This term, issue by issue · Crime and justice
Crime and justice: ACT and National match current settings; nobody costs the projected rise in prisoners
No party fully builds the 2050 position: the projected 35% rise in prisoners is a lasting cost, and only Opportunity and the Greens aim squarely at remand and reoffending, its drivers, without costing how.
What is at stake now and by 2050
This term
Crime and safety rank high with voters, and this term's answer has been tougher sentencing, a gang patch ban and more prison beds. The prison population is now over 11,000, and about four in ten prisoners are on remand awaiting trial or sentence, not serving a sentence.
Number to know
11,256 people in prison at 30 June 2026, about 41% of them on remand (Corrections).
By 2050
On current law the Ministry of Justice projects the prison population to reach 15,200 by 2036, a 35% rise driven by recent sentencing changes and longer remand. Every extra prisoner is a lasting operating and capital cost, so justice settings chosen now feed the fiscal gap for decades unless reoffending and remand fall.
Number to know
Prison population projected at 15,200 by June 2036, up 35% if nothing else changes (Ministry of Justice).
Source: Ministry of Justice, Justice sector projections released (June 2026)
Current settings
Gang patch ban (2024), sentencing reforms this term (Sentencing (Reform) Amendment Act, Crimes Amendment Bill), a bill before Parliament to keep military-style academies for serious young offenders, and the agreed Christchurch Men's Prison expansion. The prison population is projected to rise 35% by 2036.
The options on the table
| Option | Backed by |
|---|---|
| Tougher sentences and new offences |
|
| More police and enforcement powers (transport police, rural units, licensed security guards) |
|
| Deport non-citizens convicted of serious crimes |
|
| Rehabilitation, specialist courts and restorative justice |
|
| Health-based drug law (decriminalise possession or cannabis) |
|
| End youth military academies and raise the age of youth justice |
|
| Replace prisons with Māori-led, tikanga-based alternatives |
|
Where each party stands
Voter priorities out of 15 (the four core tests plus relief this term) and Readiness to 2050 out of 21 (the four core tests plus the three long-run tests). Current settings come first, as the bar to beat. Open a party for every test score, the rationale and the sources.
Current settings
- Voter priorities
- 10/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 13/21
Test scores, rationale and sources for Current settings
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 2 Both scores Mechanism 2 Both scores Funding 2 Both scores Delivery 3 Both scores Relief 1 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 2 Readiness to 2050 Candour 1 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Current settings target offending through tougher sentences, the gang patch ban and more prison capacity, all enacted and Budget-funded with a delivery record. The Ministry of Justice projects these laws will lift prisoners 35% to 15,200 by 2036 without a stated plan to fund or offset that cost, so Future effect is 1 and Candour 1.
Relief this term
The gang patch ban (2024) and this term's sentencing reforms keep running, with prison capacity growing; no new measure adds to felt safety this term and the effect on offending is not shown.
Sources
National
- Voter priorities
- 10/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 13/21
Targeted law changes on sexual offending and child deaths, plus a funded Auckland transport police team.
- Amend the Crimes Act so sexual consent must be actively given ("yes means yes")
- Bar "good character" as a sentencing discount for sexual offending
- Auckland Transport Police Team: 50 sworn officers, $7m a year from Budget 2027 (in fiscal plan)
- Up to 10 years' jail for adults present who stay silent when a child under 12 is killed (18 Oct)
Test scores, rationale and sources for National
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 2 Both scores Mechanism 2 Both scores Funding 2 Both scores Delivery 3 Both scores Relief 1 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 2 Readiness to 2050 Candour 1 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Names specific drivers (consent law that defines what consent is not; visible policing deterring offending on transport) and names the vehicle (Crimes Act amendments, $7m a year in the fiscal plan from Budget 2027). The offer is narrow and does not address remand or prison growth; no trade-offs stated.
Relief this term
An Auckland Transport Police Team of 50 officers from Budget 2027 is dated but limited to Auckland public transport; consent law and sentencing changes deter offending slowly.
Sources
Labour
- Voter priorities
- 3/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 6/21
Opposes youth boot camps and parts of the Move On bill; would create a corporate homicide offence. No police or sentencing policy.
- Vote against the bill keeping military-style academies for serious young offenders
- Amend the Move On bill to remove rough sleeping and begging
- Create a corporate homicide offence for workplace deaths
Test scores, rationale and sources for Labour
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 1 Both scores Mechanism 1 Both scores Funding 0 Both scores Delivery 1 Both scores Relief 0 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 1 Readiness to 2050 Candour 1 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Labour's justice offer is opposition to the youth academies bill (citing reoffending by most pilot participants), amending the Move On bill, and a corporate homicide offence. No policing, sentencing or prison policy appears in its policy index; nothing is costed.
Relief this term
Opposing youth academies, amending the Move On bill and a corporate homicide offence do not address the crime voters feel; no policing or victim measure.
