Written By:
- Date published:
9:06 am, April 2nd, 2026 - 59 comments
Categories: 2026 oil crisis, election 2026 -
Tags: roy morgan
Some reasons to feel better. Labour/Green/Te Pāti Māori are on 60 seats, which means not too far off being able to govern and do so without Peters. This would be a very good result.
Yet half National’s seats are going to Act and NZF. Centrist and swing voters might choose NZF over Labour to block TPM from government (and the Greens).
The trend is clear in the wikipedia article on Opinion polling for the 2026 New Zealand general election. We’re not out of the woods yet, and while it’s tempting to think that people will turn away from National as the oil crisis deepens, it might also turn people to NZ First. The Green Party polling is also a worry.
I’m with Standardista Res Publica, the most important thing this year is to change the government, and it behooves us not to tear down Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori. Critique policy yes, slag them off so Labour-lite voters turn away, no. We also don’t want to encourage people to not vote at all. When we frame any of the left parties as losers, why would people vote for them?
It’s a dilemma, because we need a strong Labour going into the election, and we need a strong narrative of a resilient and sustainable future for New Zealand given the pressures from the oil crisis.
On the other hand, Winston ‘wild card’ Peters has ruled himself out of being in government with a Hipkins-led Labour. Another good reason to support Hipkins.
Meanwhile, political commenter Lew pointed to the potential for a change of leadership on the right,
That poll also says that:
How much of a swing from NACT1st to TOP is possible before the election? And if so, they might go with the current coalition govt.
Problem with TOP is that they feel like classic centre protest party, at least from the material that they keep sending to me. They rely on pulling support from both left and right of centre. But without a core defined constituency of their own, no regional base, and in a position that parties from either side will flog any viable policy.
So say they get into parliament as a set of newbie politicians (as I remember their candidate list), without a constituency seat, decide to go into coalition with one side or another. What happens. They piss off supporters and new MPs who want to go the other way. Centre junior partners in a coalition die with supporting one side or another.
Best outcome is to act on a legislative basis, bill by bill, and instead to take the 100 cuts way to die instead. But it means that their parliamentary team can develop the kind of experience that leads potential voting supporters to trust them.
But it is unlikely to happen in any case. While the polled, especially people who don't bother to vote, like to show support for new minor parties when they can't see anything else worth supporting – that support tends to dissipate closer to elections. After all, just not voting is extremely easy for ditherers…. 😈
Thanks. Also, at the moment TOP seems to have stalled at 4% so that may be as high as they'll go.
TOP, also as far as I can see, is just another (neo)liberal/conservative party, and would be a conservative drag on a Labour-Green govt if they did choose do a deal with TOP.
would be a conservative drag on a Labour-Green govt if they did choose do a deal with TOP.
Why would you say that. They would go with National if they were "neoliberal". However, I think an injection of "TOPic" policies would improve Labour's platform. Take a look at their website sometime: top.org.nz
they've always said they could work with either side.
That is possible, though I cannot see them working with the current government: they claim their own policies are "evidence based".
power is a potent drug. I don't know the people involved in TOP now, but I can see them doing memorandum of understanding type support for a National-led government, to get a foot in the door and some policy gains.
Labour has never fully shifted away from neoliberalism – I'd call it 'soft neoliberalism'. Greens have more left wing policies than Labour (eg their focus on beneficiaries & renters), but still have a bit of a (neo)liberal streak (eg their 'sex work' policy- a neoliberal gloss on exploitative prostitution).
TOP lean more strongly to neoliberalism and in a Labour-Green-TOP govt would drag Labour a bit away from GP's strongly left policies more in a conservative/neoliberal direction.
I believe TOP will get past the 5% threshold, people are sick of Winnie and Seymour and are looking for a "breath of fresh air", people have had enough of Winston's BS and Bravado, along with his offsider Shane Jones, meanwhile ACT and David Seymour are merely a proxy for the Atlas Group and the Mount Perelin Society.
The Labour recovery from 27% of the vote to polling at 34%-35% is solid, and I believe still has upside.
