'It's extraordinary how things change' - NZ election strategies dissected at summit

For Labour to have a shot at government, it needs Opportunity to get five or zero percent at November's election, the party's campaign chair says.Kieran McAnulty says anything between that would mean the Opportunities vote is distributed amongst parties that do make it into parliament.The comments were made at a conference today, alongside a wider discussion by pollsters on where voters are at a little more than 2 months out from the election, and come after the most recent RNZ Reid Research poll had the Opportunity party as kingmaker.The conference also featured prominent political figures involved in previous coalition negotiations, offering insights into how they are planned and executed, including the selection of biscuits and how not to disrespect New Zealand First leader Winston Peters.The 'Politik Election Summit 2026: Navigating a Disrupted Electorate' took place in Wellington on Wednesday.It featured a range of speakers including political strategists and politicians as well as a keynote from Kosmos Samara, an Australian lobbyist and pollster who described the political landscape across the ditch with the rise of One Nation.He said One Nation was tapping into voters' concerns about the cost of living, and particularly with Generation X - those born between 1965 and 1980 - while younger, more diverse and more educated voters were more likely to steer clear of the party.He also discussed how anybody consuming Australian news media might think immigration was a key issue, but said "it just isn't".He described how the conservative parties - who were losing votes to One Nation - thought immigration was the issue and doubling down on that narrative."They are creating a problem and responding to a problem that doesn't exist."PollingTim Hurdle, a former National senior adviser, consultant and director of several companies, and David Talbot, a pollster and director at Talbot Mills Research both presented polling information heading into the election.Hurdle, using polling information from Freshwater, showed how parties had been faring since the last election, with National on a downward trajectory after a post-election lift, the rise of New Zealand First and a "redemption arc" for Labour.His take on the rise of Opportunity was that their vote was coming "a bit" out of Labour.Talbot - using Talbot Mills Research data, who poll for the Labour party - also spoke about the state of the electorate.Talbot said on his numbers, Opportunity holds the balance of power. He said the left bloc was dominant in 2025 with a centre-right block in 2026, "although overwhelmingly driven by Winston's rise rather than any strength in the national vote".His prediction was that Opportunity was going to "get there" in terms of reaching the threshold, and their vote was coming "pretty equally off the left and the right blocks"."After 10 days of media coverage, our tracking had them well above five really quickly."They will probably continue to get attention in the campaign, and that will help them drive that momentum," he said later.Both Hurdle and Talbot were also asked about National's strategy of attacking Labour on tax.Hurdle said National had gone "very aggressive very early", which he said was a risky tactic."You can only use the same message so much, and it starts to wear off."Campaign plansNational Party campaign chair Simeon Brown also spoke at the conference too describing National's strategy and reiterating the well-practiced line of "fixing the basics and building the future".He also took another opportunity to attack Labour with the notion of "nine new taxes".Brown said tax was going to be a "key issue" this election. Asked whether the party had gone too early on the attack, Brown said New Zealanders wanted clarity on where National stood.He getting the Prime Minister out and about for public meetings was another key strategy.When asked about Luxon's lower favourability ratings and whether the party would adjust their strategy due to that, Brown said Luxon was "absolutely central" to the campaign, but that there was a "great team of ministers" who would also play a role.Meanwhile, Labour's Kieran McAnulty began by saying "unexpectedly, we've got a genuine shot here" about Labour's chances at the election.He acknowledged that "currently" both the left and right blocs required Opportunity to be able to govern, and it would be "fascinating" to see if that remained the case throughout the campaign.McAnulty addressed the National party's tax attacks, saying "the traditional attacks on a capital gains tax haven't landed, and so they're moving into that sort of territory".Asked about Opportunity, he said Labour either needed them to receive enough votes to enter parliament, or no votes at all.Ultimately, he said Labour would have to play the cards its dealt."A three-party coalition is only three years ago unprecedented, and now it's probably the preferred option. It's extraordinary how things change."Coalition negotiationsThree experienced political advisors and strategists also presented their experience when it came to coalition negotiations.Long-time National Party chief of staff Wayne Eagleson - who served Sir John Key, Sir Bill English and Don Brash - spoke alongside Neale Jones, who was chief of staff to Labour leader Jacinda Ardern and former leader Andrew Little, and Stuart Wilson who was specialist ministerial adviser to Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour.Discussing how negotiations begin once the numbers are in after an election, Eagleson said he would be "staggered" if parties were not doing the legwork already.During the 2011, 2014 and 2017 elections, Eagleson said National was "wargaming it" as early as six months before the election.That included being clear on what National wanted to achieve and watching carefully what potential coalition partners or confidence and supply partners were after."Bottom lines are a massive pain in the arse."I understand why people like talking about it, but inside political parties, I think there's a lot less talk about about that."He described needing to stick to your values, but also being aware of things "you're prepared to trade"."You don't want to get yourself boxed in the corner."He discussed the political landscape being different, "we never really seriously looked at coalitions" during his time, but the numbers were different now he said, "with the fragmentation, and that does change it".Eagleson said National had a pretty good sense of what NZ First and Peters wanted in 2017, because work had been done ahead of time and because: "Winston has been a remarkably consistent political figure for a long period of time."Jones described the time in 2017 where Jacinda Ardern took over, changing Labour's fortunes. But once Labour got to the negotiating table, Jones described Peters' not wanting to hear the Greens' name mentioned."We were not to tell them what we were negotiating, and they had to sign on to it. We had to say to the Greens, 'we are signing an agreement with New Zealand First that you must adhere to, and you have to trust us'."Jones said building that level of trust through opposition meant they were able to have not just the personal, but also the professional working relationships."Had we not done that, we may not have got it across the line."Jones said Peters was in charge of the 2017 negotiations "on both sides." Jones confirmed that considerations about the type of biscuits were important."He [Peters] dictated where we met, when we met, and I vaguely recall the biscuits and the catering him having a strong view on."Eagleson echoed this, saying because Peters could go "either way" he "drove the room"."He drove the layout of the room, he largely drove the agenda. He certainly, I'm sure he did drive the biscuits and the opportunity for a 10-minute break to duck out every now and again," he said, to laughs in the room.Jones also said they were "always careful not to be disrespectful of Winston Peters", and not getting on his bad side.Jones said even on a Sunday afternoon, "we'd be showing up with a suit and tie, because we knew that we didn't want to blow the coalition negotiations because Winston thought we looked scruffy".Wilson added that minor parties did not like to be called minor parties.He said Peters reacted badly in negotiations when he felt he was been disrespected."That's probably the same with Seymour, just a different way."He then discussed the key elements of keeping the coalition together for a three year period was relationships and structures, and what sanctions can be applied as a minor party to the major party to keep those in line, as well as the sanctions the prime minister could apply to the minor party leader and their ministers"Because the traditional relationship between a prime minister and the ministers don't apply to those coalition partners."