Eleanor Thompson As the government enters the final stretch before the 2026 election, clashes over Treaty principles, public service branding, and new police surveillance powers reveal fractures within the National-led coalition that could shape the campaign ahead.
By Eleanor Thompson
Managing Editor
Zealandia News
April 1, 2026 — WELLINGTON
The first day of the new financial year has brought not only increased financial support for more than one million New Zealanders but also renewed political tensions within the coalition government, as ACT Party leaders signal their intention to resurrect divisive policy debates that National and NZ First had hoped to leave behind.
Deputy Prime Minister and ACT leader David Seymour has vowed to reignite the Treaty principles debate in 2026, declaring he will “never move on” from his vision for equality in New Zealand despite the Treaty Principles Bill being voted down at its second reading in April 2025 following the largest hīkoi to ever reach Parliament’s grounds . The announcement, made in a recent interview, sets the stage for a potentially volatile election year as the coalition partners navigate their differences while trying to present a united front.
Seymour acknowledged that his coalition partners “abandoned us and did not support us for the vote in Parliament” but insisted the movement was not dead. “We’ve planted the seeds of a movement of equal rights for this country that won’t go away anytime soon,” he said. “I’ll never move on from the idea that we are all equal” .
Coalition Commitments Tested
The Treaty debate is not the only source of friction. ACT MP Todd Stephenson has publicly pressed Public Service Minister Judith Collins over what he describes as departments being “slow” to adopt an English-first branding directive — a coalition commitment between National and New Zealand First . Stephenson wrote to Collins earlier this month expressing “growing concern” that coalition commitments were not being visibly implemented, noting that the Government’s main webpage still displayed its brand in te reo Māori first.
“When Government branding does not reflect clearly articulated commitments, it creates the perception that either the direction is not being firmly driven or that departments are exercising discretion in areas where there should be none,” Stephenson wrote .
Collins responded by noting that ministers had agreed in 2024 to respond to the commitment on a “case-by-case basis,” adding that she had recently become “concerned at the cost of agency rebranding activities” — a matter she has raised with Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche .
Stephenson insisted his party did not support “costly rebrands involving consultants” or “flash new signage and stationery,” pointing to Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden’s digital-first rebrand at her agency, which cost just $741. He called for the Government’s main logo to face the same treatment .
Green Party public service spokesman Francisco Hernandez dismissed the debate as a “waste of time” and a “culture war” sideshow, arguing that New Zealanders had much more significant things to worry about, particularly amid what he called a “fuel crisis” .
New Police Powers Bill Advances
A separate piece of legislation is also drawing political battle lines. The Policing Amendment Bill, introduced to Parliament on Tuesday evening by Police Minister Mark Mitchell, would give police new powers to move or detain individuals and expand their ability to collect, record, and use information for “intelligence purposes” .
The bill is in two parts. The first addresses intelligence gathering, allowing police to record short live videos in public if they judge it justified. The second would give police new powers to declare wider public areas off limits and impose fines of $1000 on those who refuse to comply .
The bill’s preamble states that two events — including an RNZ investigation exposing officers casually photographing tens of thousands of people, mostly Māori teenagers — “have together narrowed the law” so that police now have less power to photograph or record people in public than a regular person .
Privacy Commissioner Michael Webster has raised concerns that the bill sets a “low bar,” permitting collection of people’s information for “an intelligence purpose” which is not defined. “Overly broad or insufficiently clear intelligence gathering powers will impact on the privacy rights of everyday New Zealand[ers] and has the potential for chilling effect on people’s civil and political rights,” Webster said .
The Justice Ministry recommended tailor-made safeguards, but that advice was “deemed unnecessary” because the bill was not displacing any privacy principles or the Commissioner’s powers, according to the bill’s disclosure statement .
Children’s Commissioner Dr Claire Achmad expressed “real concerns especially for mokopuna and rangatahi Māori, given the previous breaches of their rights by the exercise of police power in photographing them.” She noted that while a police policy team had invited feedback, “due to the very short time-frame provided by police, this was not possible” .
