From the article:

Both major parties seeking election to government attended and spoke at the launch of a new organisation led by controversial Chinese businessman Zhang Yikun, who was prosecuted for concealing donations to them ahead of the 2017 election.

Zhang is said to be a leading figure here in the Chinese government’s overseas influence effort, through what is known as the United Front.

National Party campaign chair Simeon Brown led the party’s delegation to the launch of Zhang’s new body, and MP Camilla Belich fronted for Labour. [...]

The launch in Auckland of the NZ Chinese Chamber of Commerce, also known as the NZ Chinese General Business Association, on October 3 was before hundreds of people and also attended by former National Prime Minister John Key and Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere. [...]

Geoff Wade, a senior analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, tells Newsroom “the re-emergence of key United Front figure Yikun Zhang in the NZ political scene just before the national election is worthy of close attention by both politicians and security agencies.”

He said it was notable that Zhang had named himself founder and president of the new body and also that one of his co-accused over the political donations, Colin Zheng, was one of its honorary presidents.

Zhang and associates were convicted of breaking up their donations in order to conceal them in 2022 but overturned on appeal. Both National and Labour say they haven't received any donations from Zhang in 2026.

Misinformation is false information spread unintentionally without harmful intent - perhaps a rumour being passed along, a Facebook post being shared.

Disinformation is false information that is deliberately spread with harmful intent - a post that lies about a candidate's personal life, for instance, or accuses them of a crime.

And we're also seeing malinformation, which is true information used with malice - presented out of context, or with details omitted. That's harder to pin down, but an example could be a post about medicine emphasising some rare side effects without explaining that they're rare.

There’s a lot of scaremongering about opportunity in the Facebook comments from boomers (only boomers comment on Facebook). The left say that opportunity will go with national and the right say they will go with labour. In my opinion I think they should and will go with the Labour Party as the aspirational goals of a land tax and UBI are fundamentally different from the national parties “no new taxes” mantra. In addition the only way I see that the government can be changed is through the election of the opportunity party.

I’m tired of both labour and national and their attitudes to a new party. I watched Erica Stanford and her smug attitude to them on Duncan Garners podcast and was extremely put off. It seems our election has now gone down to schoolyard bullying tactics. The confidence and arrogance of both labour and national is unfathomable to me given how unpopular they are as reflected by the polls. In particular the overconfidence of Luxon given his recent train wreck interview where he was schooled on his own policy by a university student that was more articulate than him. How can national be so confident when they tried to oust their troubled leader three times and failed. Remember this is the lowest these parties have polled since the National party was formed in the 30s.

I also do not agree with the right discrediting Chloe swarbrick as inequipped to be finance minister because of her qualifications being some university papers in economics. What about Nicola Willis and her background in English literature and being a lobbyist?

David Seymour also had a mind numbing argument about TOPs apparent contradiction regarding electoral donations, despite receiving electoral donations themselves. Clearly electoral donations donations are unfair given the ACT party received millions in donations far more than any party including TOP.

Please share your thoughts in a polite way so educated discussion can be had.

From the article:

National's campaign chair has called a media standup to demand Labour and the Greens explain which smaller-party policies would emerge from coalition negotiations - despite National refusing to do the same. 
 
Speaking to reporters in Auckland, Simeon Brown says the situation for a Labour-led coalition is "completely different" compared to a National-led one.  [...]

Brown pushed back on reporters' questions about which of New Zealand First's promises - which some commentators have estimated at costing $50b to $100b - National would take up. 
 
He also denied that David Seymour - who said in 2023 he would like to be finance minister - could be named in the role, saying that would be for Nicola Willis. National has consistently attacked Labour over the risk that Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick could be finance minister, despite Chris Hipkins ruling that out. 
 
Asked what National would do if Willis - a list-only MP - failed to return to Parliament, he simply rejected that possibility. 

This all seems very rational and reasonable.

People will gnash and wail at this because NZF/politics, but the report into the Manawanui did paint an embarrassing picture for New Zealand.

I'm the first to give Stuff shit, so it feels only fair to credit them when they do good.

