First, I'm sorry you're facing redundancy after spending years in one industry. Losing a job is difficult enough without having to question whether the skills and experience you've built will still be valued in the future. Having rent to pay also makes this more than an abstract economic debate.

Your question is particularly important for the 2026 New Zealand general election: when politicians promise to create jobs, what evidence tells us whether those jobs will actually materialise, and whether someone who has lost their job can realistically access them?

There are some useful ways to distinguish credible employment policies from campaign promises.

1. The economic situation New Zealand is facing

The employment figures provide important context.

According to Stats NZ, in the June 2026 quarter:

5.6%

Unemployment rate

Highest in 11 years, according to Policy.nz

171,000

People unemployed

June 2026 quarter

The unemployment rate increased by 0.2 percentage points during the quarter. Employment growth was still positive year-on-year, but the labour market remained under pressure. Unemployment rateLabour market (M9) - Reserve Bank of New ZealandPolicies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026

This matters because a policy that works during a labour shortage may have a different effect when businesses are reluctant to recruit.

It also means that simply creating economic growth does not guarantee that people made redundant in one industry will find work in another.

2. What are the parties promising about jobs?

There are several different economic philosophies behind the parties' proposals. Here are some of the most relevant approaches in the current campaign.

National: business investment and economic growth

National Party

Its approach is to encourage private-sector growth through lower taxation, investment incentives, reduced regulatory barriers and business confidence.

Its policies include:

• No new taxes.
• Easier consenting for commercial buildings and infrastructure.
• Support for small businesses.
• Growing exports and access to international markets.
• Investment in energy infrastructure and economic development.

National argues that stronger business investment and economic growth will generate more jobs and higher wages. 2026 Election PolicyNational’s 100 Day Plan to secure our future

What is the evidence?

There is a credible economic argument that investment in machinery, technology, infrastructure and productive businesses can increase productivity and eventually support employment.

However, increased productivity does not automatically mean more workers. Businesses can sometimes increase output using fewer employees.

The Treasury's 2025 analysis of the Investment Boost tax incentive identified potential benefits through increased capital investment and productivity. That is evidence for an investment mechanism, not proof of a particular number of new jobs. Aide Memoire T2025/1133: Economic growth effects of Investment Boost - 2 May 2025Investment Boost driving real investment, lifting productivity

Labour: infrastructure, apprenticeships and targeted employment

Labour Party

Labour's approach involves more direct government investment, vocational training and targeted support for employers.

Its 2026 employment proposals include:

• Extending Apprenticeship Boost.
• Investing in social housing, schools and hospital improvements.
• Māori-led vocational training.
• A graduate nurse employment guarantee.
• Supporting small businesses and directing more government procurement towards them.

Labour says its Start Work Now programme would support nearly 30,000 apprentices through construction and infrastructure projects. Labour's 2026 Election PoliciesLabour's 2026 Election Policies

What is the evidence?

There is some particularly relevant New Zealand evidence here.

The Ministry of Social Development evaluated the Mana in Mahi employment programme. It found that participants experienced increased time in employment, education or training, and spent more time off benefits than a comparison group.

Importantly, the evaluation found that the programme created employment for some people employers otherwise would not have hired. Mana in Mahi – Strength in Work: Evaluation

That is meaningful evidence that targeted employment support can work.

The limitation is that this does not establish that every expansion of apprenticeship subsidies or infrastructure spending will deliver the same results.

The Green Party: public investment and new industries

Green Party

Its approach focuses on government investment in clean energy, transport, research, innovation and sustainable industries.

One particularly striking campaign announcement is its claim that its economic development plan will create 284,000 jobs over four years.

The Greens explain that:

• 220,000 jobs are already forecast over that period.
• Their proposed investments would create an additional 64,000 jobs.
• Investment would focus on clean energy, transport, research and innovation.
• The party wants to increase research and development spending towards 3% of GDP. Greens’ economic development plan will create 284,000 jobs

What is the evidence?

There is a reasonable economic case for investing in infrastructure, renewable energy and research. These investments can create direct employment and stimulate employment in supplier industries.

But the distinction between the 220,000 forecast jobs and the additional 64,000 claimed jobs is crucial.

The 220,000 figure is not a jobs contribution attributable to Green Party policies. The additional 64,000 is a party projection that needs independent scrutiny.

I would want to see the economic modelling, assumptions about private investment, expected construction costs and the number of jobs that would remain after the initial projects are completed.

ACT: reducing barriers to business and employment

ACT New Zealand

ACT emphasises reducing regulation, flexibility in employment relationships, lower taxation and limiting government intervention.

The underlying argument is that businesses will be more willing to expand and hire if employing people is less costly and business activity is easier.

The important evidence question is whether lower costs lead to genuinely additional recruitment, rather than simply reducing costs for businesses that would have employed the same people anyway.

New Zealand First: economic independence and domestic industry

New Zealand First

Its economic messaging includes support for domestic businesses, industry, regional economic development and employment.

One of its proposals is restructuring the electricity market, which the party argues could reduce power costs.

Lower energy costs could help businesses that use substantial amounts of electricity, potentially improving their ability to expand and employ people.

However, cheaper electricity is not itself evidence of additional jobs. The employment impact would depend on how much costs actually fall and whether businesses use those savings to expand.

Te Pāti Māori and The Opportunity Party

Te Pāti Māori

Its employment approach includes Māori economic development, training, employment protections and improving access to decent work.

The Opportunity Party

Its proposals include structural tax and welfare changes, including a universal income proposal intended to change how people are supported financially.

These approaches raise a different question: how can people be supported to participate in the workforce, particularly when conventional employment opportunities are limited?