Sources
Greens
- Voter priorities
- 6/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 8/21
Prevention and rehabilitation first: restore judicial discretion, expand specialist courts, health-based drug law.
- End mandatory minimums, three strikes, preventive detention and limits on home detention
- Extend Te Ao Mārama to all courts; expand legal aid; raise the age of criminal responsibility
- Replace the Misuse of Drugs Act; legal regulated cannabis for personal use
- Criminalise coercive control; body cameras for frontline police; stronger IPCA
Test scores, rationale and sources for Greens
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 2 Both scores Mechanism 2 Both scores Funding 0 Both scores Delivery 1 Both scores Relief 1 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 1 Readiness to 2050 Candour 1 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Names drivers (poverty, drug criminalisation, neglect of rehabilitation) and sets out a broad, plausible path through specialist courts and restorative justice, but cites no evidence or targets. None of it is costed in the Greens' tax package, and it gives no timelines.
Relief this term
Criminalising coercive control and body cameras for police would help some family violence victims; ending mandatory sentences, Te Ao Mārama in all courts and drug reform aim at reoffending over the long run. No timelines.
Sources
ACT
- Voter priorities
- 10/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 14/21
Costed enforcement package: three strikes for burglary, rural crime unit, child-safety screening, deportation.
- Minimum three years' prison on a third burglary conviction ($141m a year by 2030/31, in fiscal plan)
- Rural crime unit and 100,000 extra patrol hours ($11m a year)
- Working with Children card ($13m to $20m a year)
- Deport resident visa holders convicted of offences carrying 10 years or more
Test scores, rationale and sources for ACT
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 2 Both scores Mechanism 2 Both scores Funding 2 Both scores Delivery 3 Both scores Relief 1 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 2 Readiness to 2050 Candour 2 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Cites reoffending after burglary release and a 15% rural prosecution rate, and books each measure in its fiscal plan, including the ongoing prison cost of three strikes for burglary ($141m a year by 2030/31). ACT delivered sentencing law as a coalition partner this term; naming that cost earns Candour 2.
Relief this term
Three strikes for burglary needs a third conviction, so its prison effect builds mostly after 2029 ($141m a year by 2030/31); the rural crime unit and 100,000 extra patrol hours ($11m a year) give noticeable but narrow relief to rural communities.
Sources
NZ First
- Voter priorities
- 4/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 6/21
Deportation for any imprisonable offence and a call to designate gangs as terrorist entities; no costing.
- Deportation liability for any imprisonable offence; automatic for violent, sexual and organised crime
- Petition to designate all gangs as terrorist entities
- Ban public sales of fireworks
- Coastguard funding up $12m a year
Test scores, rationale and sources for NZ First
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 1 Both scores Mechanism 1 Both scores Funding 0 Both scores Delivery 1 Both scores Relief 1 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 1 Readiness to 2050 Candour 1 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Asserts rising gang violence without data; the terrorist designation route is a petition with no legal test or process set out. Deportation widening is a clear measure, but nothing is costed and NZ First publishes no fiscal plan.
Relief this term
Deportation for imprisonable offences affects a small group of offenders; gang terror designation is a petition with no legal path; a public fireworks ban gives narrow nuisance relief. None is dated.
Sources
- NZ First, NZ First Announces Immigration Reform Policies (11 Sep 2026)
- NZ First, All Gangs Should Be Terror Entities (petition, undated)
- NZ First, NZFirst to Ban Public Sales of Fireworks (9 Oct 2026)
- NZ First, policy index
- NZ First, NZ First to increase funding and support to NZ Coastguard (15 Oct 2026) (15 October 2026)
Te Pāti Māori
- Voter priorities
- 4/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 7/21
Replace prisons with tikanga-based, community alternatives by 2040 under a Māori-led justice authority.
- Abolish prisons by 2040
- Create a Māori-led justice authority
- Reform laws that criminalise poverty and survival
- Whānau-led care instead of uplifts of Māori children
Test scores, rationale and sources for Te Pāti Māori
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 2 Both scores Mechanism 1 Both scores Funding 0 Both scores Delivery 1 Both scores Relief 0 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 1 Readiness to 2050 Candour 1 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Names a driver (early criminalisation of Māori; Māori men about half the male prison population) and sets a 2040 target, but gives no path for replacing prisons for serious violent offenders and no cost or vehicle for the Māori-led justice authority.
Relief this term
Abolishing prisons is set for 2040 and the Māori-led justice authority has no vehicle or date; nothing lifts felt safety this term.
Sources
Opportunity
- Voter priorities
- 6/15
- Readiness to 2050
- 8/21
"Smart on crime": early intervention, specialist courts and rehabilitation to cut remand and reoffending.