Lots of secondments to MBIE occurring as the state starts preparing for Stage 2. If Stage 2 hits before Budget in May, I can see National heading for 21-22% polls.
Labour under Clark went from 28 to 38% (96-99).
That is required to establish a Labour-Green coalition.
2017 Labour got 37%, and I don't see any issue with Labour getting at least that.
The problem was Greens getting just 6%. Then 8% in 2020. 11% in 2023 when Labour's tide ran out.
The only way there's going to be a change of government in 2026, is if the Greens gain strong popularity over NZFirst and actually gain 12-15% of the vote.
If Labour get 37 or 38%, then the Green Party needs only 10%+.
(5% wasted or TPM)
This why early enrolment is important – getting the youth vote out under the new MAGA style rules.
Do not count on "wasted vote" to form a government. And at 4% TOP may actually get to 5%, in which case they are a direct rival to the Greens forming a coalition with Labour.
I said 5% wasted or TPM for a reason
If Labour is at 37.5% and the Green vote over 10% – with TPM they would have won the election (over 2% of the vote and a seat would do it, or 3 seats) and the 3 headed hydra would have lost.
Those who want to block a Labour-Green coalition government
1.vote New Zealand First (2005)(2017)(2023). They now know that NZ First is prepared to work with ACT (international capital first) as a coalition partner.
2.vote Labour, so it does not need a partner (2020)
If and whether TOP get 5% is by the by. And a periphery issue.
If Labour and Green parties meet such vote targets it is an election win.
Either TPM is support partner or TOP provides an alternative (the Key system was to have alternate options).
Afaik, Green vote goes up largely from Labour and non-vote. NZF votes are for Labour to get. Greens don't get votes from dissatisfied NZF voters. Hopefully they will grab some of TOP's vote.
No matter where they get their votes from, the Greens need to do a lot better than 11%.
The 2017 election result saw the Greens essentially shunted out in favour of NZF, and the Greens got a minor role as Confidence and Supply rather than actually being at the centre.
The Greens seriously need to avoid that again if they are to make a difference to New Zealand rather than just keep talking about it.
This term NZF has come from barely 6% to 11% in one term, equal with Greens. That's the real threat to the Greens: 2017 redux.
yes, but if the GP vote comes from Labour and Labour still need NZF to govern, Peters will still sideline the Greens as a condition of NZF's support. It's a flaw of MMP. And Peters.
The Greens are polling around 10 – 11%. 2023 election was 11. 6%, that's their highest ever result. It's possible they will pull more of the non vote this year. Much depends on what happens with the oil crisis and whether people want innovation towards sustainability and resiliency, or go conservative.
"Another good reason to support Hipkins"
What are the other reasons?
McAnulty is a Left politician that appears to have principles and with growing up in Eketahuna, nows the value of blue collar work.
He is competent and would appeal to a lot of males that Labour has lost.
Hipkins, not so much.
And that is precisely the point weka is making: tepid support for the left.
Just accept that a less than optimal (in your view) Chris Hipkins is still infinitely better than anyone on the right!
Labour has increased its vote share strongly since 2023 election and the Greens have sat still and are now equal with NZF. Under this growing Labour support there is zero chance of Labour changing leaders, nor reason to.
1. changing leader in election year is high risk. It worked in 2017 under very different circumstances and with different people
2. As Ad points out below, Labour are on the ascendent. No-one in Labour is going to want to change leader now.
3. given that, what is the point of lefties slagging off Labour? Or not supporting Hipkins?
4. changing the government is the most critical thing the left can do in terms of climate, ecology, resiliency. They're also better at managing the economy and crises.
5. While I am also in favour of Labour moving leftwards, I don't think it's possible for that to happen in the ways you mean this year. If NACTF get in again, this is potentially catastrophic for NZ. Term 2 would be term 1 on steroids in terms of damage to the country.
6. Fascism is rising, and NZ isn't immune to this. I want a green left government, but I also believe we have to bring people with us and too many people feel left out, and the culture war gap is widening.
