Election 2026 debate: Greens’ Marama Davidson and Act’s David Seymour clash over gang visit

Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson defended the decision of one of her candidates to visit a gang pad during the election campaign in the Herald Powerbrokers’ debate on Wednesday night.

The visit has stirred controversy on the campaign.

“I will listen to anyone who wants to turn their life around for the better,” Davidson said.

“Ignoring the problems doesn’t make them go away,” she said, adding she wanted to “improve” people’s lives.

Act’s David Seymour responded by saying that while people should have empathy for those affected by drugs, violence and poverty, “why on earth would you go to the very place that causes so much of that trouble and say that you want to restore mana to the Mongrel Mob?”

Opportunity leader Qiulae Wong said she believed it was “inappropriate to spend the campaign engaging with gangs”.

The debate, moderated by Ryan Bridge, featured Davidson, Seymour, Wong, and NZ First leader Winston Peters. Te Pāti Māori pulled out of the debate after the death of co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer’s mother.

The debate was frequently fiery, with Bridge at one point forced to summon the spirit of Paula Bennett, calling on the four leaders to “zip it, sweeties!” after the debate got out of hand.

That interaction came after Seymour said he had demonstrated he could “work with anyone” around in Parliament, noting his success with advancing assisted dying as an opposition MP.

“The issue I have with certain people on this stage is actually the policies that they support,” he said.

“[Opportunity] wants to stop you using your KiwiSaver for a first home deposit. That’s going to mean that the only people who can buy a house in this country are those dependent on the bank of mum and dad,” he said.

Seymour was referring to Opportunity’s policy of axing KiwiSaver withdrawals for first-home buyers.

Wong said Opportunity would support first-home buyers with its land tax.

“That’s why we have proposed the land tax and the tax reset as a whole. We need to introduce a citizen’s income, which will make it easier for people to save for their first home.”

In a section on family violence, Peters discussed New Zealand’s anti-smacking law.

“As a child, I got a few smackings, and guess what? I thoroughly deserved them. Make no bones about it.

“I’m from a family household of 30 kids, and we survived by being disciplined,” Peters said.

Wong jumped in, saying, “I think there are lots of things that happened in the 50s and 60s that would be inappropriate today.”

A feature of the debate was attacks on Wong by the leaders of the established parties, particularly Peters and Seymour.

Seymour called Wong’s tax plan “absolutely disgraceful”.

And Peters described Wong’s centrism and bipartisan beliefs as “dreamtime stuff”.

“This idea we’re all going to get on holding hands like some sort of different planet is not going to happen ... that’s not the way humanity is,” Peters said.

Wong held her own, interjecting on one of Peters’ interjections, reminding him that he asked her a question and she deserved the chance to answer it.