Election 2026: Here's how the multi-party leaders’ debate unfolded

Will this debate move the needle? The party leaders must surely hope so, because it seems nothing else is working.

At 6pm, a new 1News-Verian poll came out showing that, despite the campaign kicking into full gear, there has been little change in the public's voting intentions. National and Labour are tied on 28%, with National down one percentage point and Labour unchanged. The Greens are down one point on 15%, New Zealand First is unchanged on 10%, Act is up one point on 10% and Opportunity is up one with 8%. Te Pāti Māori is on 0.4%, which is unsurprising considering the party is focused entirely on the electorate vote. All of the changes are within the margin of error.

Based on this poll, Opportunity would be in a position to decide the government. Speaking to TVNZ's Jack Tame, Opportunity leader Qiulae Wong said she would speak to the party with the largest party vote on election night first.

With less than a month until election day, it seems the polling numbers are all but set in stone. Several polls in a row now have shown little change in the party vote numbers.

This debate, hosted by Tova O'Brien, will be the minor parties' best opportunity of the campaign to speak to a large TV audience. Will it cause any voters to change their minds? We'll have to wait and see.

Minor party leaders, start your engines! Although apparently TVNZ is being careful to avoid to phrase "minor parties" in order to avoid offending Winston Peters.

The debate is about to kick off at TVNZ studios on Hobson Street. Act Party supporters dominated the street outside, waving placards as David Seymour arrived in the campaign bus, which they've dubbed "Big Pinky".

The studio audience is finally seated after an hour of corralling by producers. They've practised their clapping, just to make sure everyone knows how to do it. TVNZ is playing some Crowded House while everyone waits.

And we're off. Host Tova O'Brien kicked things off by asking: "If you're part of the next government what is the first tangible thing you'll deliver?"

David Seymour cited Act's policy to remove tax from Kiwisaver earnings. Rawiri Waititi also named tax, promising to remove GST from kai and remove income tax on the first $30,000 you earn. Winston Peters named his party's policy of splitting up the supermarket duopoly. Qiulae Wong hammered the same theme, promising to empower the Commerce Commission to split up the supermarkets, banks and power companies. Chlöe Swarbrick named the Greens' idea for a state-owned supermarket.

It's clear that the cost of living is on everyone's mind and will surely continue to dominate the debate - and the wider campaign.

When asked which parties supported National's proposals to drug test beneficiaries, Seymour was the only leader to raise his hand. "So much for libertarianism," snorted Swarbrick.

Seymour defended the policy, saying that he wanted to defend taxpayers' money. He said he would be happy to take a drug test because he was "so boring" that he wouldn't have any issues.

Waititi said if the government was going to drug text beneficiaries, it should start with politicians first. Swarbrick said it was an example of "punching down" and added "people can't work ghost jobs".

When asked if Opportunity could drop its promise of a land tax in favour of Labour's capital gains tax, Wong says she'd support any tax that would improve equity and bring down house prices. Swarbrick wasn't willing to shift her position and defended the Greens' wealth tax. She said she wasn't willing to negotiate before the election.

Things are moving quickly and the insults are flying. Wong accused Peters of racist rhetoric in reference to his telling Chinese-born Green MP Lawrence Xu-Nan to "go back to your own country". Peters said that was "rubbish" and that he had spoken to Xu-Nan after the debate in parliament. He seemed to be implying that Xu-Nan agreed the comments weren't racist, though he wouldn't reveal what was actually said.

Swarbrick didn't seem to be aware of any conciliatory agreement between the two. She defended Xu-Nan as "one of the hardest-working MPs in parliament".

Just moments earlier, Seymour deflected questions about his party's major donors by suggesting Wong was "corrupt" because Opportunity was founded by a $3 million donation from Gareth Morgan. O'Brien joked about accusations of "the c-word".

If you were going to guess which policy prompted comparisons to the Hunger Games, you probably wouldn't have cancer hospitals at the top of your list.

Seymour argued for his policy of building a cancer hospital using funding from large philanthropists. Swarbrick said it would be better to pay for the hospital using a wealth tax. Seymour responded that private money has funded many New Zealand institutions since the early settlers. "He's talking about the Hunger Games," Swarbrick quipped. Seymour said that comment was "inaccurate and offensive".

Peters chimed in, saying the real question was: why are more people were getting cancer? "Because you're allowing more of them to smoke," Swarbrick said.

On a slightly related note, Seymour said he would continue his discounted school lunch programme if re-elected, even though it wasn't technically something that Act supported.

Does New Zealand still need the Waitangi Tribunal? Seymour wants to limit the tribunal from investigating contemporary claims and aim to solve all historical claims by 2040, New Zealand's bicentenary.

Waititi launched into an impassioned defence of the tribunal and argued that all legislation should account for the treaty. Seymour invoked the words of Kate Sheppard, Peters told a rambling story about Dame Whina Cooper and the Foreshore and Seabed Act, and no one seemed particularly happy.

In the TVNZ Leaders deabte, both Chris Hipkins and Christopher Luxon said they wanted to learn more te reo Māori.

