The housing debate is now a divide between the haves and have-nots

Thursday, 26 February 2026

While a whopping 71% of renters want house prices to fall, a majority of mortgage-holders want them to rise, writes Jordan Meyers.

Jordan Meyers is Head of Research at Freshwater Strategy.

OPINION: New Zealand’s housing debate has hardened into a quiet but corrosive divide: those who own, and those who fear they never will. While homeowners broadly accept that the country needs more housing; always check the fine print. “Yes,” they tell us, “just not in my back yard” to spell out the often-quoted “Nimby” acronym.

Meanwhile, aspiring buyers watch the dream of ownership drift further away. It’s no wonder they increasingly want prices to fall.

The latest Freshwater Strategy polling for The Post shows that; alongside cost of living and healthcare, housing remains a defining issue of this political term.

Townhouses under construction in Auckland’s Kohimarama. The debate over housing intensification has been loudest in our biggest city, with much of the opposition blamed on “Nimby” attitudes.

Nine months out from the next election, the political landscape has shifted dramatically. National’s once‑slender advantage on housing has long-gone. Almost half the country believe Labour and Chris Hipkins are more trusted on the issue.

So, the Government faces a fundamental test: can they reassure home owners while convincing younger New Zealanders that the Government still has something serious to offer.

Just two-and-a-half years into government, National can in no way be held responsible for the current state of the housing market, but if the party wants to reclaim leadership on housing, it must confront a reality that voters have already accepted.

In 2024, when asked directly whether house prices should fall, Housing Minister Chris Bishop answered “yes”, adding that “average house prices in NZ are too expensive”. At the time it sounded fairly radical, but today it sounds like common sense. Freshwater Strategy’s polling for The Post shows that 46% of New Zealanders actually want house prices to fall, compared to just 24% who want them to rise.

The generational split, once stark, is narrowing. Younger New Zealanders still overwhelmingly want lower house prices, but older voters are shifting too. Many now recognise that their children and grandchildren are being priced out of the communities they grew up in, as well as the urban centres that sustain much of the country’s jobs and economic prosperity.

The sky-high price of real estate in Sydney is a cautionary tale, writes Jordan Meyers.

The deepest divide, however, is not generational. It is between the haves and the have nots. Those who own property and those who don’t.

While a whopping 71% of renters want prices to fall, a majority of mortgage-holders want them to rise. Perhaps they need them to?

Sydney, where I grew up, offers a cautionary tale. There, decades of political hesitation allowed affordability to collapse. Sydney is one of the most expensive housing markets in the world, second only to Hong Kong. The median house price is 13.8 times median household income, ahead of major global cities such as Los Angles (11.2 times median income, 5th highest) San Fransico (10.0, 8th ), and London (9.1, 12th ). For reference, multiples of 9 and above are rated as “impossibly unaffordable” by experts at Chapman University’s Center for Demographics and Policy.

Auckland, New Zealand’s most expensive housing market, is ranked 16th globally, with median house prices at 7.7 times the median household income.

We don’t need to imagine where this leads. Entire generations have been locked out, families pushed further from the city, and a generation of voters have become increasingly cynical about mainstream politics, and driven towards political alternatives, sometimes extreme.

RMA Reform and Housing Minister Chris Bishop announces changes to Auckland’s zoning capacity targets, after a fierce debate in the city over the impact of housing intensification.

Cities bent themselves around the scarcity of housing rather than the wellbeing of people. New Zealand still has time to avoid that fate, but the window is narrowing.

So where is the common ground? Surprisingly, it exists. Homeowners and renters alike support greater density in existing urban areas, especially when paired with transport infrastructure.

When new housing is framed as a threat to neighbourhood amenity, opposition hardens. But when it is framed as part of a broader investment in community - better transport, better public spaces, better services - support grows. The lesson is clear: people are not opposed to development; they are opposed to development that leaves them worse off.

Infrastructure, however, remains the sticking point. New Zealanders, particularly in Auckland and Wellington, do not believe current infrastructure can keep pace with population growth, let alone support the additional 2 million homes some fear. Without a credible infrastructure pipeline, any housing policy will struggle to win public trust.

The debate is no longer about whether New Zealand needs more housing. Voters have already answered that. The real question is whether the country is willing to accept the trade-offs: taller buildings, more neighbours, denser cities, and significant investment in infrastructure.

Without these, the outcomes are predictable: high rents, locked-out first-home buyers, and a generation forced to leave the communities that need them most.

New Zealand now faces a choice. It can cling to the old rules and watch inequality calcify, or it can build a future where the next generation has a stake in the country they call home. The decision is simple, even if the politics are not.