<www.taxpayers.org.nz> 📌 View Online <[link removed]> | 🚀 Share on Facebook <[link removed]>

Hi Friend,

Parliament may have packed up for the election, but the spending promises certainly haven’t.

This week our Bribe-O-Meter unearthed another $10 billion of Labour commitments, one little-noticed foreign aid promise turned into a full-blown campaign issue, and Labour’s long-awaited fiscal plan finally landed.

Elsewhere, the Greens have discovered a rather magical way to fund trains, ACT wants to stop taxing KiwiSaver returns, and there are some big questions being asked about transparency and how we run local elections.

Let’s get into it.

Bribe-O-Meter Week 4: Labour finds another $10 billion 💸📊

<[link removed]>

Week four of the Bribe-O-Meter is in, and this time Labour has been doing most of the heavy lifting.

In just seven days, Labour announced another $10.43 billion of spending commitments - equivalent to $5,034 for every household in the country.

That includes $4.3 billion for social housing, school repairs and hospital maintenance, plus another $583 million for its student loan policy.

But the biggest addition was one Labour did not put a price tag on at all.

Labour has committed to lifting foreign aid spending to 0.7 percent of Gross National Income.

On our numbers, even assuming it takes the full four years to get there, that means another $5.5 billion, or $2,662 per household.

That takes Labour’s specifically announced spending promises to $33.24 billion, or $16,041 per household.

And remember, that is before its separate commitment to lift Core Crown spending to 33 percent of GDP, which takes its overall Bribe-O-Meter total to $50.47 billion, or $24,358 per household.

The other parties were quieter this week, with National’s total remaining at $960 per household, ACT adding just $1 per household, and Te Pāti Māori has now put numbers against three policies totalling $4.3 billion. We still have not added Te Pāti Māori to the main leaderboard because too much of its wider platform remains impossible to cost credibly.

There was one other change worth noting.

We marked Labour down half a star on transparency. Announcing more than $5.5 billion of additional spending without even attempting to quantify it is exactly what the Bribe-O-Meter is there to expose.

You can see the full Week 4 Bribe-O-Meter, every party’s running total and the latest transparency ratings here. <[link removed]>

And that $5.5 billion foreign aid promise is worth dwelling on, because what happened next is a pretty good demonstration of why we built the Bribe-O-Meter in the first place.

How a one-line Labour promise turned into a $5.5 billion headache 🌏💸

<[link removed]>

Buried near the bottom of Labour’s foreign policy announcement was a single line promising to “progressively increase overseas development assistance towards 0.7% of GNI as fiscal conditions allow”. <[link removed]>

No price tag, no timelines, just one sentence committing taxpayers to a potentially enormous increase in spending.

So our boffins got to work.

<[link removed]>Even assuming Labour took the full four-year forecast period to reach its target, we put the extra cost at $5.52 billion, or $2,662 for every household in New Zealand. <[link removed]>

The very next morning, National attacked Labour over the same promise, putting the bill at $6.5 billion. <[link removed]>

We won’t complain about the imitation or the different assumptions putting the cost at $6.5 billion. The whole point of the Bribe-O-Meter is to force these numbers into the election debate. And it worked.

By Sunday, when Chris Hipkins fronted to launch Labour’s long-awaited fiscal plan, journalists were asking him about the foreign-aid promise. <[link removed]>

There was just one problem.

The $5.5-billion-plus commitment was nowhere to be found in Labour’s fiscal plan.

Which brings us neatly to the plan itself...

Labour’s fiscal plan finally turns up 📊👀

<[link removed]>

On Sunday, Labour released its fiscal plan, promising that every election commitment is fully costed and fully funded, the books will be back in surplus by 2028/29, and there is still $10.5 billion of operating headroom left over.

Naturally, we went looking for the workings.

What Labour initially published looked more like a glossy summary than a fiscal plan. Thanks to Bernard Hickey at Interest.co.nz, we got our hands on the fuller PDF, <[link removed]> which provides a bit more detail.

And, credit where it’s due, the fuller document provides more detail on Labour’s year-by-year fiscal track and where the money is supposed to come from and go, but it still leaves some rather large questions.

