Top cancer doctor says ACT's big cancer hospital plan won't work

One of New Zealand's leading cancer doctors has called ACT's plan to build a national cancer centre "magical thinking" and a fantasy. Professor Chris Jackson, who teaches cancer medicine at the University of Otago, says the party's plan has problems with its funding, its location, and its priorities (RNZ).

ACT's policy is called "Beyond Tomorrow – A Starship for Cancer." It would build a national cancer centre with sites in Auckland and Christchurch, based on an idea from broadcaster Paul Henry (ACT Party; RNZ). The party says it would cost around $2 billion to build, but the final price tag would be worked out later through a formal planning process (ACT Party).

To pay for it, ACT says it would use a mix of government money, private investment, and charitable donations. The party also wants to set up a foundation to attract donations and remove the current $33,333 limit on tax credits people can claim for giving to charity (ACT Party; RNZ; ACT Party).

Jackson told RNZ that this funding approach does not match how cancer centres overseas actually work. He said those centres are usually funded by private patients paying for their own treatment, not by donations. He also said the ongoing cost of running cancer care runs to hundreds of millions of dollars a year, so relying on donations year after year is not realistic (RNZ).

Jackson also said putting all cancer treatment in one or two big centres is the wrong approach. He said it would draw specialist staff and equipment away from smaller regions, making it harder for people outside the main centres to get treatment close to home (RNZ).

New Zealand has one of the highest rates of late cancer diagnosis among similar countries, Jackson said. People also struggle to get access to cancer diagnoses in the first place. Rather than building a big cancer hospital, he said the government should prioritise a lung cancer screening programme, because catching lung cancer early would meaningfully improve cure rates (RNZ).

Jackson is married to Labour MP Rachel Brooking (RNZ).

The broader context here is a familiar tension in New Zealand health policy: the choice between building something big and eye-catching, or spending the same money on smaller, community-level services that doctors say would help patients sooner. ACT's plan relies on private investment and donations, but Jackson says those funding sources do not suit the ongoing running costs of cancer care, which do not go away.

The regional access question matters too. A centralised model, in Jackson's view, would pull specialist staff out of the regions and make the late-diagnosis problem worse, not better. A lung cancer screening programme would cost a fraction of the $2 billion ACT has proposed for its cancer centre, and oncologists have long argued that earlier detection saves lives.

This debate is likely to continue if ACT keeps pushing the policy. The party has framed "Beyond Tomorrow" as a long-term investment. Jackson has reframed it as money that would be better spent on proven, immediate steps like screening. His marriage to a Labour MP is worth noting, but his clinical arguments stand on their own.

ACT has not yet responded to Jackson's criticisms in detail. The party's policy documents say the next step is the formal planning process, which means the $2 billion figure is a rough estimate and the funding model is a statement of intent, not a final plan.