2026 New Zealand election: flood protection and Hawke’s Bay households

For a household on the Heretaunga Plains, this election is about more than climate policy. It is about whether your home remains insurable and affordable to protect, whether your children can grow up in a community that is safe from flooding, and who pays when the next major flood occurs.

My main finding is that the parties differ considerably on who should pay for flood resilience, how much central government should contribute, and whether households should receive a national insurance and adaptation safety net.

There is also an important distinction between:

• Money already committed to Hawke's Bay flood protection.
• Future infrastructure investment that parties might promise.
• Financial protection for homeowners whose properties remain exposed to unacceptable flood risk.

Those are three different things. A party supporting stronger stopbanks does not necessarily have a policy to protect your household from rising insurance premiums or future property devaluation.

1. Where Hawke's Bay stands now

The Heretaunga Plains are protected by the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme, covering low-lying areas around the Tūtaekurī, Ngaruroro and lower Tukituki rivers.

Much of the existing scheme was designed around a flood with a 1% annual exceedance probability (often described as a 1-in-100-year event). That does not mean such a flood happens only once every hundred years: the probability applies independently each year.

Hawke's Bay Regional Council has identified the need to rethink the long-term scheme following Cyclone Gabrielle. Its review is particularly important for Hastings and Napier households.

August 2025Restoring Flood Resilience

What is already funded

$256.5m

Hawke's Bay's current regional flood-resilience programme.

• $209 million central-government funding.
• $47.5 million Hawke's Bay Regional Council contribution.
• Seven major resilience projects, alongside stopbank, pump-station and monitoring upgrades.
• Construction is planned to be underway across all projects by the end of 2026, with completion targeted for mid-2027.

Figures from Hawke's Bay Regional Council. The programme is part of the wider North Island Weather Event recovery investment. Restoring Flood ResilienceHawke’s Bay Regional Council’s flood resilience programme on track as construction momentum builds | Restoring Flood Resilience

One important qualification: these works do not guarantee that the Heretaunga Plains will never flood again. The Regional Council explicitly says that no flood-protection system can eliminate all flood risk. Restoring Flood Resilience

There is also a significant question about what happens after the current programme finishes: who funds the next generation of flood defences, and how much of that cost falls on local ratepayers?

2. How the parties compare

The following comparison uses published 2026 policies, statements by party representatives and recent Hawke's Bay candidate comments. I distinguish firm commitments from general political positions.

National

Existing investment and delivery

National's strongest argument is its record of funding the current post-Gabrielle flood-resilience programme.

Its approach includes:

• Continuing investment in stopbanks, drainage, pump stations and regional infrastructure.
• A national adaptation framework intended to provide consistent long-term planning.
• A proposed national flood map, with property-level information expected from 2027.
• $400 million nationally for state-highway resilience in Budget 2026.
• Further investment in recovery of cyclone-damaged local roads.

National has also proposed national standards for river gravel extraction and on-farm quarrying to make practical resilience work easier.

Preparing before disaster strikesFunding to boost resilient planning systemMP candidates address flood resiliencePolitical parties make their climate adaptation pitch

What it could mean for your household:

• You benefit from the infrastructure already being built.
• Better flood-risk information could help you understand the risks to your property and make decisions about insurance.
• Improved transport resilience could help keep roads open and children connected to schools during extreme weather.
• However, National has not established a general guarantee that households in flood-exposed areas will receive affordable insurance or financial assistance with home-level protection.

The key question for National is whether it will commit to a second generation of flood investment after the current projects finish, particularly for the Heretaunga Plains scheme.

Labour

Shared public responsibility

Labour's approach is more focused on shared responsibility for climate adaptation.

Its previous government:

• Established the Climate Emergency Response Fund.
• Developed the first National Adaptation Plan.
• Commissioned work on managed retreat and how communities should be supported when areas become too risky to inhabit.
• Proposed a $6 billion national resilience fund following Cyclone Gabrielle, according to Labour's 2026 election science-policy response.

Labour's climate spokesperson has described a future funding approach involving:

• Those who benefit from protection.
• Those who contribute to climate change.
• Central and local government.
• Banks and insurance companies.

An important caveat: in August 2026, Labour's spokesperson said its detailed election adaptation policy was still to be announced. Labour's current published election-policy list does not establish a specific new Heretaunga Plains funding commitment. 2026 Election Q&A – SciencePolitical parties make their climate adaptation pitchLabour's 2026 Election Policies

What it could mean for your household:

• Greater potential for central government to share the costs of long-term flood protection.
• More attention to the role of insurers and banks in helping communities prepare.
• Potentially stronger planning for households that eventually need to relocate.
• But you should not assume Labour would reinstate the former $6 billion proposal in exactly the same form or that it would directly subsidise your insurance premiums.