Labour says its plan contains about $25 billion of commitments, funded partly through almost $11 billion of extra revenue from its capital gains tax, scrapping Investment Boost and reversing the heated-tobacco tax changes.

Our Bribe-O-Meter, meanwhile, had already identified $33.24 billion of specifically announced Labour spending promises before this plan was released. <[link removed]>

And we already know where at least some of that gap comes from. The $5.5 billion foreign-aid commitment we uncovered above doesn't appear in Labour’s fiscal plan at all.

Then there is pay equity. Labour has allowed $2.5 billion for the immediate $4-an-hour increase for care and support workers, but the wider cost of restoring its pay-equity regime is still uncosted. Labour says its remaining headroom can absorb whatever that eventually costs.

Labour says its numbers have been independently reviewed by accounting firm Hall Chadwick.

But Hall Chadwick got to see something taxpayers haven't: the detailed policy information and assumptions Labour used to calculate its costs.

Given the gaps we've already identified, those workings matter. If they show how Labour can fund its promises, return the books to surplus and reduce debt at the same time, let everyone see them.

As we said when the plan landed, Labour is promising tens of billions in spending while still returning the books to surplus and reducing debt. <[link removed]>

If the numbers really stack up, publish the lot.

Labour wasn’t the only party making expensive promises this weekend...

Greens’ rail numbers fail the sniff test 🚆💸

<[link removed]>

The Greens have spent the weekend promising a big expansion of passenger rail: an overnight Auckland–Wellington service, Christchurch–Dunedin trains, an extension of Te Huia to Tauranga, and more.

All up, the package would cost taxpayers about $1,980 per household.

Now, there is nothing wrong with making the case for more rail if they think the benefits justify the cost. But the Greens also reckon fares would cover the bulk of the operating costs of their new Auckland–Wellington overnight service.

As James pointed out, that claim fails the most basic sniff test. <[link removed]>

NZTA says private revenue, including fares, covered just 20.5 percent of public transport operating costs in 2023/24.

In other words, the system was already close to 80 percent subsidised before the Greens’ latest promises.

And then on Sunday, the Greens announced they would make public transport free for children, teenagers, students, apprentices and Community Service Card holders, while capping everyone else’s bus and train fares at $2.

Their own Parliamentary Library costing puts those fare changes at $262 million in 2027/28, rising to $381 million by 2030/31. <[link removed]>

So the pitch is: slash fares, increase subsidies, launch a raft of new train services... and somehow fares will cover most of the running costs.

But not every election announcement this week involved finding new ways to spend money...

ACT takes aim at the KiwiSaver tax trap 💰📈

<[link removed]>

ACT has come out with a KiwiSaver policy we rather like: stop taxing the investment earnings on KiwiSaver.

At the moment, workers put money into KiwiSaver from their after-tax pay, employers pay tax on their contributions, and then the investment returns are taxed along the way too. ACT wants to remove the Portfolio Investment Entity tax so more of the return stays invested and keeps compounding. <[link removed]>

That is a good start.

But as our Policy Analyst Austin pointed out, there is a cleaner way to do the whole thing.

We say KiwiSaver should move to an “exempt-exempt-taxed” model: contributions go in tax-free, investment earnings grow tax-free, and tax is only paid when the money is eventually withdrawn in retirement. <[link removed]>

For someone earning $60,000, that would mean another $997.50 going into KiwiSaver each year instead of being paid as PAYE and tax on the employer contribution. On $80,000, it is $1,737. On $100,000, $2,310.

And because that money stays invested for decades, the benefit is not just the tax saved today. It is the compounding on top of it.

With politicians across the spectrum talking about making New Zealanders save more for retirement, it seems a bit odd to keep taxing the savings along the way.

If the goal is bigger KiwiSaver balances, letting more of workers’ own money actually reach their KiwiSaver account is a pretty obvious place to start.

Away from the spending promises, transparency has suddenly become something of an election theme too.

Labour’s transparency two-step 👀

<[link removed]>

After everything we wrote last week about officials apparently finding ways around the OIA, Labour has now made government transparency part of its election pitch.