7. I'm a fan of McAnulty too, no idea if he is PM material. It's important for parties to have a range of competent MPs in addition to the leader. I' used to think of Swarbrick as PM material, but I'm currently in two minds about her job as co-leader of the GP.
As for "Winston ‘wild card’ Peters has ruled himself out of being in government with a Hipkins-led Labour" I would well imagine Winston First will be working on a few explanations why after the election they chose to go with a Hipkins led Labour. Winston First changes direction as often as wind direction. I seem to recall him stating he would not work with Jim Bolger prior to the 1996 election, and then formed a nice cozy whiskey relationship post election. One condition of Labour doing a deal with Aotearoa NZ First should be that Shane Jones gets a nice warm back bench seat. if he wants a Ministers spot he can be Minister for counting chairs in school halls.
I would expect Peters to wriggle his way out of the position too, but in the election campaign his position of ruling out Labour works in the left's favour and should be taken advantage of 😈
the baubles of office glitter brightly for Winston and Jones
The poll is:
Lab 34 Gre 11 TPM 3=48
Nat 26.5 NZF 11 ACT 10=47.5
This is not really news…it similar to several recent polls indicating a "too close to call" election. The 7.5% gap between Labour and National is interesting but not that relevant under MMP as Bill English found out..
Any National 2026 result under 30% is political death to most of their list, including of course Bishop and Willis.
At 25% National vote it's a real bloodbath akin to the 2020 National result. Not even the Barfoot&Thompson and Waitemata Trust and Fed Farmer donations would help them at that point.
I smell blood and the left ain’t bleeding.
National has fragmented to the more ideological and the more social conservative wings, but the coalition is still tracking at near the Key governments level of support that enabled continuance for him at the Beehive.
It is not Key centred with small parties at the periphery, it is a genuine hydra.
This makes Luxon less central and thus weak tea leadership.
Bishop publicly not happy, insiders briefing against Stanford in the Papakura selection process, and far right commentator Ayling turning his ire on Peters… I smell rats who have noticed the ship suddenly has a lot of water in it.
Bishop is now ridiculously overloaded as a Minister.
Whichever comes first Stage 2 or the May 28 Budget, the disquiet against Luxon towards an alternative can now only grow.
Luxon is no Andrew Little, so hopefully he will hang on for quite some time and drag the government down with him.
The difference is that Andrew Little was the Opposition Leader and not the incumbent PM and figure-head of a coalition Government. The Coalition ‘partners’ might sit idle as long as the polls show no collateral damage to the support for their respective parties.
yes. The comparison was with Andrew Little who stepped down for the good of the party. Maybe that's Luxon's position too, but it's also likely he's ego invested enough to hang on even if it would be better to step aside.
I don't know what was involved within the party in Little stepping down.
National are ruthless…. if the polls stay below 30 the long knives will come out.
TPM will be interesting, as there is currently no polling in the individual Maori seats. They will need to win at least one electorate to bring others in with them but it is very hard to tell at this point in time whether that is going to happen.
The party has been trying their best to tear themselves apart over the past 12 months and it is yet to be seen whether the electorate will punish them for that.
Labour will be challenging hard in the Maori seats, so there is a real chance TPM will not return. That makes the road to victory a lot more difficult for Chippy.
Hipkins reaction to Ani O'Brien's ham fisted attempt at a hit job has ironically probably seen his support go up in key swing voter demographics.
@Tony @ 3.1
"Chris Hipkins is still infinitely better than anyone on the right!" …because?
My vote is precious. Just because Labour's leader is less shit than heartless rabble doesn't cut it.
Then you vote left to change the Government gsays. Nothing changes before that.
It will encourage Coc to be more ruthless if waverers vote right or Winston.
Fyi, Little decided with falling numbers, that he was not the person to lead, and he had seen the public reaction to Jacinda at meetings and rallies. He was right. Further he is a good man. It appears Chippy is as well, and a concerted effort to paint him differently has not worked, as it smells highly of manipulation. imo as a party member who has attended meetings with them all at times.
We need to get this Government out and work at reversing the damage to our people country and reputation for starters.
