From flood-affected communities and rising rates to public asset ownership and economic independence, Sue Grey argues that New Zealand needs a fundamental change in how it is governed. Speaking with eLocal's publisher and Founder Mykeljon Winckel ahead of the 2026 general election, Grey outlines her party's approach to restoring local accountability, rebuilding productive capacity and giving ordinary New Zealanders a greater say in decisions affecting their lives.
Report by eLocal | 14 October 2026
Music Credit: “13th Floor” by GroovExpress From Contemplation Nova © GroovExpress. All rights reserved.
An Election Campaign Revealing Deeper Frustrations
For Sue Grey, leader of the New Zealand Outdoors and Freedom Party and candidate for West Coast-Tasman, the 2026 election campaign has become an opportunity to hear directly from communities increasingly frustrated with decisions made on their behalf.
In a wide-ranging interview with eLocal Publisher and Founder Mykeljon Winckel, Grey describes travelling across an electorate she says takes approximately 11 hours to traverse, attending candidate meetings and speaking with residents concerned about property rights, rising costs, local government accountability and the future of their communities.
Her description of the concerns she encounters is particularly revealing.
"Don't rate us out of our properties, don't tax us out of our properties, and don't flood us out of our properties."
That message, Grey says, has emerged repeatedly during her travels.
It reflects what she describes as a growing disconnect between communities and the institutions responsible for serving them.
Rather than focusing exclusively on traditional election promises, Grey argues that New Zealand must reconsider how government decisions are made, who benefits from public expenditure and whether ordinary citizens retain meaningful control over their own lives.
The interview explores questions extending beyond party politics into the relationship between government, communities, private enterprise and the public assets built by generations of taxpayers.
Flooding, Managed Retreat and the Value of Local Knowledge
One of the most immediate issues discussed is the aftermath of serious flooding across parts of the Tasman region and the continuing concerns surrounding flood management on the West Coast.
Grey describes meeting residents who have lived in their communities for decades and believe their practical knowledge of rivers, drainage systems and historic flooding patterns has been overlooked.
She argues that councils have become too dependent on consultants and technical advice while failing to adequately consider the experiences of people who understand local conditions.
The concern is particularly acute where flood-risk assessments and managed-retreat proposals may affect people's homes, land values and financial security.
For property owners, the consequences can extend far beyond the physical threat of flooding. Insurance availability, mortgage arrangements, regulatory restrictions and uncertainty about future land use can all affect the value and viability of a property.
Grey believes local knowledge should play a much greater role in determining appropriate responses.
However, local experience and technical assessment need not be mutually exclusive. Effective flood management requires reliable hydrological evidence, engineering expertise, environmental assessment and informed community participation.
River gravel extraction, for example, may be beneficial in some circumstances but can also alter river behaviour and create risks elsewhere.
The challenge for councils is to demonstrate that their decisions are supported by transparent evidence and that affected residents have a genuine opportunity to influence the outcome.
The wider question is whether New Zealand's existing planning and consultation processes give communities sufficient power over decisions that can fundamentally change their lives.
Bringing Back the Ministry of Works
One of Grey's most substantial policy proposals is the restoration of a national public works capability modelled on the former Ministry of Works.
She argues that New Zealand has become excessively reliant on private consultants, contractors and outsourced expertise for infrastructure planning and delivery.
In the interview, Grey claims substantial amounts of taxpayer and ratepayer money flow to internationally owned consulting businesses, including payments for advice rather than completed infrastructure.
The scale of those financial flows would require examination of public procurement records, consulting contracts and company ownership information before any precise figure could be established.
Nevertheless, the underlying policy question is legitimate.
Would New Zealand obtain better value by rebuilding permanent public-sector engineering, construction and infrastructure-maintenance capability?
Grey believes such an institution could provide practical training, apprenticeships, secure employment and a greater capacity to maintain roads, waterways and essential public assets.
Winckel agrees that the former Ministry of Works represented more than a government department. It also provided training and career pathways while maintaining a pool of technical expertise available for public projects.
The Ministry of Works was progressively restructured and commercialised during the economic reforms of the 1980s and 1990s.
Those reforms reflected a broader shift towards private-sector contracting and market-based delivery of government services.
Supporters of outsourcing argue that competition can improve efficiency, encourage innovation and reduce the need for government to maintain expensive permanent capabilities.
Critics argue that excessive outsourcing can weaken institutional knowledge, fragment accountability and create dependence on external providers.
Will this in fact make New Zealand stronger?
That is the test any proposal to restore a Ministry of Works should face.
A modern public works institution would need to demonstrate that it could deliver infrastructure more effectively, train skilled workers, retain expertise within New Zealand and reduce long-term costs without simply creating another expensive bureaucracy.
The question is not whether public or private ownership is inherently superior. It is which arrangement delivers the best outcomes for New Zealanders.
