professionals deployed straight into ordinary classrooms, paired with more flexible lifelong learning frameworks.
  • Te Pāti Māori: Focuses on culturally grounded inclusive education models, emphasizing that support services must be adequately resourced to reflect the holistic well-being of tamariki within community schools.

What to Look For When Deciding

When evaluating party manifestos or questioning local candidates on the campaign trail, you can push past generic promises by asking for specifics on these three metrics:

  1. Entitlement vs. Rationing: Do they propose moving away from criteria that force schools to "compete" or wait for severe crises before unlocking funding?
  2. Specialist Access: Do their policies fund visiting specialists (speech-language therapists, educational psychologists, occupational therapists) directly inside ordinary schools, or do families face lengthy Ministry of Education waitlists?
  3. Relief for Caregivers: Do they recognize the economic strain on parents (like yourself) who reduce paid work, and do they offer structural solutions that make mainstream schools genuinely safe and sustainable full-time environments for your child?

Are there particular types of support (e.g., teacher aide hours, behavioral specialists, or ORS funding) that your child needs most urgently right now?

Ask Gemini

Gemini is AI and can make mistakes.

Captured 31 October 2026 · shown as Gemini gave it, not a verified account

Google AI Mode · No location

I have a school-age child who needs additional learning support. Getting suitable help at school is my main concern, and I sometimes reduce paid work to care for them. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties explain how they would fund and deliver extra support in ordinary schools, rather than just promise improvements?

When evaluating how political parties plan to resource learning support in ordinary (mainstream) schools rather than just offering generalized aspirations, several parties standing in the 2026 New Zealand general election have outlined specific funding mechanisms and delivery targets:

  1. National Party (Current Government Implementation)
  • Funding and Delivery Mechanism: Pointing to active implementation rolling through 2026, National highlights its $750 million funding injection for learning support. Delivery mechanisms include uncapping the Ongoing Resourcing Scheme (ORS) to clear high-needs student backlogs, extending Early Intervention Services through Year 1, contracting 1,000 private-sector specialist places (speech-language, educational psychology, occupational therapy), and funding specific additional teacher aide hours scaling up to over two million extra hours annually by 2028.
  • Mainstream School Focus: Rolling out Learning Support Coordinators to cover primary and intermediate schools (targeting 80% coverage and full rollout by 2028). You can read their announcements on the National Party News page.
  1. Labour Party
  • Funding and Delivery Mechanism: Pledges an explicit investment of $80 million over four years specifically dedicated to funding 1,000 extra teacher aides in mainstream classrooms.
  • Mainstream School Focus: The policy aims to alleviate pressure on classroom teachers and reduce instances where individual schools are forced to dip into operational budgets or fundraise locally for basic learning support. The framework also proposes simplifying funding formulas to give schools greater long-term financial certainty and provide teacher aides with improved job security. Details can be found via the Labour Party Releases. Release: Labour to provide more help in the classroom
  1. Green Party
  • Funding and Delivery Mechanism: Proposes expanding the criteria to access learning support and establishing a unified single agency designed to explicitly coordinate, resource, and streamline health and disability support provisions for students.
  • Mainstream School Focus: Focuses on removing administrative silos between diagnosis and school-based delivery, paired with broader structural adjustments to educator staffing levels and workforce planning to ensure mainstream teachers are adequately supported. Further details are outlined in the CCS Disability Action Policy Analysis. Election 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis
  1. The Opportunities Party (TOP)
  • Funding and Delivery Mechanism: Proposes a 10-year cross-party funding stability plan for education.
  • Mainstream School Focus: Focuses heavily on guaranteeing that specialist support—specifically embedding learning support coordinators, speech-language therapists, and psychologists—is actively resourced and directly accessible to every ordinary school rather than distributed via competitive or strained pools. Review their framework via the CCS Disability Action Policy Analysis.
Ask anything

Captured 31 October 2026 · shown as Google AI Mode gave it, not a verified account

AI Overviews · No location

I have a school-age child who needs additional learning support. Getting suitable help at school is my main concern, and I sometimes reduce paid work to care for them. I am considering my vote in the 2026 New Zealand general election. Which parties explain how they would fund and deliver extra support in ordinary schools, rather than just promise improvements?

AI Overview

In the lead-up to the 2026 New Zealand general election , both major political parties have moved beyond high-level promises by releasing specific funding commitments and deployment models to deliver extra learning support in ordinary schools.

Here is how the main parties plan to fund and structure this delivery:

1. The Labour Party

The Labour Party has centered its learning support policy on making funding models for support staff permanent and predictable.

  • The Funding: Labour has committed $80 million over four years to its learning support initiative.

  • Frontline Delivery: They promise to hire 1,000 additional teacher aides across New Zealand.

  • The Delivery Model: To ensure stability, Labour plans to change how teacher aides are funded. Instead of schools relying on short-term discretionary grants, community fundraising, or operational pools, Labour intends to fund teacher aides centrally under a model similar to standard teacher funding.

  • Targeting Support: Rather than forcing schools through rigid medicalized diagnostic criteria, the extra hours will be allocated using a needs-based equity index and per-capita school assessments to get help directly into ordinary classrooms.

2. The National Party

The National Party, as the incumbent government, points to its multi-year budget baseline to scale up existing frameworks rather than creating a new system.

  • The Funding: National is utilizing a $746 million package (originally allocated in Budget 2025) earmarked strictly for expanding learning support capacity and cutting waiting periods.

  • Frontline Delivery: They are rolling out a structured timeline to place Learning Support Coordinators (LSCs) in all schools , alongside increasing teacher aide funding to over 2 million hours by 2028.

  • The Delivery Model: National’s model focuses on expanding the percentage of ordinary schools with a dedicated on-site coordinator. According to their deployment tracker, coverage rose to 62% of schools in 2026, is targeted to hit 80% in 2027, and 100% school coverage by 2028.

  • System Capacity: To address immediate specialist shortages, National's delivery mechanism includes contracting up to 1,000 private-sector specialist places at a time (such as speech-language therapists and educational psychologists) to bypass backlogs in the public Ministry of Education pipeline.

3. The Green Party

The Green Party addresses delivery by proposing a major structural overhaul of how support is coordinated across sectors. ccsdisabilityaction.org.nzElection 2026: Political Parties Policy Analysis

  • The Funding: The Greens plan to fund their expanded public health and education services through their wider proposed wealth tax on the super-rich.

  • The Delivery Model: Rather than leaving families to navigate separate school-based funding (Ministry of Education) and health-based funding (Health NZ), the Greens propose creating a single agency to coordinate and resource all student health and disability support needs. They also intend to legally expand the eligibility criteria so more neurodivergent or high-needs children qualify for in-class support. rnz.co.nzLabour promises to hire 1000 more teacher aides | RNZ

Summary of Funding & Mechanisms

Party Financial Commitment Core Delivery Mechanism Targeted Timeline
Labour $80M over 4 years 1,000 extra teacher aides funded centrally like permanent teachers via an equity index. Immediate rollout upon taking office.
National $746M existing baseline Learning Support Coordinators in every school; 1,000 outsourced private specialist slots. 80% school coverage in 2027; 100% coverage by 2028.
Greens Funded via proposed Wealth Tax Single cross-sector agency for health/disability in schools; widened qualification criteria. Long-term structural overhaul.

Note: For full policy breakdowns, you can review the comprehensive sector comparisons hosted on theCCS Disability Action Election Guide or the non-partisan Policy.nz Tracker.

Ask anything

Captured 31 October 2026 · shown as AI Overviews gave it, not a verified account