The key question is how much Labour would actually commit to Hawke's Bay, and how it would divide costs between taxpayers, ratepayers and property owners.

Green Party

Strong climate adaptation emphasis

The Greens put climate adaptation and reducing future climate risk near the centre of their political approach.

Their 2026 manifesto emphasises preparing communities for increasingly severe storms, floods and droughts, and providing comprehensive support for people affected by climate change.

Their broader approach includes:

• More investment in climate resilience and nature-based protection.
• Better protection and restoration of natural flood-buffering environments.
• Stronger central-government support for vulnerable communities.
• Partnership with Māori and local communities.
• Reducing greenhouse gas emissions as well as preparing for unavoidable climate impacts.

Green co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick has also called for a more integrated approach to climate adaptation, including green infrastructure and better central-local government relationships. Manifesto 2026Political parties make their climate adaptation pitch

What it could mean for your household:

• Greater emphasis on long-term protection rather than simply rebuilding after each flood.
• Potential support for catchment-wide solutions that reduce flood peaks and improve river and wetland systems.
• A stronger argument for central government to help pay where local communities cannot reasonably carry the burden.

The uncertainty is the detail of funding: the manifesto does not itself establish a specific dollar allocation for the Heretaunga Plains or a household insurance subsidy.

The key question is whether Green investment would translate into practical protection for existing homes, not just broader environmental improvements.

ACT

Practical infrastructure and property rights

ACT takes a different approach.

Its climate adaptation spokesperson, Simon Court, has argued that councils should not automatically use extreme climate scenarios as if they were certain forecasts, or use climate adaptation to unnecessarily restrict what people can do with their properties.

ACT favours considering practical alternatives such as:

• Raising roads and houses.
• Improving stormwater systems.
• Upgrading stopbanks.
• Maintaining existing flood infrastructure.
• Using lower-cost engineering solutions where they are effective.

In Hawke's Bay, ACT's Tukituki candidate Rob Douglas has specifically discussed clearing gravel build-up, widening river channels and removing obstacles to improve flood flows around Awatoto, with bridge upgrades as a possible longer-term measure.

Political parties make their climate adaptation pitchMP candidates address flood resilience

What it could mean for your household:

• A focus on practical improvements to infrastructure that protects existing communities.
• Greater emphasis on cost-effectiveness and avoiding expensive regulatory approaches.
• Potentially less emphasis on large new climate-adaptation spending programmes.
• Less certainty of a broad government-funded household insurance or relocation safety net.

The key question is whether ACT would support sufficient central-government funding for major flood infrastructure when the costs exceed what local ratepayers can afford.

New Zealand First

Regional infrastructure emphasis

New Zealand First tends to frame climate adaptation as regional development and infrastructure resilience rather than primarily as climate policy.

Its proposals include:

• A $1.2 billion Regional Infrastructure Fund, intended to support projects such as flood protection, water storage and regional infrastructure.
• Re-establishing local catchment boards to manage rivers, streams and flood protection.
• A proposed $100 million-per-year Infrastructure Equalisation Fund for local infrastructure.

However, the party's climate spokesperson Shane Jones has also emphasised economic development over climate policy and said NZ First would campaign on withdrawing New Zealand from the Paris Agreement.

In Hawke's Bay, NZ First's Napier candidate Te Kira Lawrence has specifically called for greater central-government investment and NZTA accountability for long-term flood-resilient infrastructure.

2026 Election Q&A – SciencePolitical parties make their climate adaptation pitchMP candidates address flood resilience

What it could mean for your household:

• Potentially more regional funding for river management and flood infrastructure.
• Greater attention to catchment management and practical regional projects.
• A possible benefit for rural and agricultural communities as well as urban households.
• Less certainty about a comprehensive climate-adaptation and insurance framework for individual homeowners.

The important question is how much of the proposed regional fund would actually go towards Hawke's Bay flood protection, rather than other regional projects.

Opportunity Party

Most explicit insurance and adaptation proposal

Opportunity is particularly relevant to your concerns because it has proposed a specific national approach to the relationship between flood risk, insurance and property ownership.

