2026 New Zealand election: comparing parties on healthcare access

For someone living with a long-term health condition, particularly when income is limited and regular medical appointments are necessary, three issues are especially important:

1. Affordable ongoing GP care: Can you see your GP whenever you need to, without worrying about the consultation fee?
2. Access to specialists: Can you get referrals, diagnostic tests and specialist appointments in a reasonable timeframe through the public health system?
3. Affordable medicines: Are your prescribed medicines funded, and can you afford the ones that Pharmac does not currently fund?

These are not necessarily the same priorities as improving hospital targets or increasing the number of operations.

I've compared the main parties' published 2026 health policies, using the New Zealand Medical Journal's October 2026 election analysis alongside the parties' policy announcements.

An important distinction: a promise to make healthcare cheaper does not automatically mean more appointments will be available. GP shortages, specialist workforce shortages and waiting lists also matter. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and deliveryLabour's 2026 Election Policies

1. At-a-glance comparison

Party	Affordable GP care	Specialist access	Medicines
Labour	Three free GP visits annually	Family Doctor Loan Scheme; less specific on specialist waiting lists	Free prescriptions
Greens	Move towards fully publicly funded primary care	More public healthcare capacity and community services	More Pharmac funding
National	More GP enrolments and expanded services	Targets, elective treatment expansion and private-sector capacity	66 additional medicines funded during its term
ACT	More pharmacy-led and alternative primary care	Greater use of private providers to reduce waiting lists	Major proposed increase in medicines funding
NZ First	Nurse practitioner-led clinics and more doctors	GP-controlled waiting-list fund	Additional $1.3 billion for medicines
Te Pāti Māori	Free, accessible, community-centred primary care	Māori-led health services and equitable access	Broader equity-focused health approach
Opportunity	More investment in primary care	Long-term workforce and health-system planning	No equally detailed medicines commitment identified

This is a comparison of policy direction, not a guarantee that each proposal will be implemented. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and deliveryNZ Health & Education Policy 2026 Compared

2. What each party is proposing

Labour

Strongest specific GP and prescription affordability promises

Labour's headline healthcare policies are:

• Three free GP consultations every year for everyone eligible for publicly funded healthcare, through a new Medicard.
• Free prescriptions, removing the $5 prescription charge from 1 July 2027.
• A Family Doctor Loan Scheme to help doctors enter practice ownership and increase GP availability.
• A graduate nurse employment guarantee to help strengthen the healthcare workforce.

What this could mean for you:

The free GP visits could make a meaningful difference if consultation costs currently cause you to delay appointments.

However, three free visits might not be enough if your condition requires monthly or more frequent GP consultations. The policy does not promise unlimited free visits.

Labour's published programme is less detailed on reducing specialist waiting lists and expanding access to specialist treatments.

Funding is proposed through a targeted capital gains tax, with revenue ring-fenced for health. Labour's 2026 Election PoliciesElection 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

Policy: Labour's 2026 policies

Green Party

Strong emphasis on publicly funded healthcare

The Greens propose a broader expansion of publicly funded healthcare.

Their priorities include:

• Moving towards fully publicly funded primary healthcare.
• Expanding publicly funded dental care.
• Increasing Pharmac funding so more medicines and medical devices can be funded.
• Better pay and conditions for primary healthcare nurses.
• More community-based, rural and mobile health services.
• Greater investment in mental health and preventive care.
• Better accessibility and autonomy for disabled people.

What this could mean for you:

The Greens' approach is particularly relevant if you need ongoing healthcare rather than occasional treatment.

Their ambition to make primary care fully publicly funded could eventually go further than Labour's three free GP visits.

Their commitment to increased Pharmac funding is also important if you need expensive medicines.

However, the exact timetable, funding arrangements and extent of implementation matter. Their specialist waiting-list proposals are less specifically quantified in the election analysis. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

Policy: Green Party policies

National

National's approach is focused on expanding healthcare capacity, meeting treatment targets and increasing the availability of services.

