David Seymour’s Treaty politics distract from Act’s economic agenda, CEOs warn
David Seymour’s economic credentials win CEO backing — but Treaty politics cloud Act’s pitch, writes Fran O’Sullivan
David Seymour has helped deliver some of the Coalition Government’s most consequential deregulatory reforms. But his Treaty crusade threatens to overshadow the economic agenda that gives Act its strongest claim to influence.
The Herald’s Mood of the Boardroom 2026 survey found 59% of business leaders believe Seymour has helped make the Government more business-friendly; 30% disagree and 11% are unsure.
For Seymour, the endorsement reflects a tangible record: establishing the Ministry for Regulation, restoring 90-day trials for all employers, reinstating interest deductibility for residential property and scrapping the ute tax and Auckland Regional Fuel Tax. Act has also helped drive the replacement of the Resource Management Act, with new planning and environmental legislation passed in September.
The reforms reflect Act’s core argument that excessive regulation, compliance costs and an oversized state are holding New Zealand back. The RMA replacement is particularly significant, promising a more property-rights-based planning system and faster approvals for development and infrastructure. The economic gains, however, will depend on implementation.
Yet Seymour’s economic credentials are complicated by his pursuit of the Treaty Principles Bill and the culture-war politics surrounding it.
“Act is clear and consistent with their policy as it pertains to making it easier to do business in New Zealand,” one utilities chief said.
An executive praised Seymour for challenging bureaucracy and making the Government more accountable. “What I respect most is that he gets hammered personally and politically and still doesn’t back down. He takes the attacks, holds his line and keeps going. That takes backbone. New Zealand needs more of this.”
An investment banker described Act as “the best in Government on economic matters”, and suggested Seymour should be the next Minister of Finance.
But other business leaders believe he has squandered political capital.
“Act’s diversion into Treaty rhetoric has distracted it from its contribution to the Government,” said Hayden Wilson of Dentons NZ.
A local government chief executive warned: “I don’t see the pursuit of distracting culture wars as being business-friendly in the long term. We have been focused on the wrong things.”
An energy chief also cautioned that Act’s Treaty positioning risked affecting investment decisions by major commercial Māori entities.
CEOs back practical reform
An education sector leader described Act’s election platform as the strongest package of any party, arguing that while other parties debate how to distribute public money, Act asks why government costs so much.
The survey’s policy ratings suggest business leaders favour practical improvements over some of ACT’s more contentious proposals.
Expanding the conditions pharmacists can treat, including ordering blood tests, scored 4.01 out of five. Consolidating 43 government departments into 19 scored 3.98, while increasing pharmaceutical spending by one percentage point of the health budget annually until reaching parity with Australia received 3.93.
Building a $2 billion cancer centre with Auckland and Christchurch campuses scored 3.78.
By contrast, adding parliamentary sovereignty, the rule of law and equality before the law as principles in the Constitution Act scored 3.15. Limiting tikanga in court decisions to cases expressly permitted by Parliament scored 2.99, while repealing Māori employment and engagement requirements in the public service scored just 2.72.
Introducing noise cameras to fine vehicles exceeding a decibel limit was the weakest-rated proposal, at 2.49.
The message is that CEOs are not giving Act a blank cheque. They want measurable improvements in productivity, government efficiency and business confidence.