Its 2026 climate policy includes:

• A proposed $5 billion Climate Resilience Fund.
• A National Insurance Support Framework for managing insurance retreat in flood-prone and coastal communities.
• More transparent forward-looking climate-risk information for homeowners.
• Better coordination of hazard information between councils, communities and iwi.
• $500 million for nature-based resilience solutions.
• A shared approach to paying for adaptation between central government, local government, insurers and property owners.

Opportunity leader Qiulae Wong has also acknowledged that managed retreat and buyouts require careful negotiation and fair cost-sharing, rather than assuming government should simply pay the entire cost.

Climate ActionOpportunity proposes national insurance support framework as part of climate policy

What it could mean for your household:

• Better information about how future flooding could affect your home's value and insurance.
• A more explicit national process for dealing with insurers withdrawing cover from high-risk properties.
• Potentially more support for protecting existing homes and communities.
• A more transparent framework if relocation eventually becomes necessary.

This is particularly relevant if you are worried about insurance becoming unaffordable even before your property is formally classified as unsafe.

The major uncertainty is how much of the $5 billion would be spent in Hawke's Bay, how the fund would be allocated, and what eligibility rules would apply to individual households.

Te Pāti Māori

Te Pāti Māori's approach places greater emphasis on Māori-led climate adaptation, protection of whenua and partnership between iwi and the Crown.

Its Oranga Whenua approach includes dedicated support for Māori adaptation and stronger involvement of iwi in decisions affecting land and communities.

For Hawke's Bay, this could be particularly relevant to marae, Māori landowners and communities whose livelihoods depend on the surrounding land and waterways.

However, I could not establish a specific 2026 commitment for the Heretaunga Plains flood-control scheme or a general insurance subsidy for homeowners. Environment Policy: Where NZ Parties Stand in 2026Manifesto 2026

3. Side-by-side comparison

Here is how I would assess the parties against the issues that matter to your family.

Party	Long-term flood infrastructure	Household insurance and relocation	Central-government funding approach
National	Strong existing investment	Risk information, limited direct household protection	Project-based investment
Labour	Strong emphasis on national resilience	More interest in shared responsibility and managed retreat	Shared public and private costs
Greens	Strong climate adaptation emphasis	Community protection, but limited specific insurance detail	Greater public investment
ACT	Practical engineering and maintenance	Less emphasis on government safety nets	Cost-effectiveness and restraint
NZ First	Regional infrastructure and catchment management	Limited specific household support	Regional infrastructure funding
Opportunity	Dedicated national resilience investment	Most explicit insurance-retreat framework	Shared government, insurer and owner costs
Te Pāti Māori	Māori-led and community-based adaptation	Focus on vulnerable communities and whenua	Crown-iwi partnership

This is a comparison of policy direction, not a ranking of guaranteed outcomes. The parties have not all published equally detailed policies, and a coalition agreement could materially change what gets implemented.

4. The financial issue for Heretaunga Plains homeowners

This is arguably the most important part of your decision.

Who currently pays for flood protection?

The Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme's annual operating cost was approximately $5.5 million excluding GST in 2024–25.

According to the Regional Council's August 2025 discussion document:

• Scheme ratepayers pay approximately 70%.
• The remaining 30% comes from the general rate and reserves.

That means the cost of maintaining flood defences is already substantially borne by local ratepayers.

August 2025

For households, there are three separate financial exposures:

1. Regional rates: Funding stopbanks, drainage, river management and ongoing maintenance.
2. Insurance: Premium increases, higher excesses, exclusions or possible withdrawal of cover.
3. Private property protection: Improvements to drainage, flood barriers, raised equipment, building modifications and other resilience measures.

A government-funded flood protection project does not automatically reduce your insurance premium. Insurers make their own assessments of residual risk, and a protected property can still face substantial flood exposure.

What happens if your home is considered too dangerous to remain in?

The Category 3 voluntary buyout programme is an important precedent.

For the worst-affected properties following Cyclone Gabrielle, the Crown and local councils agreed to share the cost of voluntary residential buyouts.

This was not a universal guarantee for every flood-prone home. It applied to properties classified as Category 3 under the post-cyclone framework.

Category 3 Voluntary Buy-out Programme

For your family, I would want any incoming government to answer:

• Would there be a permanent national framework for Category 3-type situations?
• Would homeowners receive a fair buyout if flood protection became economically or technically impractical?
• What happens to people who have mortgages?
• Would the government help households that remain technically insurable but face unaffordable premiums?
• Who pays if a new stopbank or drainage project protects one community but increases flood exposure elsewhere?

These are questions that should not be left until after the next disaster.