Its policies and existing initiatives include:

• Expanding GP enrolments and general practice services.
• Increasing urgent and after-hours healthcare availability.
• Expanding elective procedures using both public and private providers.
• Funding additional medicines through Pharmac.
• Expanding medical training, including the Waikato medical school.
• Improving cancer screening and treatment.

National reports that it has funded 66 additional medicines, including 33 cancer treatments.

What this could mean for you:

National's approach could benefit people waiting for procedures, specialist treatment or access to newly funded medicines.

However, it does not offer Labour's three free GP visits or a comparable universal free-prescription commitment.

If your biggest concern is paying for frequent GP consultations, National's published proposals are less directly focused on reducing those costs. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

Policy: National's healthcare policies

ACT

ACT places considerable emphasis on increasing choice, efficiency and the use of different healthcare providers.

Its proposals include:

• Allowing pharmacists and other health professionals to provide more healthcare services.
• Greater use of private healthcare providers to reduce public waiting lists.
• Increasing the proportion of the health budget spent on medicines.
• Establishing comprehensive cancer centres in Auckland and Christchurch.

Its medicines policy, called Closing the Medicines Gap, proposes progressively increasing medicines expenditure towards Australia's level. ACT estimates that this could eventually mean approximately $5–6 billion in medicines funding.

What this could mean for you:

The medicines proposal could be significant if you depend on treatments that are currently unfunded or difficult to access.

More pharmacy-led services could also make some routine healthcare easier to obtain.

However, ACT does not have a comparable promise of universally free GP appointments. Greater reliance on private healthcare also raises questions about affordability for people unable to pay privately. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

Policy: ACT health policies

New Zealand First

NZ First has some particularly significant proposals relating to medicines and specialist waiting lists.

Its policies include:

• An additional $1.3 billion for medicines.
• Replacing Pharmac with a new medicines agency.
• A proposed $925 million annual GP-controlled waiting-list reduction fund.
• Allowing GPs to purchase approved specialist consultations and operations for patients waiting for treatment.
• Recruiting more doctors, including internationally trained doctors.
• Expanding nurse practitioner-led digital health clinics in areas with limited access.

What this could mean for you:

The proposed waiting-list fund is particularly relevant if you need specialist appointments but face lengthy delays.

The medicines proposal could also improve access to treatments that are not currently funded.

However, replacing Pharmac is a substantial change. The practical implications for medicine approval, funding decisions and continuity of existing treatments would need careful scrutiny.

The waiting-list proposal also needs clear rules about who qualifies and how patients are prioritised. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

Policy: NZ First policies

Te Pāti Māori

Te Pāti Māori places particular emphasis on accessible healthcare, prevention and Māori-led health services.

Its approach includes:

• Rebuilding and strengthening Māori-led health services and health governance.
• Improving access to primary care.
• Community-centred and whānau-centred healthcare.
• Greater emphasis on prevention and early intervention.
• Addressing inequalities in healthcare access and outcomes.

What this could mean for you:

Its approach is particularly relevant to improving healthcare access for communities experiencing persistent barriers to treatment.

Its policies emphasise the importance of healthcare being accessible, culturally safe and responsive to people's circumstances.

The published election analysis identifies less detail on specific national GP fee arrangements, specialist waiting-list targets and medicines funding than some other parties. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

Policy: Te Pāti Māori health policies

Opportunity Party

Opportunity proposes a longer-term approach to healthcare rather than focusing primarily on individual election-cycle promises.

Its proposals include:

• A cross-party 10-year health plan called Healthy People.
• Progressively increasing public health spending towards 9% of GDP.
• Greater investment in primary and preventive healthcare.
• Longer-term medical workforce and specialist training planning.

What this could mean for you:

The focus on stable long-term funding and workforce planning is relevant to people who need consistent healthcare over many years.

However, it has fewer specific, immediately measurable commitments on free GP appointments, prescription charges and specialist waiting times. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

Policy: Opportunity's Healthy People plan

3. Which parties stand out on your three priorities?

Looking specifically at the practical issues you raised, this is how I would distinguish their proposals.

