The Opportunity Party has enjoyed a run of four successive published poll results above the 5% threshold, going as high as 8%. Now that they’ve broken through, more people may jump aboard to give them a try in November’s election. We’ve yet to see how party leader Qiulae Wong performs under pressure in campaign debates, but she kept her cool when challenged by Jack Tame on TVNZ’s Q+A.
TOP’s apparent rise may help explain a dip in polling for Labour and NZ First. If successful at the election, TOP have said they’re willing to work with parties across the House to form a government, but they’d approach the party that wins the most seats first. This could mean a confidence-and-supply agreement, and not necessarily a full coalition with seats in cabinet.
National, however, have said they won’t work with TOP, which is readily explained by the considerable policy differences between the two parties.
As things have shifted since I last wrote about TOP, it’s timely to have closer look at who TOP are and what they stand for.
As they would be new to parliament and entirely list MPs, anyone considering voting for TOP should look carefully at their candidates, not only their leader.
For whom would you be voting?
People have different criteria for judging the suitability of candidates for public office. Supposing, then, that the first ten candidates listed on their website could become MPs, it’s noticeable that there are six women and four men. They have a variety of professional backgrounds, including public service in central and local government, and in business and consultancy. There are few details on their educational attainments. Overall, they have a strong emphasis on environment, sustainability and resource management skills. Going by profile photos, they look relatively young. Leader Quilae Wong is 38.
A common theme is that they’re fed up with the sclerotic, adversarial style of traditional politics and they want to do things differently. The website says “none of us is a career politician”, which is self-evident, as none of them has been elected yet. It also means that they all lack experience in parliament.
“Free from ideological and party baggage”, however, they want to take an evidence-based approach and to “rebuild trust in politics”.
For what, then, would you be voting?
TOP’s “tax reset” would be a major fiscal-policy realignment. A land-value tax coupled with a universal basic income (“citizen’s income”) has drawn the most media attention. At first one might say it’s a leftist policy of redistribution. But TOP argue that their “tax reset” also addresses “conservative goals - like raising strong families, ensuring fairness and driving market efficiency”. They say it’s time to stop the “outdated left and right boxing match”.
Their tax reset policy is, they calculate, fiscally positive. “Based on 2024 numbers, the Land Value Tax pays for the Citizen’s Income with around $4 billion extra annually in net Crown revenue.” But those four billion dollars, and more, soon get swallowed up.
TOP propose $60 billion of additional borrowing over ten years for infrastructure investment, for which the interest would cost, they calculate, between $2.5 and $3.5 billion pa. And that’s just the start.
TOP is certainly not adopting a “small target” strategy in this campaign.
Politics Happens is an independent reader-supported publication. It has no party, philanthropic or corporate sponsor. Grant Duncan does not donate to any political party. He does not disclose whether or not he votes.