5. What should you look for specifically on the Heretaunga Plains?

9

There are several issues that deserve more attention than general election promises about climate change.

1. The long-term Heretaunga Plains scheme review

The Regional Council's Reimagining Project is reviewing the long-term approach to the Heretaunga Plains and Upper Tukituki flood-control schemes.

I would particularly look for commitments to:

• Upgrade existing stopbanks where engineering evidence supports it.
• Improve river capacity and management.
• Address drainage and pump-station limitations.
• Consider the combined effects of river flooding, surface water and intense rainfall.
• Assess whether existing protection standards are adequate for future conditions.

2. The Awatoto bridges

A recent engineering review identified raising and lengthening road and rail bridges near Awatoto as potentially important for reducing future flood risk.

There is currently no committed NZTA funding for the proposed bridge improvements, and KiwiRail has indicated that replacing its bridges would be expensive.

This is a particularly useful election test: will parties commit to funding improvements where transport infrastructure could affect flood flows, rather than simply rebuilding it like-for-like?

MP candidates address flood resilience

3. Flood protection beyond the current programme

The current $256.5 million programme is important, but it is not the same as a permanent funding arrangement for the entire Heretaunga Plains.

Ask parties whether they will commit to a multi-decade investment programme and how they will prevent the cost being disproportionately transferred to local households.

6. What I would ask candidates before voting

I would put these five questions to every Hawke's Bay candidate, regardless of party.

Questions for your 2026 election candidates

1. Will your party commit to ongoing central-government funding for the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme after the current $256.5 million programme finishes?

2. Will you support the engineering improvements identified around Awatoto, including the road and rail bridges, and where will the money come from?

3. What will your party do if homeowners face sharply increasing insurance premiums or insurers withdraw cover because of flood risk?

4. Will you establish a permanent national framework for voluntary buyouts and managed retreat, with fair compensation for families?

5. How will you stop the cost of flood protection being passed disproportionately to Hastings and Napier ratepayers?

   Copy questions for candidates

7. My overall assessment

Based on the available policies and statements as at 2 November 2026, I would distinguish the parties this way:

• For proven investment in physical flood infrastructure: National has the clearest current delivery record through the existing government-funded programme.
• For a broader public responsibility for climate adaptation: Labour and the Greens offer stronger emphasis on central-government involvement and longer-term community protection, although Labour's specific funding commitments need clarification.
• For practical engineering and property-owner flexibility: ACT offers a different approach, prioritising engineering solutions and cost-effectiveness.
• For regional flood and catchment infrastructure: NZ First has proposals worth examining, but the actual allocation to Hawke's Bay matters.
• For insurance uncertainty and the possibility of managed retreat: Opportunity has the most explicit published proposal addressing these issues.

I would not make your decision solely on who promises the biggest stopbank investment. The long-term financial security of your home also depends on what happens when engineering protection is insufficient.

For a family with school-age children, I would put three things at the top of the voting assessment:

1. A credible 20–30-year flood-protection strategy for the Heretaunga Plains.
2. A fair national funding arrangement that prevents local ratepayers carrying an excessive share of the cost.
3. A reliable safety net if your home becomes difficult to insure or unsafe to occupy.

A party that addresses all three would be offering a more complete response to your concerns than one that simply promises to build more stopbanks.

Useful sources to check before casting your vote

• Hawke's Bay Regional Council – Restoring Flood Resilience – current projects, funding and progress.
• Reducing Flood Risk in Hawke's Bay – Regional Council discussion document – the Heretaunga scheme and its long-term challenges.
• Hawke's Bay candidates address flood resilience – October 2026 candidate responses.
• Opportunity Party – Climate Action policy.
• Green Party – 2026 manifesto.
• Labour – 2026 election policies.
• National – Preparing before disaster strikes.

One final point: I would also check your property's individual flood-risk information rather than relying on a general description of the Heretaunga Plains. Two homes relatively close together can have very different exposure depending on elevation, drainage, proximity to waterways and the direction floodwater would travel.

The national flood map announced by the Government is expected in 2027, so it will not necessarily be available to inform your 2026 vote.

This is a policy comparison rather than an endorsement of any party. The important distinction is between what governments have already funded, what parties propose, and what they are actually prepared to guarantee to households.

2026 New Zealand election: flood protection and Hawke’s Bay homeowners

Policy comparison · 1 November 2026 · Heretaunga Plains, Hawke’s Bay

My main finding is that the parties differ less on whether Hawke’s Bay needs stronger flood protection than on who should pay, how protection should be planned, and what happens to homeowners when protection is no longer economically or technically realistic.