Affordable, regular GP appointments

• Labour: Three free visits annually.
• Greens: Aim for fully publicly funded primary care.
• National: More enrolments and expanded services, without an equivalent universal free-visit promise.

Important distinction: If you need GP appointments more than three times annually, the details of the Greens' longer-term proposal are particularly worth examining.

Getting to see specialists

• NZ First: A proposed $925 million annual GP-controlled waiting-list fund.
• National: Additional planned-care treatments and use of private providers.
• ACT: Greater use of private providers to reduce waiting lists.
• Labour and Greens: Broader primary-care and public-health approaches, but less specific quantified specialist-access commitments in the reviewed analysis.

Important distinction: Funding a specialist appointment is not the same as having enough specialists to provide it.

Affordable medicines

• Labour: Remove the $5 prescription charge.
• Greens: Increase Pharmac funding.
• ACT: Major proposed expansion of medicines expenditure.
• NZ First: Additional $1.3 billion for medicines and a new medicines agency.
• National: Its existing record includes 66 additional funded medicines.

Important distinction: Removing a prescription charge does not necessarily make an unfunded medicine available.

4. An important issue: healthcare and income support

There is another dimension worth considering when assessing party policies.

When a long-term health condition limits your ability to work, healthcare affordability is only one part of financial security.

You may also want to examine each party's commitments concerning:

• Supported Living Payment eligibility and payment levels.
• Accommodation Supplement and other housing assistance.
• Disability Allowance, including medical and travel expenses.
• Whether income-support payments keep pace with living costs.
• Access to disability-related services and support.
• Transport assistance for regular medical appointments.
• Whether changes to benefit rules could make your financial situation less secure.

These are particularly important because even free GP appointments will not necessarily cover transport, diagnostic costs, specialist-related expenses or other costs associated with ongoing healthcare.

I would not assume that a party's healthcare policy tells you how it will treat income-support recipients. Those policies need to be assessed separately.

5. Questions I would want parties to answer before voting

For someone who needs ongoing treatment, I think these are some of the most revealing questions:

1. If three free GP visits are provided annually, what happens to someone who needs 10 or 15 appointments?
2. Will people with long-term conditions receive additional subsidised or free GP visits?
3. What concrete commitments will reduce public specialist waiting times?
4. Will people be able to access unfunded medicines more easily?
5. Will Pharmac receive sufficient funding to keep up with new treatments?
6. Will Disability Allowance and other support payments adequately cover ongoing medical expenses?
7. How will the parties ensure that people who cannot afford private healthcare receive timely treatment?

The New Zealand Medical Journal's October 2026 election analysis makes an important point: healthcare promises must be assessed against workforce availability, funding and the practical ability to deliver services. Election 2026 and health: promises, priorities and delivery

My overall assessment

I wouldn't judge these parties simply by who promises the most money for health.

I would distinguish between three different things:

• Reducing what you pay: Labour has particularly clear proposals on GP and prescription costs.
• Making more treatments available: ACT and NZ First have substantial medicines proposals, while the Greens also advocate increased Pharmac funding.
• Making healthcare consistently accessible: The Greens' publicly funded primary-care ambition, NZ First's waiting-list proposal and National's capacity expansion represent different approaches to this challenge.

There isn't one party that clearly promises everything you might need. In particular, frequent GP care, timely specialist appointments and affordable medicines need to be considered together.

One question that would help me make this comparison more useful

Without needing to disclose your diagnosis or any private medical information:

Which of these is currently the biggest difficulty in your everyday life?

• A. GP appointments are too expensive, particularly because I need them regularly.
• B. I struggle to get specialist appointments, tests or follow-up treatment through the public system.
• C. My prescribed medicines are expensive or some of the medicines I need are not funded.
• D. All three are significant problems.
• E. My healthcare costs are compounded by living on a benefit and struggling with general living expenses.

I can then give you a more focused comparison of the parties based on the issues that would make the greatest practical difference to your life, including their disability and income-support policies.