Labour Moves Ahead Of National On Controlling Cost Of Living, Ipsos Poll Finds
The topic has remained the top concern for New Zealanders since February 2022, and has now gone up five points since the last survey in February 2024 - bucking a steady downward trend.
Labour overtaking National on ability to handle the issue for the first time since October 2021 - climbing 4 percentage points to 32 percent, compared to National's 1-point drop to 31 - will be a worry for Prime Minister Christopher Luxon who made it a key election issue in 2023.
Labour also remains New Zealanders' top pick on the number 2 issue healthcare - rising 4 points to 40 percent to National's 24, up 1 point - with the issue also increasingly a concern, hitting another new record at 43 percent.
National is still on top when it comes to the economy at 35 percent but that's a 1-point drop from February, Labour closing the gap by the same amount, rising to 30 percent. Concern about the economy lifted 2 points to 32 percent.
Housing and law and order are the fourth-equal concern at 25 percent, with worry about housing dropping 2 points and law and order holding steady.
Labour gained three points to 32 percent on housing while National stayed steady at 27 percent, and Labour gained 4 points to 26 percent on law and order with National still in the lead but dropping two points to 34 percent.
Labour has also overtaken National on petrol prices and taxation, meaning it's now considered the party most able to handle all the 6th to 20th-ranked issues other than climate change (Greens), pollution and water (Greens), Issues facing Māori (Te Pāti Māori) and Defence/Foreign Affairs (National).
Ratings of the coalition's performance rose slightly from the last survey's record low of 4.2 out of 10, to 4.3.
The Ipsos New Zealand survey was carried out between 23 to 30 May and asked 1002 New Zealanders what they thought were the top three most important issues facing the country today.
The poll is conducted through online panels, and has a margin of error of +/- 3.5 percentage points. It had no external sponsors or partners, is initiated and run by Ipsos "because we think it is important for businesses and organisations to understand the challenges that New Zealanders face in the context of their everyday lives".
Results were weighted by age, gender and region to reflect the wider New Zealand population. Some results may sum to 100 percent and others may show a difference higher or lower than the actual due to rounding, multiple responses, or the exclusion of "don't know" or "not stated" responses.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
36 minutes ago
- Scoop
NZ Will Soon Have No Real Interisland Rail-ferry Link – Why Are We So Bad At Infrastructure Planning?
Another week, another Cook Strait ferry breakdown. As the winter maintenance season approaches and the Aratere prepares for its final months of service, New Zealand faces a self-imposed crisis. The government has spent NZ$507.3 million on cancelled iReX ferry plans, the country's fleet has an average age of 28 years, and the earliest New Zealanders can hope for promised replacements is 2029. The Marlborough Chamber of Commerce warns unreliable ferries already shake tourist confidence. Several more years of duct-tape solutions won't help. The recent pattern of breakdowns and cancellations has become so routine that New Zealand risks normalising what should be viewed as a national crisis: a serious infrastructure failure. It is also a textbook example of how short-term political cycles, coupled with chronic under-investment, create far more expensive problems than the ones they promise to solve. Cost blowouts While ministers claim to have spared taxpayers a $4 billion blowout on new ferries, Treasury papers show almost 80% of the cost escalation lay in seismic upgrades for wharves, not in the vessels themselves. Those land-side works will be required no matter what ferries the country eventually orders. Justifying the original contract cancellation, Finance Minister Nicola Willis quipped that iReX was a Ferrari when a Toyota Corolla would do. But the cost of finding a suitable Corolla is adding up fast. Annual maintenance costs are projected to nearly double to $65 million, just to keep the existing ageing ferries running. Additionally, $300 million had to be earmarked to cover fees for breaking the original ferry replacement contract. By retiring the Aratere this year – New Zealand's only rail-capable ferry – the government is also severing the interisland rail link for almost five years. KiwiRail will 'road-bridge' rail freight, an expensive workaround that