Chris Hipkins used a speech on “Trust in Government” to promise an overhaul of the Official Information Act, arguing that a law written for filing cabinets needs updating for the way government works today.

On that, credit where it’s due. We have spent years arguing that the OIA needs more teeth, more proactive disclosure, and fewer opportunities for information to disappear behind bureaucratic excuses.

But Labour has missed one rather large institution: Parliament itself.

As Rhys pointed out, MPs expect Ministers and government departments to open themselves up to OIA scrutiny while Parliament remains conveniently carved out. <[link removed]>

If Labour really wants to rebuild trust through transparency, that exemption has to go too.

Then, rather strangely for a week of talking about strengthening democracy and accountability, Labour announced it also wants to abolish the ratepayer roll.

The ratepayer roll allows someone who owns property and pays rates in a council area where they do not live to enrol for one vote in that council’s election. They do not get extra votes in the same council.

Labour calls abolishing it “one person, one vote”.

We see the problem rather differently: if a council can send you a rates bill, you should have some democratic say over the people deciding how high that bill will be. <[link removed]>

More scrutiny for Wellington, but less representation for some of the people footing the bill at council level.

Transparency and accountability are good principles, but they need to apply even when they’re inconvenient.

And while we’re talking about who gets a say in local government...

Why are councils still running their own elections? 🗳️🤔



Auckland Council announced last week that it will ditch postal voting <[link removed]> and move back to in-person voting booths for the 2028 local elections, after voting irregularities in Papatoetoe were serious enough for a judge to void the result and force a fresh election. <[link removed]>

Fair enough. But it raises a bigger question: why are councils running their own elections in the first place?

We already have an Electoral Commission whose entire job is running parliamentary elections and maintaining the electoral rolls. But the Commission does not run local elections - councils appoint their own electoral officers to conduct them <[link removed]>.

That means different voting arrangements, different contractors and ratepayers across the country paying for councils to reinvent the same wheel.

If moving back to voting booths gives people greater confidence in local election results, then let's do it. But rather than 78 councils each cooking up their own solution, hand the job to the Electoral Commission and run local elections properly and consistently nationwide.

Next stop: Mt Albert Electorate Debate 🗳️🎤

<[link removed]>

We’ve clocked up a fair few kilometres this week. Alongside our Waitaki election debate in Oamaru, the Debt Clock has been out on the road too - so a huge thank you to everyone who came out to see us, have a chat, and help spread the word about just how quickly the debt is still piling up.

Now the debate roadshow rolls on.

Next Thursday we’re heading to Mount Albert, where we’ll be putting the local candidates through their paces at Albert’s Post Bar and Eatery from 7pm. <[link removed]>

Anna Lorck and Damien Grant will once again be asking the questions and keeping everyone on their toes.

And this one comes with a bit extra.

We’ll be releasing the latest national Taxpayers’ Union–Curia Poll live on the night, alongside a brand-new Mount Albert electorate poll. So if you’re there, you’ll be among the first to see what voters locally and across the country are telling us.

Tickets are $10 and include a complimentary drink 🥂 <[link removed]>

Have a great week,




Tory Relf
Head of Comms
New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union



In the Media:

The Press Race politics sells; we have to be wary of buying in <[link removed]>

Listener Top 10 bestselling New Zealand books: October 3 <[link removed]>

Waikato Times Hamilton city leaders could face pay cut <[link removed]>

Rotorua Daily Post Ratepayers need a real say in council reform <[link removed]>

The Spinoff The Unity Books bestseller chart for the week ending October 2 <[link removed]>

The Platform Centrist Uncovers New Method Of Internet Safety For Kids <[link removed]>

The Platform The Complicated Legalities Behind 3rd Party Election Campaigning <[link removed]>

The Post The curated chaos of the campaign trail begins <[link removed]>

Newsroom This week's bestselling books - October 2 <[link removed]>

Rotorua Daily Post Rotorua unitary authority: Ministers must assess costs and regional service risks - Reynold Macpherson <[link removed]>

The Press LIVE: The Press Kingmakers' Debate <[link removed]>

NZ Herald NZ Taxpayers’ Union Electoral Debate - Waitaki (Oamaru) <[link removed]>