A universal income, for example, could provide financial security while someone retrains or looks for work. But that is a different claim from demonstrating that the policy itself creates more jobs.

For the full range of current proposals, the independent election policy comparison at Policy.nz is useful. Policies for Party vote - NZ Election 2026Election policy tracker: what the parties are promisingSummary of 2026 election tax policies

3. What does the actual evidence tell us about job creation?

This is arguably the most important part of your question.

There is a difference between an economic theory that sounds reasonable and a policy that has been tested in practice.

Here are three useful examples.

Policy approach	What the evidence tells us
Wage subsidies and targeted employment programmes	New Zealand's Mana in Mahi evaluation found positive employment and training outcomes compared with a comparison group.
Apprenticeship subsidies	More than 55,000 apprentices have been supported by Apprenticeship Boost. However, the Education Ministry has noted limitations in proving how much additional training the subsidy caused.
Investment tax incentives	Treasury identifies potential productivity and investment benefits, but those do not establish a specific number of additional jobs.

Sources: Mana in Mahi – Strength in Work: EvaluationEducation Report: Further advice on support for apprenticeships12 - Apprenticeship BoostAide Memoire T2025/1133: Economic growth effects of Investment Boost - 2 May 2025

One particularly useful document is the Ministry of Education's assessment of apprenticeship support.

It noted that Apprenticeship Boost helped preserve existing apprenticeships and encourage continued recruitment. However, it also acknowledged that employment conditions had not deteriorated as badly as originally anticipated when the scheme was introduced.

It warned that subsidies can sometimes encourage employers to take on apprentices without a strong intention to complete their training.

This illustrates why measuring the number of people receiving a subsidy is not the same as measuring the number of jobs genuinely created. Education Report: Further advice on support for apprenticeships12 - Apprenticeship Boost

4. Five questions to ask whenever a party promises jobs

I would use these questions to assess any party's employment claims, regardless of its political philosophy.

1. Are the jobs genuinely additional?

Would those jobs exist anyway because of normal economic growth? Or are they genuinely attributable to the proposed policy?

2. Are they permanent or temporary?

Construction projects can employ thousands of people, but what happens when the project finishes?

3. Are the jobs accessible to existing workers?

Will someone with experience in manufacturing, administration, retail, construction or another declining industry be able to move into them?

4. Has the policy worked before?

Is there an independent evaluation, preferably using a comparison group, rather than just a party's own forecast?

5. Can the government actually afford it?

Are the costs, funding sources and economic assumptions independently scrutinised?

The distinction between a forecast and an independently evaluated result is especially important. A party's economic model is not automatically wrong, but it should not be treated as established evidence.

5. What does this mean if you've been made redundant?

I think there is another dimension to this debate that deserves more attention: creating jobs is not the same as helping displaced workers find them.

Imagine your previous industry contracts, but the economy creates thousands of new jobs in renewable energy, healthcare, construction or technology.

That sounds positive at a national level. But it doesn't necessarily help you if:

• You need two years of training to qualify.
• The new jobs are in another part of New Zealand.
• Employers want younger applicants or different experience.
• You cannot afford to study while paying rent.
• Your existing qualifications aren't recognised in the new industry.

This is where I would pay particular attention to three types of policy:

1. Retraining support

Does the party offer funded training, apprenticeships, career guidance and practical pathways into industries experiencing skills shortages?

2. Income security during unemployment

What happens to someone who needs several months to find another job? Does the policy provide adequate income support and practical assistance?

3. Employment transition programmes

Does the party help experienced workers transfer their existing skills into new industries, rather than expecting them to start again from scratch?

These are important measures of employment policy that headline job-creation figures can overlook.

6. My suggested way of comparing the parties

Rather than asking which party promises the most jobs, consider comparing their policies against these criteria.

Criterion	What to investigate
Job creation	Independently supported additional jobs
Job security	Permanent employment versus temporary projects
Retraining	Funding and accessibility of vocational training
Income support	Ability to meet essential costs while unemployed
Industry transition	Help moving between declining and growing industries
Business growth	Evidence that policies lead to additional hiring

You can also examine the parties' fiscal plans and independent economic analysis.

Useful resources include:

• Stats NZ – employment, unemployment and industry statistics.
• The Treasury – economic forecasts and policy analysis.
• Ministry of Social Development – employment programme evaluations and income support.
• Tertiary Education Commission – apprenticeship and training opportunities.
• Policy.nz 2026 employment policy comparison – party positions on employment.

7. One thing I'd encourage you to consider personally

I wouldn't assume that redundancy means you need to abandon your industry or retrain completely.

There may be opportunities to transfer your experience into related industries, particularly if you have developed management, technical, operational, customer-service or specialist skills.

Your immediate financial security also matters. You can investigate eligibility for Jobseeker Support and other assistance through Work and Income while considering your next career move.

A question that would help me make this research more relevant

You mentioned that you've spent years in the same industry. I'd be interested in understanding what sort of work you've been doing, because the employment prospects and retraining options can differ considerably between industries.

Which industry have you recently been made redundant from?

If you tell me that, I can take the analysis a step further and examine:

• Which New Zealand industries are expected to grow or contract.
• Whether your existing skills are transferable to growing industries.
• Which parties' employment proposals specifically address those industries.
• Whether there is evidence of genuine employment opportunities rather than just political promises.

My aim would be to help you assess the economic policies not simply as a voter, but from the perspective of someone who needs a realistic opportunity to earn a living and keep a roof over their head.

---

Worked for 16s

Searching the web

Searching the web

Searching the web

Searched 21 websites