Election 2026: Live updates from the multi-party leaders’ debate

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.

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.

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".

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.

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".

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.

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.

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.