involves loading train cars onto trucks, putting those trucks on ferries, then reversing the process at the other end. This will increase truck traffic, produce more emissions and add more wear to already strained infrastructure. Forcing more than $14 billion worth of annual freight from rail to road could also negatively affect New Zealand's climate change commitments. Freight moved by rail generates only about 25% of the CO per tonne-kilometre of the same load produced when hauled by truck. The cancelled hybrid ferries would have also cut emissions by 40%. Instead, New Zealand is locking in higher emissions for another half decade or longer. Unrealistic timelines The ferry saga reflects New Zealand's infrastructure problem in a nutshell. The country tends to underestimate costs, create unfeasible timelines, then shows dismay when projects blow up or limp home at double the price. Auckland exemplifies the pattern. The city has seen decades of cancelled harbour crossing proposals and a scrapped light rail project, with nothing to show but consultancy fees. When New Zealand does build –Transmission Gully, for example – the final bill bears little resemblance to initial quotes. The 27 kilometre motorway north of Wellington was nearly 50% over budget and took eight years to build – two years longer than promised. The systematic underestimation of costs reflects a flawed approach to infrastructure planning. Politicians need quick wins within three-year electoral cycles, while infrastructure projects take decades to deliver. Projects are approved based on lowball estimates, with the outcome inherited by another administration. This has crossed party lines and created a system that rewards short-term thinking and punishes long-term planning. Just consider the second crossing for Auckland Harbour. For 35 years, the government has commissioned study after study – from the 1988 tunnel plans to the 2010 business cases – each time backing away when the price tag appeared, or the government changed. The iReX cancellation marks the first time the government has actually signed contracts and then walked away. As with the second Auckland Harbour crossing, each delay has only made the inevitable solution more expensive. Other countries have, to a degree, addressed this problem. Infrastructure Australia, for example, provides independent cost assessments and long-term planning that transcends political cycles. New Zealand's Infrastructure Commission, established in 2019, lacks similar teeth and independence. Ultimately this isn't really about ferries. It's about how New Zealand consistently fails to deliver, on time and at cost, the infrastructure that keeps its economy moving.
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
LGNZ Urges More People To Run For Council
Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) is calling for more people to put their hands up to stand in this year's local elections in October. Nominations opened yesterday, with prospective candidates required to submit their nomination before the cutoff date of 12 noon on 1 August. To help potential candidates make this decision, LGNZ has produced a handy 2025 candidate's guide. LGNZ also offers a comprehensive range of pre-elected learning materials via its online learning platform, Ākona. LGNZ Chief Executive Susan Freeman-Greene says a hallmark of healthy democracy is when people are willing to represent their community around the council table. 'This year we'll have 1465 seats available across 66 councils, including 66 Mayoral seats and 683 community board seats. There will also be 127 seats up for election across the 11 regional councils,' says Susan Freeman-Greene. 'At the last local election, we had 3119 people standing across 1607 seats across the country; a ratio of almost two people for every seat. Seven mayors were elected unopposed into their roles in the last election, while 40% of members elected for the first time. 'Obviously we'd like to have more candidates standing, as evidence tells us that the more candidates who are contesting a seat, the higher the voter turnout will be. And ultimately, we want more New Zealanders heading to the polls to have their say; the 42% voter turnout at the 2022 local elections was not good enough.' Susan Freeman-Greene says that elected members can come from all walks of life. 'Being an elected member is an important and public role. There's no question it's a demanding job but it's also very rewarding. Every day councils make important decisions that impact future generations – from infrastructure investment like roads, bridges and pipes, to climate resilience.'