For a household on the Heretaunga Plains, I would pay particular attention to four questions:

1. Will central government continue paying a substantial share of stopbank and flood-protection upgrades, rather than passing the costs to regional ratepayers?
2. Will there be a national approach to insurance affordability and properties that become difficult to insure?
3. Will homeowners receive meaningful assistance if their properties need further protection, flood-proofing or eventual relocation?
4. Will flood planning account for extreme events beyond the design capacity of existing stopbanks?

The election is on Saturday 7 November 2026, so these are live election issues, not simply long-term theoretical questions. 2026 Election Q&A - Science

1. What is actually at stake on the Heretaunga Plains?

9

The Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme is particularly important to your household.

It protects approximately:

• 39,000 hectares.
• 138,000 people.
• Around 82% of Hawke's Bay's population.

It covers the Tūtaekurī, Ngaruroro, Clive and lower Tukituki river systems, protecting much of Hastings, Flaxmere, Havelock North and Napier. Resilient River Communities

The existing stopbank network is predominantly designed around a one-in-100-year level of service. That does not mean a flood can only happen once every 100 years: it represents an estimated annual probability, and multiple floods can occur much closer together. Reducing Flood Risk

Work already funded

Existing government commitment

Hawke's Bay has an established flood-resilience programme worth $256.5 million:

Funding source	Amount
Central government	$209 million
Hawke's Bay Regional Council	$47.5 million
Total	$256.5 million

The programme includes seven major community flood-resilience projects, including Pākōwhai, Ōmāhu, Waiohiki, Whirinaki and Havelock North.

Construction is scheduled to have started across the programme by the end of 2026, with completion planned by mid-2027. The programme includes stopbank improvements, pump stations and monitoring systems. Restoring Flood Resilience

There is also a separate cyclone recovery funding agreement worth up to $556 million, including approximately $203.5 million of Crown funding for regional flood mitigation.

This matters because the Hastings District flood-protection allocation would otherwise have required significant additional regional rates, deferred projects or reduced protection works. Cyclone Recovery Funding Hawke's Bay

The important distinction: these are existing commitments. They should not be confused with new promises made during the 2026 campaign.

2. How the major parties compare

The following comparison uses party responses to the Science Media Centre, the October Hawke’s Bay candidates' debate, published party policies and reporting on insurance proposals.

Party	Main approach	What it could mean for your household
Labour	National resilience investment and stronger climate adaptation	Potentially more central-government investment in flood protection
Greens	Long-term adaptation funding, fair cost-sharing and nature-based protection	Greater emphasis on reducing underlying flood risk and protecting exposed households
National	Infrastructure investment, stronger defences and avoiding hazardous development	Continuation of existing infrastructure programmes, but future funding arrangements need clarification
NZ First	Regional infrastructure, river management and catchment boards	Potentially more direct regional flood works and support for productive rural land
ACT	Stronger defences, property-risk accountability and risk-reflective insurance	More emphasis on property owners understanding and bearing the risks of vulnerable locations
Opportunity	National climate resilience funding, insurance reform and managed retreat	The most developed proposal for households facing insurance withdrawal or eventual relocation

These are differences in emphasis, not guarantees of what a coalition government would deliver.

Labour

National resilience investment

Labour's strongest argument is that New Zealand needs to return to more substantial national investment in resilience.

Its election response says:

• It created a $6 billion national resilience fund following Cyclone Gabrielle.
• That fund was intended to support roads, bridges and flood-protection infrastructure.
• It believes the current Government removed that funding.
• It wants stronger investment in climate science and natural-hazard preparation.

Labour's local Tukituki candidate, Dan Scott, also advocated restoring wetlands, widening rivers and combining emissions reduction with climate adaptation. 2026 Election Q&A - ScienceTukituki candidates debate climate risks, housing and jobs

What this could mean for you

Labour's approach could mean more national funding for the Heretaunga Plains scheme, reducing pressure on regional rates and helping fund larger infrastructure upgrades.

Its interest in nature-based solutions is also relevant because stopbanks alone cannot solve every flood problem.

However, I would want Labour to clarify whether it intends to establish a new, ongoing resilience fund and how much would actually be allocated to Hawke's Bay.

The previous $6 billion fund is not the same thing as a new, fully funded 2026 commitment.

Green Party

Fair adaptation and risk reduction

The Greens have a particularly clear position on the principle of who should bear the cost of climate adaptation.

