Background

Software now underpins many aspects of our society's organisation. It runs our phones, businesses, schools, hospitals, councils, government departments, and our critical infrastructure. It is already a core infrastructure component for our economy and way of life.

A large share of government software and cloud services procurement is tied to multinational vendors. This growing dependence on foreign software vendors represents a significant but often hidden import cost, which is expensive in foreign currency and balance of payments terms.  Effectively, it requires substantial primary exports, such as meat, wool, and timber to offset the ongoing costs of these software licenses. It also creates the risk of foreign governments restricting access to critical technologies, or of overseas vendors changing pricing, licensing, support, or availability on terms that do not serve New Zealand’s interests.

With this in mind, there is a better way to manage government technology.

Open-source software is software whose source code is freely available to use, study, modify, and share. It is developed by global communities, universities, governments, and volunteers who are passionate about building for the collective good. Open-source software powers much of the modern internet and artificial intelligence (AI) space, underpining many technologies used every day, including the Linux operating system, the Android Open Source Project, Chromium-based browsers (such as Chrome), Firefox, databases like PostgreSQL, and numerous other systems.

Most New Zealanders already rely on open-source software for everyday use, whether they realise it or not. The question is not whether open source works, but whether we will choose to fully utilise it. The Freedom Party asks whether New Zealand should continue to pay high, ongoing costs for proprietary software licences when we can build on open-source solutions
instead.

Open Source First is also a vertical integration strategy. Rather than renting essential digital capabilities indefinitely from overseas vendors, the government should build, own, or control more of the software infrastructure it relies on. This does not mean the government must build everything itself; rather, it means the government should retain strategic control, use open
standards, and invest in local capability wherever practical.

Stats NZ reported that New Zealand businesses recorded $14.5 billion in sales of published software and IT services in 2023. New Zealand already possesses a significant software and IT services sector. Open Source First seeks to pivot and build on that local capability rather than defaulting to overseas proprietary platforms when open and reusable alternatives can meet the
need.

For these reasons, the Freedom Party believes it is time for the government to take a hard look at the cost, ownership, and resilience of New Zealand’s technology infrastructure.

An Open Source First Policy

The Freedom Party advocates an Open Source First approach to software procurement. This does not mean a full moratorium on licensing commercial software across government, but rather that whenever a new project is proposed and a new software system is needed, decision- makers should first assess whether a suitable open-source solution can be adapted to meet
requirements before purchasing proprietary software licences.

Where an open-source solution can be adapted to meet the software requirements at comparable quality and risk, it should be preferred. When gathering information on the costs of different options, those proposing external contracting should provide clear evidence that paid proprietary alternatives can meet the requirements significantly better than adapting open-
source software.

How Open Source First Would Work

The Freedom Party would introduce an Open Source First rule for central government technology procurement.
 

This means that before a public agency buys a new software system, it must first check whether a suitable open-source option exists. Open Source First does not mean banning commercial software; it means commercial software must prove that it offers better long-term value than an open-source option.

When the government compares software options, it should consider the full whole-of-life cost, not just the upfront price. This includes licence fees, subscriptions, support, training, cybersecurity, hosting, upgrades, migration costs, and the cost of eventually leaving the vendor.

Open Source First does not mean agencies are left to manage important systems without support. Where open-source software is used for important public services, the government will still arrange appropriate support, maintenance, cybersecurity checks, hosting, and service agreements. Money saved on licence fees can instead be redirected to pay qualified New
Zealand providers to keep systems secure, reliable, and well-maintained, with clear responsibility for fixing problems when they arise.

If an agency chooses commercial software rather than a suitable open-source option, it must formally explain why. Valid reasons may include security, privacy, reliability, specialist features, support, service continuity, or value for money.

Software developed mainly with public funds should be reusable across government wherever practical. If one council, school, hospital, or government agency pays to build a system that solves a common problem, other public bodies should be able to adapt and reuse it rather than paying repeatedly for the same type of software.

‘Freedom’  would also support greater use of open standards so government data remains portable and protected against vendor lock-in. Public agencies should not be trapped in expensive systems simply because leaving a vendor has become too difficult or costly.

This approach would begin with central government procurement and could then be extended, where practical, to Crown entities, councils, schools, hospitals, and other publicly funded organisations with shared software needs.