Lets see if I've got this right. A sex offending priest, who grew and smoked his own weed at the vigarage where he lived with his gay Labour MP partner, was supported at trial by the former Anglican dean of Christchurch who is now the head of a charitable law organisation that assisted survivors who gave witness statements to the Royal Commission of Inquiry into abuse in state and faith-based care.

Who wanted permanent name suppression. Which was successfully opposed by our media, namely Stuff.

Hold up, I need to call Netflix, I got a show idea..

My only conclusion from reading this is that Luxon is still an out of touch c-suite. Saying his government hasn’t stoked division is delulu.

Guess that inflation is sticking around for a bit. I wonder how this will be spun by Nicola? lol

Yeah I know this is going to sound unhinged.

"Goldsmith 4 Epsom" used to be a genuine strategic play to deny ACT their entry ticket to Parliament. The logic was sound: deny Seymour the seat, lock ACT out of Parliament.

That logic no longer holds. ACT is safely over the threshold. Seymour is coming back to Parliament whether he wins Epsom or not.

On current polling, Paul Goldsmith will NOT be back in on the Party Vote. But for the first time ever, he's now campaigning seriously to win Epsom. His argument to right-wing voters: "you'll get Seymour regardless, why not get me as a bonus?"

In other words, he's saying Epsom can deliver National an extra seat via overhang. And that is the whole game this election.

The right is openly organising to manufacture a National overhang. Nick Mowbray and Don Brash are telling National voters to give their electorate vote to National candidates and their party vote to ACT or NZ First. The explicit aim is to maximise National’s electorates while shrinking its party-vote entitlement, so Parliament grows and the extra seats go to the right. Just one of those extra seats could be the difference between a National-led government and a Labour-led one.

In Epsom, left-leaning voters can actually do something about that. If enough people who would otherwise vote Left instead give Electorate Vote Seymour, National (and the centre-right as a whole) is denied an extra seat.

Yeah this is the complete opposite of the previous approach. But helping Goldsmith win Epsom is now helping the Right’s overhang play.

Seymour 4 Epsom.

I was attracting a number of increasingly personal insults over on r/nz so I assume it’s an opinion worth having, or at least discussing. Unfortunately mods disagree, so copying here because I do actually stand by this.

—
It feels insane calling this an unpopular opinion because until literally this month I would have thought that‘s how most people in New Zealand feel. But I’m sort of guessing now that they don’t, because the people who seem very worried about supposed, possible gang influence don’t seem at all worried the about actual aristocratic elite meddling in global democracy, including ours.

Now I’m not accusing any particular party of being supported by gangs OR billionaires (but some of them are, and the signs are not hard to spot). But if that was legitimately our only two options for this election, I would vote for the parties backed by gangs every time. Because I am absolutely certain that in this country where money talks but so very quietly, the gangs will have less influence than the billionaires. Every time.

At least the gangs are locals.

Live thread for tonight's youth leaders debate at 7pm. Hosted by Whatitiri Te Wake and streaming at the post link on Māori+ and the Te Ao Māori News YT channel.

Lineup seems to be:

• Arena Williams, Labour
• Dan Bidois, National
• Eden Skipper, Opportunity
• Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, TPM
• Tamatha Paul, Green
• Te Kira Lawrence, NZ First

Awesome policy Labour, quick question, how much is it going to cost? In total, over 4 years, how much is this going to cost?

They would receive a $100 weekly credit, adding up to $5200 a year, with the money held in a trust account.

Yup, and how many people do you expect this to help into homes?

Labour would also expand the existing First Home Loan scheme, lifting the income limit to $300,000 and allowing more people to buy a house with a deposit of just five percent.

Gotta pump up that housing market! In what world does a couple earning $300,000 need help?

I even went and checked the Labour press release, which RNZ just verbatim copied. An empty policy..

We’ve been hearing for a while that this election is “too important” for various reasons depending on what ‘team’ is telling the story. But this article calls out a few things that actually might make this a landmark election. The possibility of a new party in Parliament. Maybe National’s first one term government or on the other side of the coin, retaining the least popular Prime Minister since MMP.

😐

On brand for Simeon. They threw money into private practice to make their ‘targets’ look better.