Their proposals include:

• A national adaptation framework.
• Credible, fair and long-term funding.
• Planning for climate risks before disasters occur.
• Genuine partnership with iwi Māori.
• Ensuring the costs do not fall disproportionately on communities already exposed to risk.

The Green Party also supports nature-based protection and restoring erosion-prone land. Its local representative Roy Boonen supported permanent native forest and reducing climate-related risks. 2026 Election Q&A - ScienceTukituki candidates debate climate risks, housing and jobs

The party has also criticised reductions in flood-protection funding under the current Government. That criticism is the party's own assessment of the spending figures, rather than an independent evaluation. Luxon's Government cut flood protection spending while extreme weather worsens

What this could mean for you

The Greens' approach could be attractive if you want:

• More government participation in paying for flood resilience.
• Greater consideration of the entire catchment rather than individual stopbanks.
• Better protection of rivers, wetlands and natural drainage.
• Long-term planning that recognises climate change.

The unanswered question is how much money would be allocated to engineering works on the Heretaunga Plains, and whether the party would support particular stopbank upgrades even where those works have environmental trade-offs.

National

Infrastructure and development controls

National's local Tukituki MP, Catherine Wedd, pointed to:

• Stronger bridges.
• Stopbank investment.
• Improved transport connections.
• Water security.
• Keeping new development away from hazardous locations.

Her statement at the local debate was particularly relevant: development should not continue in places where flood risk is unacceptable. Tukituki candidates debate climate risks, housing and jobs

National is also responsible for the current government's existing flood-resilience funding commitments described earlier.

There is, however, an important policy gap.

The Science Media Centre reported that National did not provide a response to its 2026 natural-hazards policy questions by the deadline. I have not identified a published National commitment setting out a new long-term national flood-adaptation fund or a comprehensive insurance-retreat support framework. 2026 Election Q&A - Science2026 Election Policy

What this could mean for you

National's approach offers continuity for the current funded flood-protection programme.

Its emphasis on infrastructure and limiting development in hazardous locations is relevant to the long-term security of the plains.

But you should seek clarity on:

• Whether the Government will continue funding beyond the current programme.
• Whether central government will contribute to future upgrades of the Heretaunga Plains scheme.
• Whether future cost overruns will fall on HBRC and ratepayers.
• What happens if insurance becomes unaffordable despite the existing flood defences.

The absence of a clearly identified new commitment is not proof that National would refuse future funding. It means there is less certainty about the next stage.

New Zealand First

Regional infrastructure and river management

NZ First has a relatively practical regional infrastructure approach.

Its published proposals include:

• Supporting the $1.2 billion Regional Infrastructure Fund.
• Funding flood protection, water storage and irrigation.
• Re-establishing local Catchment Boards.
• Creating a $100 million annual Infrastructure Equalisation Fund for local infrastructure upgrades.

It also argues that regional communities should receive a fair share of national investment.

In the Hawke's Bay candidates' debate, Taine Randell emphasised preparation for flooding, infrastructure resilience and better protection of productive land. 2026 Election Q&A - ScienceTukituki candidates debate climate risks, housing and jobs

NZ First also highlighted its record of using coalition negotiations to secure regional infrastructure funding, including flood-protection projects. Election 2026: What Parties Promise the Primary Sector

What this could mean for you

NZ First could be useful in securing regional flood-protection funding through coalition negotiations.

Its catchment-management proposals are relevant to the Ngaruroro, Tūtaekurī and Tukituki systems.

However, the distinction between a regional infrastructure fund and a dedicated residential flood-protection programme is important.

A fund that supports irrigation, water storage and regional infrastructure does not automatically guarantee money for your home's flood protection.

I would want to know how much would be specifically reserved for Hawke's Bay flood schemes and whether the money would be additional to existing commitments.

ACT

Risk-based approach

ACT's local candidate, Rob Douglas, supported stronger flood defences but argued that insurance costs should reflect the risks associated with building in vulnerable locations.

ACT's broader position places considerable emphasis on reducing regulation and encouraging private investment. Its candidate also argued that international climate policy should treat methane differently from carbon dioxide. Tukituki candidates debate climate risks, housing and jobs

ACT declined to provide a response to the Science Media Centre's policy questions and said its manifesto would be published before the election. 2026 Election Q&A - Science

What this could mean for you

ACT's position raises an important concern for existing homeowners.

There is a difference between preventing additional homes being built in hazardous locations and changing the insurance treatment of families who already own homes there.