1News
14 hours ago
- 1News
Chinese consulate asks NZ film festival to can Philippine doco
Chinese officials have asked that a Filipino documentary be removed from future screenings at the New Zealand Doc Edge Festival, saying doing so would be in the interest of Chinese-New Zealand relations. The documentary, Food Delivery: Fresh from the West Philippine Sea, had its world premiere on June 30 at The Capitol Cinema in Auckland — after being withdrawn from screenings in its home country. The film was scheduled to premiere at the Puregold CinePalo Film Festival in Manila was pulled from the line-up days before it aired over what the film creators described as "external factors" earlier this year. It was then selected by New Zealand's Doc Edge Festival — the first to be able to do so. But, this week, festival organisers were asked to do as the Filipino counterparts had and cut the doco from its schedule. In correspondence seen by 1News, the Chinese Consulate requested the festival refrain from all future screenings — if it wanted to act in the "interest of public and China-New Zealand relations". The correspondence pointed out that New Zealand Prime Minister's Christopher Luxon's recent visit to China had been "fruitful". ADVERTISEMENT Festival organisers said the written request followed several calls to ticketing staff and board members, requesting that the screenings be pulled. "The documentary... is rife with disinformation and false propaganda, serving as a political tool for Philippines to pursue illegitimate claims in the South China Sea. Its screening would severely mislead the public and send the wrong message internationally," the email from the Chinese Consulate read. "This documentary disregarded history and facts, and is designed to amplify the Philippines' wrong position on the issue concerning the South China Sea and deliberately distort and hype up the maritime situation." Doc Edge general manager Rachael Penman said they've refused the request and willingly stand by all their filmmakers. "We are a voice for independent filmmakers," she said. "We programmed a film that we felt was really important to be seen and brings up a conversation with so many people. I hope that everyone does go and see this now, and has their own opportunity to make their own decisions about this film." 1News has reached out to both the Chinese Embassy and the Chinese Consulate via email and phone with questions around its specific concerns with the film and why it was appropriate to exert political pressure in such a way. While it didn't address those specific questions, the Chinese Embassy said as a "matter of principle we hope that publicly promoted content would reflect realities rather than spreading mis or dis-information". ADVERTISEMENT It also called for disputes to be peacefully resolved and expressed its desire for "countries outside the region to play a constructive role in this regard instead of doing the opposite". The Philippine Embassy declined to comment other than to say "it is aware" of the situation. Directed by Filipino filmmaker Baby Ruth Villarama, the tells the stories of local fishermen, the national Coast Guard, and the Navy as they work in the South China Sea – with a particular focus on the area around the Scarborough Shoal. Contained within the Philippines' Exclusive Economic Zone, China's had de-facto control of it since 2012 and has refused to accept an international ruling that said its claim over almost the entirety of the South China Sea has no legal basis. University of Otago senior lecturer in politics Nicholas Khoo said there is "absolutely no ambiguity" and the Scarborough Shoal is "Filipino territory". "The challenge is that China doesn't respect the Filipino position, nor does it respect the international legal issue that is at stake here." He said the situation "underlines the importance of New Zealand standing up for the international legal order" and for it to continue to "reassert our interest in freedom of navigation", adding that "there should not be an aggressive use of force to attempt to solve issues". ADVERTISEMENT Khoo said the film clearly contradicts China's narrative and that will be why officials are working to prevent its screening. New Zealand's Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded on behalf of government officials and said it fully supports freedom of expression. In relation to the territorial disputes, it said New Zealand does not take a position on individual claims in the South China Sea, but did want disputes resolved peacefully via diplomacy and in accordance with international law, in particular the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In China the film has also been heavily criticised. Commentators with its state-run network described it as revealing a "pattern of selective storytelling that serves broader political interests" and a "propaganda piece" that "dodges the gritty geopolitics of the region and the realities of the territorial issues and maritime disputes". Villarama told 1News today she had deliberately chosen to shine the lens on the people rather than the politics. "Because we really want to celebrate us as people, without politicising the issue. We want to diplomatically reach out and share our personal stories, because the more personal we go, the more authentic we can be with others." She said she held no animosity towards China, and invited those opposed to her documentary to go and watch "so they can know the truth about our people". ADVERTISEMENT "We don't have any agenda. There is no 'Western influence'."