As always these cunts want to make claims about ‘biggest increase ever n health spend’ but doing it in the shittiest ways.

I got banned from another subreddit for saying that this left and right classification is annoying. My view is that people don’t fit binary perspectives and to classify people left and right is like supporting a sports team but gets in the way of actually solving problems.

Here’s a pew report from the states that’s interesting.

What are peoples views in this forum?

From the article:

ACT has published its campaign manifesto on the first day of voting, pitching itself as the only party seeking to save taxpayers' money this election.

The document also shows ACT has ditched an earlier promise to scrap the existing Permanent Resident Visa category in response to "anxieties" among migrant communities. [...]

The plan brings together all of ACT's announced policies, including a KiwiSaver tax break, a higher pension age and a three-year freeze on the minimum wage.

Together, it promises to cut $22 billion of "wasteful" spending over four years, with government debt $12.4b lower by 2031 than currently forecast.

The capitalist hellscape deepens.

"The Ministry for Pacific Peoples has done nothing for Pacific Islanders."

"I think that's a really insulting thing to say," Opportunities Party candidate Romeo Tevaga said....how do you think they achieve Language Weeks, which are really important to our identity, language and culture?"

We're not just any other population," Green Party candidate Teanau Tuiono added.

"I think that's a really insulting thing to say. Very insulting. Why should we get rid of the ministry now when we have this many people?"

So, language weeks. Seems like a worthy use of millions of dollars and 84 FTEs.

Lets look at what they're doing

− just over $26 million for the purchase of policy advice, communication, project and relationship services required to maintain strong links between Crown and Pacific communities

• just over $1 million to provide education, employment and skill development programmes for Pacific peoples

− just over $6 million to provide Pacific peoples with the information and skills needed to succeed in business

− just over $30 million to facilitate home ownership for Pacific peoples

− just over $1 million for the provision of scholarships for further education for Pacific peoples

− $250,000 for the resourcing of Pasifika Wardens.

Dr Evil Riiiiight.meme

Now, that advance voting has begun, it seems timely to hear from the good people of r/KiwiPolitics as to who we're all voting for and the rationale behind it.

For example, I'm personally voting for ACT as my party vote as I feel they want a smaller government, debt reduction, charter schools and an improvement in race relations.

The Labour candidate in my electorate has my candidate vote as my incumbent National representative can be absent and hasn't really done much to promote the interests of our electorate. The hope is that given my electorate is pretty damn blue, the Labour candidate will have to be an exceptional representative if he wants to be re-elected in 2029 or else we'll get a new, hopefully better National candidate.

But what are your thoughts on how you'll vote?

Imagine having a parliament with 3 independents! Assuming Ferris and Kapakingi get in as well.

Just a casual reminder of what Labour Day is all about - WORKERS.

I’ve linked an article from NZ History on the origins of Labour Day. The dude in the pic is Samuel Parnell who was a carpenter in Wellington and the first person to secure an eight hour work day in 1840 as part of a negotiation to build a store for shipping agent George Hunter. Parnell stipulated he would only accept the job on the condition he’d work no more than eight hours a day, saying “I am ready to start tomorrow morning at eight o'clock, but it must be on these terms or none at all.” Hunter responded that in London the bell rang at six o'clock, and if a man was not there ready he’d lose a quarter day’s pay. Parnell simply pointed out they were not in fact in London anymore and the rest is history.

The first Labour Day was celebrated in 1890 to mark the first anniversary of establishment of the Maritime Council, New Zealand’s first national union. Parnell was featured in parades and news articles as a pioneer of workers rights in New Zealand.

So if you feel tempted to complain about public holiday surcharges or higher wages for people working on the day instigated to acknowledge and advocate for their rights, maybe think about the slavish Dickensian hellscape we could instead be living in where there was no such thing as a forty hour week or an eight hour day and you could be penalised a quarter of your day’s pay for not showing up at the crack of dawn.

Great article with lots of interactive tools and tables that give a reality check on what income and wealth really looks like for households and how our current tax settings approach wealth.

Weekly place for any foreign affairs or international news discussion.