If insurance premiums increasingly reflect property-specific flood risk, existing homeowners could face higher costs even where they have no practical ability to change the river system or surrounding infrastructure.

I would ask ACT specifically whether it supports government assistance for existing homeowners facing insurance withdrawal or unaffordable premiums.

The Opportunity Party

Most developed insurance-reform proposal

Opportunity has published a policy called Climate Resilient Aotearoa, released on 18 September 2026.

It is particularly relevant to your insurance concerns.

Its proposals include:

• A National Insurance Support Framework.
• National rules for identifying and managing insurance withdrawal.
• A cost-sharing arrangement involving central government, local government, insurers and property owners.
• An expanded role for the Natural Hazards Commission.
• Funding for resilience works on vulnerable properties.
• Relocation as a last resort.
• Mandatory climate-risk disclosure for properties, mortgages and insurance products.

The party also wants the Natural Hazards Commission to work with homeowners, banks, insurers and councils to identify vulnerable properties and coordinate responses. Opportunity Party proposes new rules for insurance retreat

At the local candidates' debate, Rachel Ward also proposed a climate resilience fund supporting nature-based protection and communities facing managed retreat. Tukituki candidates debate climate risks, housing and jobs

What this could mean for you

This is arguably the most directly relevant policy package if your primary concern is what happens when your home becomes difficult to insure.

It recognises that homeowners should not necessarily bear the entire cost of decisions made decades ago, when flood risks were less well understood.

However, the proposal does not guarantee that your insurance premiums will fall, that every property will remain insurable, or that the Government will pay the full cost of protecting or relocating your home.

The details of eligibility and the respective financial contributions still matter enormously.

3. Insurance: probably the biggest unresolved issue

For many homeowners, the biggest long-term risk is not simply another flood. It is the possibility of owning a home that becomes increasingly expensive to insure, difficult to mortgage or difficult to sell.

The insurance industry has been putting pressure on political parties to resolve this problem.

In late October 2026, the Insurance Council of New Zealand called on whichever government takes office after the election to prioritise:

• Long-term climate adaptation funding.
• Investment in flood protection.
• Better land-use planning.
• Avoiding further development in high-risk locations.

It cited an estimated 219,000 homes worth $180 billion exposed to coastal or inland flooding. ICNZ presses next government on the adaptation funding call left for the new term

There is also a significant policy development to watch.

The current Government introduced legislation in July 2026 that would require councils to plan for high-risk communities over at least 30 years. However, decisions about who pays for adaptation have been left to the next government.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis has rejected calls for a dedicated resilience levy. ICNZ presses next government on the adaptation funding call left for the new term

This means that even if your local council identifies the right flood-protection solution, there is still an unresolved question about who funds it.

What the different approaches mean for insurance

Approach	Potential household consequence
National flood-resilience funding	Better protection could help manage long-term property risk
Green national adaptation framework	Greater prospect of shared public funding for exposed communities
Labour national resilience investment	Potentially more money for protective infrastructure
NZ First regional infrastructure	More investment in regional flood infrastructure, depending on allocations
ACT risk-reflective insurance	Greater potential for premiums to reflect individual property risk
Opportunity insurance framework	More formal protection and support when insurance becomes unavailable

One important caution: none of these policy positions guarantees that insurers will offer affordable cover for every property.

Even substantial stopbank improvements do not remove all risks from surface water, groundwater, drainage failure or extreme river events.

4. What happens if your home needs protection or relocation?

This is where the differences between parties become particularly important.

Cyclone Gabrielle showed that government policy needs to distinguish between three different situations.

Situation A: Your home can be protected

Stopbanks, floodways, river management and pump stations can reduce risk.

The key question is whether the Government and regional council will share the cost, rather than placing most of the financial burden on local ratepayers.

Situation B: Your home remains exposed despite flood-protection works

This is more complicated.

A property might benefit from stronger stopbanks but still have:

• Surface-water flooding.
• Poor stormwater drainage.
• Groundwater inundation.
• Access-road flooding.
• Residual risk if flood defences are overtopped or fail.

You need to know whether government assistance will extend beyond major river-protection projects.

Situation C: Your home eventually becomes too risky to occupy

This is the managed-retreat question.

Hawke's Bay already experienced a version of this through the Category 3 property-buyout programme.

The existing recovery agreement included up to $92.5 million in Crown funding towards purchasing residential properties and property rights in Category 3 areas, with local council contributions and insurance proceeds also relevant. Cyclone Recovery Funding Hawke's Bay

Opportunity has the clearest new proposal for establishing national rules around future insurance withdrawal, risk reduction and relocation.