The bill has now gone to select committee, with a report back deadline of July 27. Labour’s Camilla Belich warned during the first reading that the bill was too vague to ensure New Zealand would not become “an Orwellian society of mass surveillance” .
Foreign Policy Divisions Emerge
The coalition is also facing criticism from Labour over its foreign policy approach. Labour’s new foreign affairs spokesperson, Vanushi Walters, has accused the National-led government of being “very one-sided” in its international affairs and struggling to consistently uphold the rules-based order .
Walters, an Oxford-educated human rights lawyer, said she would not have signed New Zealand up to a recent joint statement expressing readiness to help secure the Strait of Hormuz, calling the language ambiguous. “By signing on to the statement, we also create an expectation,” she said. “The question is, do we really believe that if the US were to ask New Zealand to contribute forces, that the Government would say no?” .
She argued that the conflict in Iran began with “an illegal breach of the UN Charter by the United States and Israel” and that the Government should have called that out. “No one is above it,” she said .
Walters also criticised what she called the Government’s “inconsistent” approach, pointing to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s previous statements about New Zealand being “a force multiplier” for the US and Australia, and signalling openness to joining the AUKUS Pillar Two security pact. “I don’t think that serves New Zealand’s interests,” she said .
Financial Support Arrives Amid Global Uncertainty
Amid the political jostling, the government has delivered on its promised financial relief package. From today, more than one million New Zealanders will receive increased support, including:
- Approximately 960,000 superannuitants, with payments for a married couple lifting more than $50 to $1,708 a fortnight
- Around 280,000 low-to-middle-income families receiving increases in the family tax credit
- 143,000 working families receiving an additional $50 per week for up to a year under a temporary fuel-cost measure
- Over 435,000 working-age beneficiaries receiving increased support, with a single person over 25 on Jobseeker Support gaining an additional $22 a fortnight .
The support arrives as the government acknowledges that the conflict in the Middle East is “causing pain for Kiwis at the pump” and is likely to drive inflation higher and growth lower than previously forecast . Finance Minister Nicola Willis said the government was making “careful choices” to protect New Zealand’s economic future, adding that “responding with large, untargeted government spending programmes could make things worse for Kiwis by adding even more pressure to inflation and debt” .
The Reserve Bank is also responding to the volatile environment, with governor Anna Breman scheduled to speak publicly about the economic impact of the Iran conflict in the coming days — a break from the usual “cone of silence” observed before official cash rate decisions .
Looking Ahead
As the election year unfolds, the coalition faces a delicate balancing act. Seymour has made clear that ACT will campaign on the Treaty principles issue, despite National ruling out entertaining another iteration of the legislation in a future coalition. NZ First leader Winston Peters has also signalled his intention to repeal Seymour’s Regulatory Standards Act next term, setting up potential policy battles regardless of the election outcome .
For now, the government is focused on delivering its financial support package and navigating the global economic fallout from the Middle East conflict. But the tensions simmering beneath the surface — over Treaty principles, public service branding, police powers, and foreign policy — suggest that the coming months will see the coalition’s unity tested as never before.
In Brief
April 1, 2026, marks a day of significant political developments in New Zealand. The coalition government has delivered financial relief to more than one million Kiwis amid global economic uncertainty, but tensions are flaring within the National-led alliance. ACT leader David Seymour has vowed to reignite the Treaty principles debate, while his party is pushing for English-first public service branding against concerns from Minister Judith Collins about rebranding costs. A new Policing Amendment Bill granting expanded surveillance powers has drawn criticism from the Privacy Commissioner and children’s advocates over insufficient safeguards. Meanwhile, Labour has accused the government of pursuing a “one-sided” foreign policy that risks drawing New Zealand into complicity with possible breaches of international law. As the election year progresses, the coalition’s ability to manage these internal divisions while navigating a volatile global environment will be closely watched.
