ACT wants to build New Zealand's first national cancer hospital
The ACT Party wants to build New Zealand's first national cancer hospital. The party has adopted the idea from new candidate Paul Henry and published it as official policy on 21 August 2026 RNZ.
The plan is called a "Starship for Cancer," named after Auckland's Starship children's hospital. It would have two sites — one in Auckland and one in Christchurch. ACT says it would cost about $2 billion to build. Henry first suggested the idea in July, saying he wanted a world-class cancer hospital in New Zealand. He told RNZ he announced it "on the fly" and expected party leaders to discourage him, but they thought he might be onto something.
The policy was published on 21 August 2026 in an article called "Beyond Tomorrow" by Henry, on ACT's official website ACT.
ACT would pass a law to set up a charity, called the National Cancer Centre Foundation, to run the hospitals. The money to build them would come from several places: private investors, donations, existing government health spending, and other private money "where appropriate," according to ACT's policy document.
To attract big donations, ACT would remove a cap on tax credits for charitable giving. Right now, there is a limit on how much tax relief people can get when they donate to charity. ACT wants to remove that limit so large donors can claim more back. This puts ACT at odds with Revenue Minister Simon Watts, who has said there are no plans to change the cap. National MP Greg Fleming has been more open, saying work was underway to "fix" it. The disagreement between Fleming and Watts shows this is a live debate inside the coalition government.
The University of Auckland's cancer department and the Christchurch Cancer Foundation would help build the business cases for the two sites. Health New Zealand, the government agency that runs public hospitals, would be a "major customer" of the new centre. ACT expects Health New Zealand to move its existing cancer services in Auckland and Christchurch into the new buildings. That means the government's ongoing cost would come from paying to use the facilities, not from owning them outright.
ACT's policy document also suggests that patients from overseas could pay to use the centre, and that revenue could help cover its running costs.
Henry has spoken about the fundraising in ambitious terms. In July, he said a group of wealthy New Zealanders could easily contribute about $10 billion, with the rest borrowed as an investment in the country's future. That $10 billion figure was Henry's own, before the policy was written up. ACT's formal policy document later put the building cost at about $2 billion. The difference reflects how the idea changed between Henry's July comments and the party's later costing.
The idea also has a political back-story. Not building a dedicated cancer hospital like Starship has been described as a great political regret of Henry's friend, former prime minister John Key Stuff. Henry's connection to Key gives the proposal a history that reaches beyond ACT and touches National's own time in government.
The funding model mixes several sources: private investors, donations, redirected government health spending, and private capital. Removing the donation tax-credit cap is the main way ACT hopes to unlock large charitable gifts. What the policy does not yet answer is whether Treasury and the Health Ministry would accept the structure ACT proposes, and whether Health New Zealand would agree to move its existing services into a standalone cancer charity's buildings.
ACT's wider team gives some context. The party's website lists David Seymour as leader, MP for Epsom, and Deputy Prime Minister; Nicole McKee as deputy leader and Minister of Courts; and Brooke van Velden as MP for Tāmaki and Minister of Internal Affairs ACT. The site also has recent articles by Cameron Luxton on Mount Maunganui businesses and Todd Stephenson on genetic discrimination, showing the party is releasing policy steadily ahead of the 2026 election.
The cancer hospital announcement is different from those smaller posts. It is a multi-billion-dollar building commitment, with its own proposed law, a clear fundraising strategy, and a direct challenge to coalition partners on tax policy.
The wider question is whether the plan can hold up when people start asking hard questions about the money. ACT needs National to engage with the donation tax-credit issue that Watts has so far ruled out, and it needs Treasury and health officials to accept a funding model that has not been tested in New Zealand before.