The Greens also explicitly support a national adaptation framework with fair cost-sharing.

For Labour, National and NZ First, I would want more detail about their future arrangements for homeowners who fall outside the protection of existing schemes.

5. What should this mean for your household budget?

I would separate the financial implications into four categories.

Household expense	What government policy can influence
Home insurance	Risk-sharing arrangements, disclosure and insurance-retreat policy
Council rates	How much central government contributes to flood infrastructure
Home improvements	Whether grants or co-funding are available for property-level resilience
Future property value	Planning restrictions, hazard disclosures and confidence in flood protection

For a family with school-age children, there is another important consideration: the long-term security of the home.

You might be able to tolerate a higher insurance excess or some additional maintenance costs. It is a different matter if your home becomes difficult to insure, your mortgage becomes harder to maintain, or you face uncertainty about whether your children can grow up in the same community.

I would therefore prioritise policies that provide predictable funding over several decades, rather than simply announcing money after the next major flood.

6. My assessment: which parties deserve the closest scrutiny?

Based on the policies currently identifiable, this is how I would shortlist them for your particular concerns.

For long-term flood protection

Labour and the Greens deserve close examination because of their emphasis on national resilience funding and long-term adaptation.

NZ First also deserves consideration because of its specific regional infrastructure and catchment-management proposals.

For insurance and financial security

Opportunity deserves particular attention because it has developed the most explicit proposals for insurance withdrawal, cost-sharing and relocation.

For infrastructure continuity

National has the advantage of being responsible for the existing funded Hawke's Bay programme, but needs to explain what happens after the current projects are completed.

For property-risk accountability

ACT deserves scrutiny because of its position that insurance should reflect the risks associated with vulnerable locations.

This is a comparison of policy relevance, not a recommendation about how to vote. Coalition negotiations could substantially change what any party delivers.

7. Five questions I would want every candidate to answer

These are the questions I would take to a local candidate meeting or put directly to candidates before voting.

1. Heretaunga Plains funding: Will you commit to continuing substantial central-government funding for upgrades to the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme beyond the existing $256.5 million programme?

2. Ratepayer protection: What proportion of future flood-protection costs will central government pay, and how will you prevent excessive rate increases for Hastings and Hawke's Bay households?

3. Insurance affordability: What will you do if an otherwise well-maintained home becomes unaffordable to insure because of its flood-risk classification?

4. Existing homeowners: Will you provide financial assistance for flood-resilience improvements, and will you establish a fair national approach to relocation if protection is no longer viable?

5. Long-term protection: Will you commit to a publicly funded, independently reviewed 30–50-year flood-management plan for the Heretaunga Plains, including protection against events exceeding the current stopbank design standard?

I would particularly insist on answers to questions three and four. Those are where broad statements about resilience often fail to translate into practical assistance for individual households.

8. Where to check the local evidence before voting

These are particularly useful resources because they help distinguish what is already happening from what political parties are promising.

• HBRC – Restoring Flood Resilience: funded projects, construction progress and local protection works.
• HBRC – Reducing Flood Risk: long-term review of the Heretaunga Plains scheme and future planning.
• Hastings District Council – Cyclone Recovery Funding: how government and councils share recovery costs.
• Science Media Centre – 2026 Election Party Responses: compare party answers on climate and natural hazards.
• National – 2026 Election Policies: National's published election commitments.

My bottom line

If I were evaluating the election primarily through the perspective of a homeowner on the Heretaunga Plains, I would not make the decision based simply on which party promises the biggest flood-protection projects.

I would look for a combination of:

• Long-term, nationally funded flood infrastructure.
• Fair sharing of costs between central government, councils and property owners.
• A credible solution to rising insurance costs and insurance withdrawal.
• Practical financial support for existing homeowners.
• Clear rules for when communities need protection and when relocation becomes necessary.

The most important unresolved issue is who pays for the next generation of flood protection and who protects families financially when that protection is insufficient.

That is the question I would make central to your vote.

One final point: I would also look at the 2027–2037 Hawke's Bay Regional Council Long Term Plan. Its flood-resilience decisions will have a direct bearing on your rates and the protection of the plains, regardless of which party forms the next central government.

I can also put together a more detailed Hastings-focused comparison of the parties' actual funding commitments, including what is already funded, what remains unfunded and which proposals could realistically reduce your household's insurance and rates burden.