National, Labour and the other parliamentary parties should work together on a policy safe for retirement housing: a durable framework with public approval, predictable funding and independent oversight that can survive changes of government.

FIXNZ commentary and policy proposal. The referendum and audit arrangements below are proposed reforms.

Turn cross-party discussions into a lasting commitment

On 11 October, 1News reported that Nicola Willis and Barbara Edmonds were willing to participate in cross-party discussions on retirement, including NZ Super, KiwiSaver, housing and healthcare. That willingness creates an opportunity to develop commitments that extend beyond one parliamentary term.

FIXNZ welcomes that opportunity. National and Labour, together with other parties, should agree on practical protections for older people and a reliable process for maintaining them. The priority is a shared institution that produces secure homes, dependable funding and measurable progress.

Why retirement housing belongs at the centre of policy

The Retirement Commission explains that an underlying assumption of NZ Super was retirement in a mortgage-free home. More people now reach retirement as renters. A mortgage-free owner and a private renter can receive similar pension income while facing very different living costs.

Retirement adequacy should therefore be assessed after housing costs, with food, energy, transport and healthcare also considered. A pension figure by itself cannot show whether someone has enough to live on.

The Commission’s 2025 retirement income review reports that, averaged across 2019–2024, the near-hardship rate using DEP-17 4+ was 3% for mortgage-free homeowners aged 65 and over, 12% for those still paying a mortgage and 31% for private renters receiving the Accommodation Supplement.

These figures describe specific groups and a specific material-hardship measure. The 31% is not the poverty rate of all older renters. The contrast nevertheless shows why housing must be treated as a core part of retirement security.

Define what the policy safe protects

A policy safe should protect clearly defined long-term commitments: retirement-system objectives, a transparent funding framework, multi-year provision of suitable homes and fair transition arrangements for people who have planned around existing rules.

The agreement should set a baseline for unmet need, identify the locations and types of housing required, assign delivery responsibilities and publish costed milestones. Accessible homes near transport and healthcare should form part of that plan. Older people needing help today also need a clear route to housing assistance and tenancy support.

Protected commitments must be specific enough to audit. Broad promises about dignity or security need delivery standards, funding rules and dates against which progress can be assessed.

Use referendums to establish and change protected policy

FIXNZ proposes that a policy should enter the safe only after approval in a nationwide referendum. Substantive amendment, repeal or removal of a protected policy should also require a nationwide referendum.

National, Labour and other parties should jointly develop the institutional framework. It should define which commitments qualify, how proposals are independently costed, how referendum questions are scrutinised and what approval threshold applies. Voters need understandable alternatives and accessible evidence about costs and consequences.

Routine administration must be distinguished from substantive policy change. Agencies should be able to deliver services and make operational improvements without a national vote on every decision. Changes to protected entitlements, funding principles or core commitments would follow the public approval process.

These are proposed constitutional safeguards. An informal cross-party agreement does not create them, and ordinary legislation alone cannot guarantee that a future Parliament will be unable to change the rules. The framework needs careful constitutional design, transparent parliamentary scrutiny and a direct public mandate.

Maintain legal oversight throughout each term

Policy continuity needs independent oversight during government, alongside regular reporting on expenditure, procurement, conflicts of interest, legality and compliance with protected commitments. Oversight should identify delivery problems early enough for them to be corrected.

A public dashboard should show funded commitments, homes delivered, changes in unmet need and conditions experienced by older renters. Reporting should explain delays and corrective measures in terms the public can understand.

Audit outcomes and the consistency of commitments

At the end of each term, FIXNZ proposes an independent public audit of policy delivery, outcomes and costs against the published baseline. A promise-and-action register should record material election commitments and subsequent governing decisions.

Where a decision differs from a commitment, the responsible officeholders should explain the evidence, changed circumstances, expected benefits and public costs. This should be a standard requirement for every government and participating party.

Ministers and other covered officeholders should also be subject to independently administered scrutiny of financial interests, asset changes and relevant transactions during their term, using defined statutory powers and safeguards for unrelated private information. Matters requiring investigation should go to the appropriate authority; an unexplained discrepancy is not itself proof of wrongdoing.

Preserve stability while allowing evidence-based improvement

A policy safe must allow problems to be identified and better options to be developed. Periodic independent reviews should publish evidence and recommendations. Where a recommendation would substantively change a protected commitment, voters would decide through the agreed referendum process.

The aim is a predictable process for improvement: continuity between elections, transparent assessment and public approval for major changes. Reviews should strengthen the framework rather than become a route around its protections.

A shared task for all parties

FIXNZ calls on National, Labour and the other parliamentary parties to build this framework together. The test is whether older New Zealanders gain more secure homes, reliable support and confidence that essential commitments will endure.

Related FIXNZ analysis: We follow the evidence, not the party line.

Sources and scope

Sources: 1News, 11 October 2026; Retirement Commission housing research; 2025 Review of Retirement Income Policies. The policy-safe, referendum and expanded audit proposals are FIXNZ’s recommendations, rather than existing legal requirements or findings attributed to these sources.