Existing policy and reasonableness reigned in a debate excluding the two Chrises, and which Winston Peters seemed to think was a waste of his time.
By Russell Palmer of RNZ
The NZ First leader dismissed both Christopher Luxon and Chris Hipkins as "not in the same league" as other prime ministers he had worked with.
Not long after, he was seen checking his watch on stage.
"You said 8.30," he told the moderators Andrea Vance and Jenna Lynch, and when they asked if he had somewhere else to be he responded "yes I have".
Follow our election live updates here
And despite saying he would not have any knee-jerk reactions, Peters was the only one to make substantive policy commitments: a $120 increase in weekly Working for Families benefit payments.
The Post editor Matthew Hooton observed in the panel afterwards that it was Christopher Luxon and Chris Hipkins who were the losers of the debate, saying "any one of these people would be a better prime minister than them".
With National and Labour down to just 28% each on TVNZ's latest poll, the minor parties have never been more central to New Zealand's political future, but the proverbial greater power comes with greater responsibility.
That could be what led to greater restraint than would be expected in the debating chamber, or it could be that none of them wanted to put their polling gains at risk.
All five of the participants - David Seymour, Chloe Swarbrick, Peters, Qiulae Wong and Rawiri Waititi - kept the debate mostly civil, with Wong and Seymour especially cordial.
"I was a bit surprised, to be honest", Wong told reporters afterwards. "I was expecting a little bit more bickering as we've been used to seeing on TV and in Parliament. But maybe that's the influence that Opportunity is having on politics already."
Seymour even said he trusted Peters, a reversal of his position three years earlier, and which Peters did not return in kind.
Perhaps expecting a more boisterous affair, Swarbrick seemed to take the most jabs at her opponents, particularly Peters, like when she sarcastically said he "loves migrants", to which he shot back "the right migrant, not everybody, like you".
But Peters' main target was the moderators and the media, as he made clear when answering reporters' questions afterwards, saying he thought the questions did not get to the point and lambasting the lack of reporters at his public meetings.
Wong soaked up the most support on the "vibe tracker", an interactive live reflection of audience opinion following in the footsteps of the "worm" from the 2002 debate that saw a huge spike in support for United Future's Peter Dunne.
She won 35% support, Swarbrick 29%, Seymour 23%, Peters 9%, and Waititi 4%.
Cost of living and health were major topics, with support for business, regulation of AI, and funding for superannuation also canvassed, but the responses were largely as would be expected based on policies the parties had already unveiled.
Seymour was the only one willing to share his salary - $515,060 - and the only one willing say he believed Health Minister Simeon Brown that there was no freeze on hiring nurses.
Questions later about who could work with whom, and which government policies coalition parties would oppose or opposition parties retain were largely evaded, other than Swarbrick pointing to Green support for a bipartisan infrastructure pipeline.
TVNZ's Leaders' Debate is on Tuesday at 7pm on TVNZ 1 and TVNZ+, followed by the Multiparty Debate on Tuesday, October 13.
The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including a serious incident south of Auckland, fiery protests in France, and a jump off Auckland’s tallest residential tower. (Source: 1News)
SHARE ME