When O'Brien asked the five minor party leaders if they would like to speak better reo, Swarbrick, Wong and Waititi raised their hands. Seymour and Peters did not.

Waititi, who was the only one of the leaders who said they spoke te reo well enough to maintain a conversation, said that "to be a true New Zealander is to speak Māori... what we want to do is share our language with you".

After questioning from O'Brien, Peters reluctantly referred to the Māori language as a "treasure" but said he doesn't want to "force it down people's throats". He complained that the Māori names of the new CRL stations were confusing. "You poor things," said Waititi.

Somehow, Waititi and Peters ended up on a tangent arguing about the colour of a Māori potato (rīwai).

During last week's leaders debate, host Jack Tame used the ad breaks to encourage Hipkins and Luxon to hurry up. That's not a problem this time. Things are moving at a breakneck pace, bouncing around from topic to topic and leader to leader.

O'Brien hasn't given the leaders any directions during the ad breaks. A staff member ran up to O'Brien and fixed her hair. Seymour and Peters appeared to exchange a couple of jokes, and Wong wandered off stage.

The Greens and Opportunity both pitch themselves as environmentalist parties. So, what's the real difference between them?

O'Brien put the question to Swarbrick first, who used the opportunity (no pun intended) to attack Opportunity for its willingness to work with Christopher Luxon and the coalition government "which has caused immense harm".

In her party's defense, Wong said: "imagine how many of those most egregious things that have happened in the last three years the Greens could have stopped if they were willing to work with National."

In a messy segment about energy policy, Peters, Swarbrick and Waititi traded barbs and pitched their respective proposals to secure cheaper energy for households.

New Zealand First wants to spend $1 billion searching for oil and gas. "It'll be huge but we've never tried." He suggested that, if New Zealand were to hit paydirt on some previously unknown oilfield, the money would be put into a sovereign wealth fund.

"Do you think you'll still be around?" O'Brien asked. "It's quite possible, yes," Peters replied.

Waititi echoed the Green Party's rhetoric with an argument favour of a "just transition" towards renewable energy, while Swarbrick pledged to support people to put solar panels on their houses and establish state-owned renewable energy generation.

"Hands up who here thinks diversity is a good thing?" asked O'Brien. Four of the five party leaders raised their hands. Peters was the only one who didn't.

In defending his position, Peters name-dropped former Singaporean prime minister Lee Kuan Lew and said successful countries such as Chine and Singapore were "all about unity" and that "every time you get diversity you get the opposite".

Wong said Peters' comments were "really dangerous rhetoric that doesn't belong in our politics".

"How would you know?" Peters fired back.

Swarbrick said unity didn't necessarily require an ethnic monoculture. Peters repeatedly called Swarbrick a "globalist".

If he is re-elected, Peters would be the longest-serving member of parliament in New Zealand history. O'Brien asked what that would mean to him. Peters was dismissive: "It doesn't mean a thing. It's a privilege to be in parliament. You're a servant of the people. The masters here are the voters."

In a moment that echoed his famed "baubles of office" quote, Peters claimed to have turned down knighthoods, high commissions and other honorary titles. O'Brien asked the other party leaders if they would accept a knighthood. Wong, Swarbrick and Waititi quickly said they wouldn't. Seymour seemed stuck and, after a moment, blurted out: "I've never thought about it, to be honest."

Through the debate, O'Brien has urged viewers to vote online to decide what topic they want the party leaders to be asked more about. Surprise, surprise, the winning issue was the cost of living.

To open the segment, Seymour defended the government's changes to interest deductibility changes - effectively a tax cut on landlords - by arguing that any tax cut on any product would cause a discount in the final price. Swarbrick said the decrease in rent prices was due to the record number of New Zealanders leaving the country.

Swarbrick and Peters got into an argument in which they each accused each other of being neoliberals.

During the ad break, Seymour got his makeup touched up and did some active stretches. Waititi conferred with party president John Tamihere and Peters whispered to chief of staff Darroch Ball. Wong and Swarbrick had what appeared to be a chummy chat, though Swarbrick kept her arms firmly crossed the whole time.

Immediately after the break, O'Brien asked the leaders what issue they would like to send to a referendum. Seymour and Peters said four year parliamentary term. Waititi said entrenching te tiriti in law. Swarbrick said a wealth tax. Wong said she would push for a citizens assembly on superannuation.

For her final question of the night, O'Brien asked each of the party leaders for one sentence on why it was worth it to be a politician. Most of them only partially answered the question and instead used it as a chance to give their final pitch.

Wong said she wanted to be in parliament because "we desperately need a circuit breaker in New Zealand politics right now".

Seymour said the country had "enormous potential but we're not reaching it right now" and that "someone has to stand up" and advocate for a small government approach.

Waititi said he wanted to restore rangatiratanga and put people ahead of privilege.

Swarbrick's answer was that "when we work together we can achieve things that no one of us can achieve alone."

And in the final note of the night, Peters said "politics can do more damage than any other profession I know, but it can also do more more good than another profession I know".

And with that, it was over. I'm signing off now. Good night!