Winston Peters up against tricky allies on $100b Future Fund

Analysis - New Zealand First leader Winston Peters wants his coalition partners' support for a $100b infrastructure fund before the 2026 election.

It could be a tall ask, given National's previous promises to curb borrowing, and Peters' own fresh plans to intervene on an ACT policy.

Should they reject the idea, there is potential for him to use it as a springboard for what many have speculated: bringing an early end to the coalition when his time as deputy prime minister comes to an end. Peters is always enigmatic, however, and he would still be foreign minister.

It's a role he prizes and which remains hugely important given the increasing levels of geopolitical conflict, a point underlined by the events of Sunday.

The "Future Fund" of up to $100b was a policy remit NZ First's membership voted for on Saturday at the party's annual convention, held this year in Hamilton.

It proposed to: "Investigate the development of a 'New Zealand Future Fund' of up to $100b to invest solely in a multi-decade infrastructure build, to ensure our future infrastructure security and to enable future economic growth and social enablement".

Peters took it centre stage for his headline speech on Sunday, saying the fund - to be based on similar approaches taken by the likes of Singapore and Ireland - was "brilliant".

It would be ring-fenced, he said, "from politicians and ring-fenced from political interference ... and where those investments are in our national interests and not offshore global ownership".

Interference had already been brought to the fore, with pro-Palestine protesters making themselves known among the crowds of about 800 people during the speech, which had been opened to the public.

Shouting questions at the stage, they asked, "Genocide: what's your policy?"

Peters responded with his usual mix of charm and belligerence: "Our policy is to oppose genocide and not to come along and make a nuisance of ourselves and stop the cause. So just go home. Just go home."

Clearly put out by the interruption and complaining about the media's focus on it, Peters soon after began a standup with a handful of reporters, refusing to wait for those gathering news on the protests.

He elaborated on the future fund, saying it would be run alongside the National Infrastructure Agency and Fund being set up by National's Chris Bishop. It would be set up "ASAP," he asserted, with work going on already in the background.

"I can say I've already written papers suggesting that we need to change our outlook here. These have been substantive papers," he said.

Reporters repeatedly pushed him on how exactly it would work, and the timeframes for when it might be expected to be brought in.

"We're just outlining it at our conference as to what we propose to do, but it's a real solution.

"I went to Taiwan and I saw it working brilliantly ... I went to Singapore, a little island nation size of Lake Taupō, doing magnificent.

"We set out a real plan ... proven to work in countless countries that have emulated what we used to do and gone straight past us. So you can do the comparison. Not my job to make contrast here."

He seemed confident of being able to persuade his coalition partners to support it, saying he intended to campaign on it ahead of the 2026 election, but "I'll campaign hopefully on supporting its introduction already".

He pushed back when asked about how he could persuade National given Finance Minister Nicola Willis' commitment to reduce debt.

"The debt target if you're spending on consumption is an appalling outcome. A debt target if you're spending on creation of wealth, added value, infrastructure and resilience - it makes sense," he said, justifying the possibility of more debt.

Minutes later, however, he denied it would mean taking on more debt.

"Was there more debt for Ireland? No. Was there more debt for Singapore? No. In fact, they've gone down so well that they don't even discuss what their sovereign fund is, because they are too scared that people will be envious."

ACT could also be a tricky ally to convince, for several reasons.

Both ACT and NZ First have in the last election appealed to similar voter bases, which often sees them competing. It may be coincidence that saw Seymour unveil Cabinet decisions on loosening foreign investment rules the day after Peters spoke vaguely to the NZ Herald about planning a "major policy" announcement for this weekend's convention - or it may not.

Peters may also be making things harder for himself after committing to follow up on a policy being developed by ACT's deputy leader and Workplace Relations Minister Brooke van Velden.

First Union general secretary Dennis Maga was one of NZ First's guest speakers at this weekend's event, his speech largely targeting Uber's dispute with its unionised rideshare drivers over whether they are employees or contractors.

Maga said Uber was bringing "substandard, oppressive, unethical labour practices that would severely render New Zealand workers' work conditions precarious and insecure", and that it was clear Uber's lobbying had been successful in getting ACT to change contract law.

"We're looking at it," Peters said. "We didn't get him along here for a joke, and as he said New Zealand First is different because we actually listen.

"As someone who's had a long-term interest in the fairness of dealing between business and workers, the government's position should be a referee where things are there, not biased either way, but being fair and ensuring there's impartiality in the outcomes."

He committed to having a conversation with ACT about the policy, saying the two parties had not yet had discussions on the matter - "probably because we're too flat out, but we'll have some, at your behest".