The Platform Harry Mowbray - "Split The Vote Campaign Doesn’t Breach Electoral Law" <[link removed]>

NZ Herald Hipkins v Hosking: Chippy fires up over ‘hidden bill’, CGT, Swarbrick howler - Audrey Young <[link removed]>

Stuff Hipkins unveils four-point plan to overhaul government transparency <[link removed]>

The Platform David Seymour Ums & Ahs Over Vote Splitting <[link removed]>

Not PC The Greens's multi-billion dollar fiscal hole. <[link removed]>

The Post Hard-right councillor claims she is being lied to by ‘left-leaning' council staff <[link removed]>

Stuff Nicola Willis, Chris Bishop among top ministers who could lose their seats as election overhang possible <[link removed]>

LawFuel The Hager Test: Does ‘Dirty Work’ Meet the Standard Nicky Hager Set in Court? <[link removed]>

Chris Lynch "I don't have a final answer": Hager pressed over claims in new book in heated interview <[link removed]>

RNZ Law: Employment settlement agreements + so-called 'NDA' clauses <[link removed]>

The Spinoff Opportunity knocked: Qiulae Wong trails in fourth in Mt Albert poll <[link removed]>

Newstalk ZB 'Exciting time': Public service bosses told of opportunities in shrinking sector <[link removed]>

The Spinoff The wildest moments from a hectic Te Tai Tonga debate <[link removed]>

Waikato Times Te Tai Tonga debate drama: Poll pressure, party loyalty and Te Tiriti dominate <[link removed]>

The Platform It Seems Nicky Hager Has No Proof For His Smears Against Jordan Williams <[link removed]>

NZ Herald Anna Lorck vows to stay on for Taxpayers’ Union debates as voice of the ‘left winger’ <[link removed]>

LawFuel Budget blow-outs and launch delays: Ministry of Justice officials refuse to reveal cost overruns for embattled courts digitisation project <[link removed]>

Newsroom Why I turned down a seat on the Taxpayers' Union board <[link removed]>

Whakaata Maori Debbie Ngarewa-Packer leads Te Tai Hauāuru poll <[link removed]>

Whanganui Chronicle Elitist Hager holds a Free Speech Union derangement <[link removed]>

Bassett, Brash & Hide PETER WILLIAMS: Splitting your vote - It’s the only way <[link removed]>

NZ City NZ election poll watch: minor parties gain as Labour and National slide <[link removed]>

Stuff Flip Forecaster: No way to power without Opportunity... unless <[link removed]>

Whakaata Maori Whakaata Māori-Curia poll reveals major shift in Te Tai Tonga race <[link removed]>

Greymouth Star Election meeting canned amid row <[link removed]>

Greymouth Star Hager book <[link removed]>

RNZ Hager headlines, putting down the watchdog, regional news cuts <[link removed]>

The New Zealand Initiative Free to Disagree: Nicky Hager's book and the Taxpayers' Union <[link removed]>

RNZ Labour targets Greens-held Wellington Bays seat <[link removed]>

RNZ Can Labour reclaim a lost heartland in Wellington's newest seat, Wellington Bays <[link removed]>

Nelson Mail National, Labour launch campaigns <[link removed]>

Interest.co.nz Undue influence <[link removed]>

Centrist NZ Newsletter: In defence of Jordan <[link removed]>

The Post Labour pledges to wipe 10% off loans for students who stay in NZ <[link removed]>

The Press National Party launches Election 2026 campaign <[link removed]>

NZ Herald Nicky Hager’s Dirty Work attack on Taxpayers’ Union ‘naive’ - Heather du Plessis-Allan <[link removed]>

The Post Nicky Hager still makes the media lose its mind: Do we all need to calm down? <[link removed]>

New Zealand Taxpayers' Union · 117 Lambton Quay, Level 4, Wellington 6011, New Zealand
This email was sent to [email protected]. To change your email preferences, click here <[link removed]>.
Authorised by the New Zealand Taxpayers' Union, Level 4, 117 Lambton Quay, Wellington 6011.