Public Assets, Privatisation and Economic Sovereignty
The conversation moves from infrastructure to the economic reforms that reshaped New Zealand during the late twentieth century.
Winckel raises concerns about the sale of publicly owned assets, arguing that infrastructure developed through generations of public investment should not be treated simply as property available for governments to dispose of.
Grey agrees, linking privatisation to the wider concentration of economic power.
Their discussion reflects a longstanding debate about whether asset sales improved efficiency or weakened New Zealand's economic independence.
Privatisation can introduce investment, competition and commercial discipline. But where essential services operate as natural monopolies or within highly concentrated markets, private ownership does not necessarily guarantee better prices or greater accountability.
The ultimate consequences depend on market structure, regulation, investment obligations and the distribution of financial returns.
For New Zealanders, the critical questions are straightforward.
Who owns essential infrastructure? Who controls investment decisions? Where do the profits go? And what protection exists for consumers when meaningful competition is absent?
These questions also apply to banking, energy, transport and other sectors where a relatively small number of businesses can exercise substantial market influence.
Grey argues that government should focus less on imposing regulatory burdens on small operators and more on preventing excessive concentrations of corporate power.
It is an important distinction.
Competition policy should protect opportunities for smaller businesses to enter markets while ensuring that dominant businesses cannot exploit their position.
Small Business, Local Trade and the Cost of Regulation
A recurring theme throughout the interview is Grey's belief that New Zealand has made it unnecessarily difficult for individuals and small businesses to produce goods, provide services and trade within their communities.
She identifies food production, home-based enterprises, local contracting and small-scale manufacturing as areas where regulatory costs can discourage economic activity.
Her examples include local food trading, homekill services, raw milk, cottage industries and the commercial use of resources obtained through hunting and trapping.
Grey argues that communities should have greater freedom to develop small enterprises without facing compliance requirements designed around much larger organisations.
The economic concern deserves examination.
Compliance costs are often proportionately more burdensome for small businesses because they cannot spread administrative expenses across large operations.
However, regulations governing food safety, workplace safety and environmental protection also serve important public purposes.
The question is whether those protections can be maintained through simpler, proportionate rules that allow small enterprises to compete and grow.
Removing unnecessary barriers may improve local economic opportunities, but the benefits must be balanced against demonstrable risks to consumers, workers and the environment.
Grey's broader argument is that New Zealand should encourage practical enterprise and self-reliance rather than creating systems in which participation becomes increasingly expensive.
Direct Democracy and the Accountability Gap
Perhaps the most consistent theme in the interview is Grey's call for greater direct democracy.
She argues that elected representatives should be accountable to the people who elect them rather than treating election victories as permission to pursue policies without meaningful public consent.
Her concerns arise partly from encounters with residents who believe local councils have ignored their submissions and proceeded with decisions opposed by affected communities.
Grey also describes candidate meetings where, in her view, politicians from larger parties have adopted language about freedom and local decision-making without necessarily having corresponding policies.
That observation raises an important issue about electoral accountability.
Voters need to distinguish between individual candidates' statements and the formal policies their parties are prepared to implement.
Direct democracy offers mechanisms such as referendums and citizen-initiated decisions, but these also require careful design.
Questions include which decisions should be subject to direct public approval, how minority rights are protected, how voters receive reliable information and how complex technical matters can be assessed.
Representative democracy provides elected governments with authority to make decisions. Direct-democratic mechanisms can potentially strengthen accountability, but they do not eliminate the need for constitutional safeguards and responsible administration.
The central principle is that political authority should remain accountable to the public.
The Economy Beyond the Official Statistics
The interview also examines New Zealand's economic performance and whether conventional measures adequately reflect the financial pressures experienced by households.
Winckel raises concerns about long-term productivity performance and the consequences of economic reforms.
Grey argues that New Zealand possesses considerable resources, expertise and productive potential but has failed to organise and utilise them effectively.
Their discussion highlights a distinction between aggregate economic statistics and the lived experience of households.
Gross domestic product can increase without every household becoming better off. Population growth, changes in asset values and sector-specific expansion can influence headline figures without necessarily delivering corresponding gains in individual purchasing power.
Productivity, however, remains central to long-term prosperity because it measures how effectively labour and capital produce goods and services.
New Zealand's productivity challenges cannot be attributed to a single policy or period without examining investment, innovation, competition, skills, infrastructure and institutional performance.
The relevant issue is whether future policies can improve real incomes and create sustainable opportunities for productive businesses.
Grey argues that rebuilding local enterprise and strengthening communities should form part of that response.
The Health Debate and Personal Choice
Health policy also features in the interview, with Grey advocating a stronger emphasis on prevention, individual choice and community wellbeing.
