Labour voters back targeted GP subsidies, poll shows
Friday, 28 November 2025
Have your say in the comments below
Labour is out of step with its own supporters on the question of universal free GP visits, a new poll suggests.
The Taxpayers’ Union/Curia survey of 1000 eligible voters, conducted from November 2-6, found 57% of Labour voters believe GP subsidies should be targeted to low- and middle-income New Zealanders. The margin of error is is +/- 3.1%.
The party’s universal GP policy is funded through its proposed tax on property profits - excluding the family home - earned after July 1, 2027.
To pre-empt accusations of a tax grab, Labour promised to funnel revenue from the levy directly into health. The centrepiece is three free GP visits per year for every New Zealander, alongside additional health spending.
Read more:
Labour to take a capital gains tax to the election, give free GP visits in return
Capital gains over a wealth tax: A choice Labour may come to regret
But the polling suggests Labour voters are not entirely sold on the universal end of that bargain, even if they back the idea of raising revenue from investment property profits.
Just 35% backed the current policy of extending free GP visits to all adults, regardless of income; 8% were unsure. Across the full sample, 44% supported targeting and 38% preferred a universal approach.
The poll also reveals a split across the political spectrum.
Greens voters are almost identical to Labour supporters, with 58% backing targeting and 39% endorsing universalism.
ACT voters favour universal subsidies more strongly than expected (53%), while Te Pāti Māori supporters were overwhelmingly unsure - 70% did not express a view either way.
Age is the sharpest dividing line.
Younger voters (18–39) are the only group where universal subsidies are more popular (43%) than targeting (36%). Support for income-targeting rises steadily with age: 47% among 40–59s, and 52% among those over 60.
Older voters, who frequently encounter long waits and workforce shortages, appear least convinced by Labour’s promise of universal access in a system that cannot currently deliver it.
Gender makes almost no difference - men and women split almost identically, with 44% favouring targeting.
Region tells a different story. Auckland stands out as the only place where universal subsidies outrank targeting (48% to 43%).
Wellington voters are the opposite extreme: a striking 60% support targeting and just 34% prefer universalism.
Christchurch leans slightly towards universal subsidies, while provincial cities, towns and rural areas each show pluralities for targeting, although rural respondents also had the highest uncertainty, at 38%.
Labour revealed the much-anticipated tax policy last month
Access to primary care remains one of the health system’s most visible pressure points. Clinics report months-long waits in some regions, and the GP workforce is ageing faster than it can be replaced.
Taxpayers’ Union spokesman James Ross argued universal subsidies “make no sense when people can’t access a GP now” and would “only make the queues worse.”
“Health funding should be targeted where it can make the most difference. Labour needs to listen to its own voters and go back to the drawing board,” he said.
The same poll revealed 61% think any capital gains tax (CGT) should be based only on real, inflation-adjusted gains, not nominal increases. Only 39% support taxing nominal gains.
Among Labour’s own supporters, 69% say a CGT should apply only to real gains, compared to just 31% who say it should also apply to nominal gains.
It also showed Labour gaining 2 percentage points following its the announcement of its new tax policy.
Ayesha Verrall, Labour’s spokesperson for health, said: “Labour believes in universal healthcare - that everyone should be able to access the health system regardless of income.
“Our free doctor’s visits policy is the next step in ensuring everyone can access healthcare when they need it. Getting people to the doctor when they are sick can treat preventable illnesses early, reducing the cost to the health system in the long run.”