If you think that this lot are a heartless rabble you have to vote Left, or not vote at all.
(I think you meant "useless heartless rabble?")
By not voting, it is a vote for the COC.
@ weka @ 3.2
Cheers for that good points. They are more about the situation we find ourselves rather than Hipkins as a leader or his politics.
I acknowledge the risk and changing leaders and I think there is an underestimation of the resentment towards Hipkins by ex labour voters in regards to the covid response. He is the poster boy for that.
Full disclosure I don't do social media and I don't know what the allegations that were made by Hipkins ex-wife nor do I want to know. What I do know is he was courting someone during the election campaign. Not a good time to be distracted nor have your attention divided.
I know this is old fashioned but when I vote, I want to vote for something not against something.
As an aside I have written this comment three times because I have lost it due to sausages fingers and my phone. So if I disappear it's not because I've got the pip.
Have you read the report commissioned by the COC on NZ's Covid response that concluded that the response "was among the best in the world"?.
Hipkins should be proud of his part in it.
Me too. But I'm also a realist – it is imperative we get rid of Luxon, Seymour, Peters ex al, before they attach .inc to New Zealand's name.
In my case, voting Labour for the electorate seat, and Green for the party vote (thereby really voting for something!)
I know it goes against the grain, but should Labour do a deal with TPM for a seat?
My gut feeling is that TPM will rally the troops and they will win most of the Maori seats again.
Absolutely they will. They're impossible to poll & the media is so … white, they're fine & will take those (def most) seats.
Great post Weka.
Agree +100% I can see TPM getting a Royal Flush, if they don't self abort themselves. With John Tamahere you never know what could happen next, he could destroy the Party and it's reputation overnight, by making stupid comments.
no, but they could make an internal strategic decision to not undermine them.
Just wondering … is Te Arikinui Kuini likely to influence things in any way? Or is she above politics? This will be the first GE since her accession.
Ultimately it could all come down to overhang seats. I can see a scenario where TPM recovers and has a few overhang seats or alternatively the Nats win more electorate seats than their party vote share. Don't underestimate the potential number of two tick voters who may party vote ACT/NZF but candidate vote National in their electorate.
Good point bigfish.
Luxon will be replaced before the election.
It is essential that all the opposition parties focus on their own positive message, not relying on the free hit of facing the most unpopular PM in modern history.
Of course it's understandable that Hipkins and co are highlighting Luxon's obvious failings, as they should, but that can – and I'm sure will – become a dead issue at any time. Luxon is dumped. Then overnight everything changes.
Please, opposition parties, be ready.
Completely agree.
The direction of government is set by the 3 parties, not the PM.
And most voters say the direction is wrong.
Replace Luxon with Willis or Bishop ???
We could have a Labour/Greens/TPM Government however those parties need to motivate their voter base to get off their couches and get down to the Voting Booth's otherwise we will have another 3 Years of National/ACT/New Zealand First – Right Wing Racist/Neoliberal/Capitalist Government.
My take (and thanks for the shoutout, Weka) is still that Hipkins isn’t a perfect leader, and Labour isn’t a perfect party. But it doesn’t need to be. Politics is the art of working with the left-ish vehicle we’ve got to beat the opposition in front of us. So the choice is simple: either we win and then try to bend the arc of New Zealand politics a bit further towards fairness, or we keep arguing over every unmet ideal and make losing more likely.
In an increasingly unstable and tumultuous world, where the current coalition has shown itself wholly unsuited to governing, a government that at best makes us feel “meh” is potentially a strength.
Because at the end of the day, Labour, the Greens and TPM aren’t running against theoretical perfection — they’re running against Peters, Seymour, and Nicola Willis.
Oh.. and I guess Luxon too. Even if he occasionally has to say something ill-judged to remind us he exists.
Replying to RP @15.
To quote Churchill, “Perfection is the enemy of progress.”
While Labour/Green/TPM coalition might not be perfect, it would be a hell of a lot better for Aotearoa than the current lot. The only winner out of bitter infighting is the govt.
Agree +100%