TOP would lift research and development spending from 1.5 percent of GDP to 2 percent within a decade and 3 percent by 2050, add a tax credit covering up to a quarter of the cost of adopting new technology, and give the Commerce Commission power to ask the High Court to break up dominant companies. Smaller measures cover polytechnics, start-ups, student loan interest for returning graduates and a new Impact Company structure. The whole package is costed at $1.33 billion a year.
The document’s framing figure is that New Zealand spends 1.5 percent of GDP on R&D, which it compares to Poland and Turkey, against an OECD average of 2.7 percent. It would recommit to a 2 percent target within ten years with at least 0.6 percent public science, and set 3 percent by 2050. In the near term that means restoring the 2024 science reorganisation cuts — which the Save Science Coalition puts at $90 million a year and 550 jobs, and the Royal Society Fellows at $300 million in total — and lifting funding back to inflation-adjusted 2018 levels, with a new fund for early and mid-career researchers and the humanities and social sciences brought into contestable rounds.
The existing R&D tax credit is described as delivering good returns but stopping short of the large investments needed to actually roll technology out. A new credit would let firms claim back up to 25 percent of the cost of deploying AI and digital platforms, new plant and machinery, and networked or autonomous equipment. At $600 million it is by far the largest line in the policy.
Baseline funding cut by the current government would be restored and pointed at practical business skills — market development, export access, cashflow, finance. Polytechnics and public research organisations would be bulk-funded up to $10,000 per business enquiry to work on real problems, and given an explicit mandate to lead regional productivity growth as hubs for sector initiatives.
Government funding for incubators, accelerators, deep tech and young enterprise programmes would double. The document is unusually frank here: it says these programmes appear to have crowded in private investment and improved start-up survival, but that monitoring and evaluation has been weak, and commits to a systematic review before any further expansion.
Student loan interest accrued over up to three years spent overseas would be rolled back, for both new graduates and those already abroad. The relief applies at the end of loan repayment and is conditional on being resident in New Zealand when the loan is repaid — the stated intent being to encourage people to go and get experience, then come back with it.
Rather than a target, the policy is a process: a long-term population strategy setting out desired population outcomes with average net migration to match, shaped by input from business, unions, NGOs and the public. The document’s own position within that is “moderate sustained positive migration”, and it argues migration has not been matched by investment in infrastructure and services for decades.
The central claim is that New Zealand has one of the weakest competition regimes in the world, that it is modelled on Australia’s, and that the two are near-unique among developed nations in lacking the power to break up monopolies, impose industry-wide conduct obligations or address tacit collusion. The proposal is modelled on recent EU and UK provisions, and is aimed at banking, supermarkets, insurance, building supplies, aviation and utilities. The document calls this a shakeup rather than tinkering, and names the Commerce Act Amendment Bill currently before Parliament as the tinkering.
TOP says it is open to structural separation in banking, supermarkets and electricity generation, but treats it as a blunt instrument that always imposes cost and disruption, so it should follow expert analysis and be supervised by the courts. The argument for the power rather than the act: the threat of it improves behaviour across the board, and a court route lets the Commission reach concentrated sectors that attract no political or media attention.
A new structure in the Companies Act for businesses that want both growth and a social or environmental purpose, modelled on structures in the UK, Canada, the United States and Italy. Qualifying means stating the purpose in the constitution and publishing annual Impact Reports on social and environmental outcomes. Investors could deduct up to $100,000 a year as they would a charitable donation.
The document itemises all 13 components with an assumption stated against each, and the lines add to $1,330.5 million — exactly the $1.33 billion total it claims. Science funding here combines restoring recent cuts ($125m), early and mid-career researchers ($100m) and the major contestable funds ($175m). Polytechnics combines restored baseline funding ($80m) with bulk funding for business enquiries ($20m). The party labels two of its own estimates arbitrary — the Commerce Commission uplift and the widened R&D credit — and says remaining measures are legislative changes absorbable within departmental baselines.
“New Zealand’s economy is stuck in low gear. But we have the talent, resources, and opportunity to shift up.”
“Mining the conservation estate and trawling our ocean-floors are short term solutions, and the economic, social and environmental bills are coming due.”
“New Zealand has one of the weakest competition regimes in the world.”
“Yes. We think the current state of competition in many business sectors warrants a shakeup, rather than continued tinkering like the current Commerce Act Amendment Bill before Parliament.”
Points the document defers or leaves undefined. These are gaps in the document, not criticisms of the policy.
Which party holds a published position on which topic.
Swipe across to see all 11 topics — the party column stays put.
| Party | Economy | Housing | Health | Education | Climate | Environment | Crime & Justice | Treaty & Māori Affairs | Immigration | Foreign Policy | Democracy & Government |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| National |
| ∅ |
| Labour | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ |
| Green |
| ACT |
| NZ First |
| Te Pāti Māori |
| TOP |
| Also contesting, without seats in Parliament | |||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Women’s Rights | |||||||||||
| Animal Justice | |||||||||||
| ALCP | |||||||||||
| Conservative | |||||||||||
| Outdoors & Freedom | |||||||||||
| Vision NZ | |||||||||||
| Alliance | |||||||||||
| Free Palestine | |||||||||||
| NZ Loyal | ∅ | ||||||||||
| Te Tai Tokerau | ∅ | ||||||||||