- More court and probation funding to cut remand numbers
- National rollout of specialist sexual violence courts
- Raise the youth court age; expand drug and mental health courts
- Decriminalise drug possession but not supply
Test scores, rationale and sources for Opportunity
Test Score /3 Counts towards Diagnosis 2 Both scores Mechanism 2 Both scores Funding 0 Both scores Delivery 1 Both scores Relief 1 Voter priorities Future effect 1 Readiness to 2050 Durability 1 Readiness to 2050 Candour 1 Readiness to 2050 Rationale
Targets remand and reoffending (more than half reconvicted within two years) and cites NZ pilot evidence that sexual violence courts cut time to trial by about a third. No costs, targets or timelines are given.
Relief this term
More court and probation funding to cut remand, and a national rollout of sexual violence courts (pilots cut time to trial by about a third), would help victims awaiting trial, but no timeline or funding level is given.
Sources
Place yourself
Agreeing sometimes means change and sometimes keeping current settings. Take the quiz to compare across every issue.
| Statement | National | Labour | Greens | ACT | NZ First | Te Pāti Māori | Opportunity |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Burglary three strikes. A third burglary conviction should carry a minimum three-year prison sentence. | No stated position | No stated position | Disagrees | Agrees | No stated position | Disagrees | No stated position |
| Youth military academies. Military-style academies for serious young offenders should continue. | Agrees | Disagrees | Disagrees | No stated position | No stated position | No stated position | No stated position |
| Deport serious offenders. Residents who are not citizens should be deported if convicted of a serious crime. | No stated position | No stated position | No stated position | Agrees | Agrees | No stated position | No stated position |
✓ Agrees, ○ Mixed, ✗ Disagrees, · No stated position. Silence is a finding.
Why each statement matters
Burglary three strikes A third burglary conviction should carry a minimum three-year prison sentence.
- What it means
- Judges now decide burglary sentences case by case. This would require at least three years' prison for a third burglary conviction, costing about $141m a year by 2030/31.
- The case for
- Repeat burglars would face certain jail time, protecting homes and businesses from further break-ins.
- The case against
- It removes judges' discretion and adds to a prison population forecast to rise 35% by 2036.
- The trade-off
- Certainty of punishment versus higher prison costs and less room for judges to decide.
Youth military academies Military-style academies for serious young offenders should continue.
- What it means
- A pilot sends serious young offenders to military-style academies. A bill before Parliament would make it permanent; disagreeing would end it.
- The case for
- Structure and discipline give serious young offenders a firm reset; a pilot needs time to prove itself.
- The case against
- Most pilot participants reoffended within a year, and the money could fund approaches with stronger evidence.
- The trade-off
- A discipline-based programme versus spending the money on other youth approaches.
Deport serious offenders Residents who are not citizens should be deported if convicted of a serious crime.
- What it means
- Immigration law already allows some non-citizen offenders to be deported. This would widen it, for example to anyone convicted of an offence carrying 10 years or more, however long they have lived here.
- The case for
- Removing serious offenders who are not citizens protects the public and sets clear terms for residence.
- The case against
- Deporting long-term residents can split families and send people to countries they barely know.
- The trade-off
- Tougher terms for residence versus the impact on families.
The 2050 test
No party fully builds the 2050 position: the projected 35% rise in prisoners is a lasting cost, and only Opportunity and the Greens aim squarely at remand and reoffending, its drivers, without costing how. ACT and National are broadly neutral: they add funded but permanent enforcement and prison costs, while Te Pāti Māori's 2040 abolition target has no path. Nobody sets a target for remand times or funds the projected prison growth to 2036.
| Party | Effect to 2050 | The policy that drives it | Would it last? |
|---|---|---|---|
| National | Neutral | Auckland Transport Police and sentencing changes. Small, funded additions ($7m a year) that do not change projected prison cost growth. Source | Partly |
| Labour | Neutral | Oppose youth academies; corporate homicide. No measures large enough to move justice spending either way. Source | No |
| Greens | Neutral | Rehabilitation and an end to mandatory sentences. Could cut prison numbers over time, but the extra court, legal aid and rehabilitation spending is uncosted. Source | No |
| ACT | Neutral | Three strikes for burglary. Adds a funded but permanent prison cost ($141m a year by 2030/31), offset inside its fiscal plan. Source | Partly |
| NZ First | Neutral | Wider deportation; gang designation. No costing, so the fiscal effect is unclear. Source | Partly |
| Te Pāti Māori | Neutral | Abolish prisons by 2040. Would remove prison costs but replace them with uncosted alternatives, so the net effect is unclear. Source | No |
| Opportunity | Neutral | Cut remand and reoffending through courts and probation. Aims at the drivers of prison growth, but without costs or targets the net effect is unclear. Source | No |
Since 19 October (not yet scored)
- Labour: Repeal the law that could criminalise rough sleeping (final Stuff leaders' debate, 20 October). Source
All sources for this grouping are listed on the sources page.