New Zealand elects its Parliament on Saturday 7 November 2026. This is the public notebook of that research: one shared economic baseline, one feasibility-scored report per party, a non-binding recommendation, and the log of every overnight check — what changed, what didn't, and why.
The question it was asked to answer: for a stable democracy and a future for young people, which party vote serves both best? Labour ranks first on both goals under every weighting tried — and is the only party that plausibly serves both at once: the cleanest path to a stable government (it governed with the Greens 2020–23), plus the most targeted, costed 18–30 package — student-loan write-off, 5% first-home deposits, SolarSaver, a student-fare cap, school lunches.
Stated plainly: its fiscal anchor (a 28% capital-gains tax that must raise real money in a falling property market) is the weak spot, and the campaign showed a candidate-vetting weakness. Runner-up: Green — the strongest youth case (the only costed jobs guarantee, $4.9bn) and best placed to push Labour; under a stability-heavy weighting the runner-up becomes National. Full reasoning, the scoring, and the trade-offs: meta-analysis & recommendation.
| Party | Stability | Youth | Composite |
|---|---|---|---|
| Labour | 4.0 | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| Green | 3.5 | 3.5 | 3.5 |
| National | 4.0 | 3.0 | 3.5 |
| ACT | 3.5 | 3.0 | 3.25 |
| NZ First | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.75 |
| Te Pāti Māori | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.75 |
| Opportunity | 3.0 | 2.5 | 2.75 |
1–5 scale, 50/50 composite; United Future excluded (dissolved 2017, not on the ballot — the report).
| Fieldwork | Pollster (n) | NAT | LAB | GRN | ACT | NZF | OPP | TPM | Lead |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 20–26 Oct | RNZ–Reid (1,000) | 24.8 | 30.6 | 14.5 | 10.1 | 9.9 | 7.2 | 1.9 | LAB +5.8 |
| 21–25 Oct | 1News–Verian (1,000) | 29 | 27 | 15 | 12 | 10 | 6 | 0.1 | NAT +1.6 |
| 9–19 Oct | Post/Freshwater (1,458) | 27.6 | 28.7 | 14.3 | 9 | 11.8 | 5.4 | 2 | LAB +1.1 |
A dead heat. 61 seats governs. The two scenarios:
Rough seat maths from each poll plus electorate bases; polls carry error. Details: government reality check · baseline.
The baseline — economics & election context
The shared foundation every party report scores against: the fuel crisis, debt, the 2026–2030 Treasury path, and the seven constraints that decide feasibility.
Luxon (PM). The proven three-party formula; strong on delivery, weakest on climate and on the welfare items that hit young people hardest.
Hipkins. Polling first; the most targeted, costed 18–30 package; the CGT fiscal anchor is the weak spot.
Seymour. The most institutionalised minor party, with hard rule-outs; a wage-freeze entry-level cut that dents its youth case.
Davidson & Swarbrick. The largest youth upside — the only costed jobs guarantee ($4.9bn) — and the heaviest fiscal exposure.
Peters. The most experienced coalition operator; polarising conduct late in the campaign; unfunded youth items.
Ngarewa-Packer & Waititi. The predictable junior partner; its seats come almost entirely from the Māori electorates.
Wong. The story of the campaign — the first credible threshold-crosser since 2017, and a decisive 6–7-seat hinge.
Dissolved 2017. The report documents why the party is not on the ballot and what its old kingmaker role means for 2026: nothing.
Meta-analysis & recommendation
How the scores were made, the full reasoning behind the non-binding Labour pick, sensitivity checks, and the government reality check.
The footnote ledger: every overnight run, what changed, what didn't, and why — with links to the sources.
An overnight check runs each night from 1am through 7am (the final pre-vote run), sweeping the news and the polls. The pages only change when the check finds something material — and every change is footnoted in the update log with its reason. When nothing material moves, the site doesn't either. Polling day is Saturday 7 November; the site stays up afterwards as the record.