Five minor party leaders face off in first big debate as a poll puts the balance of power in play

The leaders of five smaller parties met tonight in what RNZ called the first big debate of the election campaign, with the latest poll suggesting that whichever of them backs a government could help decide who runs the country after 7 November.

What happened

David Seymour (ACT), Chlöe Swarbrick (Greens co-leader), Winston Peters (NZ First), Qiulae Wong (Opportunity) and Rāwiri Waititi (Te Pāti Māori co-leader) took part in the Kingmakers' Debate, hosted by Stuff and streamed live from 7.30pm. Christopher Luxon and Chris Hipkins were not on stage. Stuff's live coverage carried the headline "They're not in the same league" over a line about Peters criticising both of them.

Why these five matter

The most recent 1News Verian poll had National and Labour level on 28 per cent, the Greens on 16, ACT on 11, NZ First on 9 and Opportunity on 6. Te Pāti Māori was on 1 per cent. Turning that into seats, 1News counted Opportunity with Labour, the Greens and Te Pāti Māori, which put that bloc on 65 seats against 59 for National, ACT and NZ First. The poll implies four overhang seats, taking Parliament to 124, with 63 needed to govern.

Neither bloc is guaranteed a majority, and a poll is a snapshot, not a forecast.

What it means for you

Smaller parties can shape what a new government does, because policies agreed in coalition talks can reach household budgets. Which of these parties holds the balance of power, and what it asks for in return, will matter.

The parties also fund themselves differently, which matters to voters judging who is influencing whom. The latest Electoral Commission disclosure, reported by RNZ, shows National received $346,160 through the anonymous "protected disclosure" scheme this year, the most of any party. NZ First received $161,000 in the latest three months, bringing its total through the scheme this year to $173,162.

The scheme lets a donor give up to $61,425 to a party in an electoral cycle without being identified publicly, provided it goes through the Electoral Commission. An independent review in 2023 recommended abolishing it. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith has said: "Abolishing protected disclosure donations is not a priority, just as it wasn't for the previous Labour Government either."

Who's responsible

Each leader on stage answers for their own party's policies and for which side they would prop up. The two main party leaders were not in the debate.

What happens next

The election is on 7 November, and the campaign continues.

Our take

The smaller parties could have more say over the next government than their vote share suggests, so a debate among them is more than a sideshow.

The anonymous donation figures belong in the same conversation. The scheme is legal and several parties use it. An independent review recommended scrapping it in 2023, and the Justice Minister says abolishing it is not a priority, as it wasn't for the previous Labour Government either. That applies to every party using it, not one.

A single poll is not a forecast. Voters are better served reading each party's actual policy, and asking what it costs and who pays, than guessing at coalitions.