She questions aspects of existing public health policy, including fluoridation and the reliance on pharmaceutical treatments.
These are Grey's political and personal positions, rather than established medical findings.
Public health interventions must be evaluated through evidence of effectiveness, safety, proportionality and their consequences for individual rights.
Community connection, access to nutritious food, physical activity and preventive healthcare can all contribute to better health outcomes.
However, claims that fluoridated drinking water is poisoning the public are not supported by the prevailing scientific consensus concerning appropriately controlled community water fluoridation.
Similarly, pharmaceutical treatments vary considerably in their benefits and risks and cannot reasonably be assessed as a single category.
The legitimate public-policy questions concern informed consent, transparent decision-making, access to reliable evidence and how health systems balance prevention with effective treatment.
These matters warrant informed debate rather than assumptions that either government policy or its critics must automatically be correct.
The Challenge Facing Smaller Political Parties
Grey also addresses the difficulties smaller political parties face in gaining public attention and parliamentary representation.
She criticises strategic voting campaigns that encourage people to support larger parties rather than the candidates or parties they genuinely prefer.
Her argument is that voters should be able to express their political preferences without being pressured by claims that supporting a smaller party is necessarily a wasted vote.
Under New Zealand's Mixed Member Proportional system, a party can qualify for proportional representation by winning at least five percent of the party vote or securing an electorate seat.
Grey identifies winning West Coast-Tasman as a potential pathway for her party to enter Parliament without meeting the nationwide five-percent threshold.
That pathway is constitutionally available, but its practical significance depends on the electorate result and the party's overall share of the vote.
She also raises concerns about the influence of political organisations, sponsors and media coverage on public perceptions of smaller parties.
Her criticisms of particular organisations and broadcasters represent her assessment of their political conduct and motivations. They should not be treated as established evidence of improper influence without further examination.
The broader question is how voters can obtain sufficient information about the full range of political alternatives available to them.
What Would Change Under an Outdoors and Freedom Government?
Towards the conclusion of the interview, Winckel asks Grey to summarise why voters should support her party.
Her response centres on political independence, community representation, individual freedom and practical local solutions.
She presents the Outdoors and Freedom Party as an alternative to established political structures and argues that its candidates would be more responsive to the concerns of ordinary citizens.
Grey identifies restoring public works capability, reducing unnecessary regulation, supporting small enterprise, strengthening communities and expanding public participation in decision-making as important priorities.
These proposals raise legitimate questions about New Zealand's economic and institutional direction.
But as with every political party, the ultimate test is implementation.
A promise to reduce bureaucracy requires identifying which regulations would change and what protections would remain.
A proposal to restore public infrastructure capability requires credible estimates of establishment costs, staffing, procurement and expected savings.
A commitment to direct democracy requires clear constitutional and legislative mechanisms.
And a programme intended to improve economic sovereignty must demonstrate how it would increase productivity, competition, household purchasing power and resilience.
Political independence alone does not guarantee effective government.
It is the quality of the policies, the evidence supporting them and the ability to deliver measurable results that ultimately matter.
A Conversation About Who New Zealand Is Governed For
The significance of this eLocal interview lies in the questions it raises about the relationship between citizens, communities and the institutions exercising power over them.
Flood management, public asset ownership, local government, economic regulation and democratic accountability may appear to be separate policy areas.
Yet they share a common issue: how decisions are made, who bears their costs and who receives their benefits.
Sue Grey argues that too much authority has become concentrated in institutions removed from the everyday realities of the people they serve.
Her proposed solutions deserve scrutiny, just as the policies of established parties deserve scrutiny.
New Zealanders should be able to examine those alternatives without having to accept every claim made by their advocates.
For eLocal, the central question remains whether the decisions made in Wellington and local council chambers are strengthening the country's productive capacity, protecting individual rights and improving the lives of ordinary people.
The full interview provides viewers with an opportunity to hear Grey explain her positions in her own words, including the experiences and concerns informing her campaign.
As New Zealand approaches the 2026 general election, the responsibility ultimately rests with voters to assess the evidence, question the promises and determine which representatives are most likely to serve their communities effectively.
Watch the Full Interview
eLocal Conversations | Mykeljon Winckel interviews Sue Grey
Recorded 14 October 2026 | Approximately 50 minutes
In this exclusive conversation, Sue Grey discusses her West Coast-Tasman election campaign, local government accountability, flooding and managed retreat, the proposed return of the Ministry of Works, public asset ownership, economic productivity, small-business regulation, healthcare, direct democracy and the challenges facing smaller political parties.
Watch the complete video interview accompanying this report.
Source
- Sue Grey, leader of the New Zealand Outdoors and Freedom Party, interviewed by Mykeljon Winckel for eLocal, 14 October 2026. Source: Microsoft Teams interview recording and supplied transcript.
Report by eLocal