‘Freedom’ recognises that open source will not be the best option in every case. Software decisions must still carefully weigh cybersecurity, privacy, reliability, support, staff skills, migration risk, and continuity of service. The purpose of Open Source First is not to replace one rigid system with another, but to ensure the government properly compares its options and chooses the solution that delivers the best long-term value for taxpayers.

Implementation and Assessment

To make Open Source First practical, the Freedom Party supports a clear assessment process for government agencies. A central government technology team should provide guidance to agencies when they are considering major software purchases. This team would not require agencies to use open source in every case; its role would be to help agencies compare open-source and proprietary options properly before public money is committed. Agencies should use a standard assessment template that considers whole-of-life cost, cybersecurity, privacy, reliability, support, staff skills, migration risk, data portability, vendor lock-
in, and long-term value for money.

Agencies should be mindful of user & management resistance to change, and familiarity with existing tools. Creation and sharing of transition strategies will be important, especially for core productivity applications.

Open Source First should begin with selected pilot projects, especially where risks are low and benefits are clear. This would allow the government to build experience, identify savings, develop local capability, and avoid unnecessary disruption. Procurement guidance should also make clear that open-source systems used for important public services still require proper support arrangements. This includes service agreements, maintenance, security patching, hosting, backup plans, and clear responsibility for resolving issues.

The goal is not to create another layer of bureaucracy, but to ensure that agencies ask the right questions before committing taxpayers to expensive, long-term software contracts.

Keeping More Wealth in New Zealand

The Freedom Party notes that when an organisation purchases proprietary software, much of the expenditure leaves New Zealand in the form of licensing fees and subscriptions. Key examples for the Government include the Microsoft Cloud, Software and Services Agreement (MCSSA), the Amazon Web Services Cloud Services Agreement (ACSA)—both authorised by the Department of Internal Affairs—and other all-of-government ICT procurement arrangements.

When procurement is designed properly, open-source adoption can allow more technology expenditure to remain within New Zealand through:

● New Zealand software companies and developers
● System administrators
● Cybersecurity specialists
● Integration projects
● Training and education
● Local hosting and cloud infrastructure

Open source gives New Zealand more opportunity to direct technology spending towards local support, development, cybersecurity, training, integration, and hosting. Instead of locking public money into ongoing licence fees paid indefinitely to major overseas vendors such as Amazon or Microsoft, organisations can invest in local capabilities and expertise to own more of their systems locally, reducing long-term dependency costs.

For the Government, this means less money going offshore, reduced dependence on large technology companies, and greater technological sovereignty over New Zealand’s public-sector systems. If government agencies require outside assistance to adapt open-source technologies, procurement settings should give New Zealand businesses a fair opportunity to provide that
support.

In the long term, this will create a skilled, resilient workforce and sharpen our domestic technical capabilities, enabling New Zealand to stand independently alongside global tech hubs.

Transparency and Public Ownership

The Freedom Party believes that government-held information should be managed for the public good, not locked away for the convenience of vendors or agencies. Where information has been created, collected, or funded by taxpayers, it should be accessible, portable, and reusable wherever practical, while still protecting privacy, security, commercial sensitivity, and
the national interest.

Any publicly funded software should, wherever practical, be based on open standards and open systems that can be audited as needed. Using and adapting open-source software enables more thorough and independent security reviews, greater transparency into how the software operates, and long-term access to public information that may be requested under the Official Information Act.

Citizens should not be put at risk of losing access to public data simply because a vendor changes its pricing, licensing model, or product roadmap. Using open systems reduces the risk of vendor lock-in clauses and ensures that governments
retain full control over their digital infrastructure.

New Zealand already has NZGOAL-SE, which provides guidance for agencies that choose to release government software under free and open-source licences. However, NZGOAL-SE does not require agencies to consider open source before purchasing proprietary software. Open Source First would fill that gap by creating a procurement rule that requires agencies to assess credible open-source options before committing public money to proprietary systems. Better Value for Taxpayers. 

A primary goal of this policy is to make public spending much more efficient and to achieve better value for money.  The New Zealand Government is projected to spend approximately $13 billion on technology over the next five years. Government estimates suggest that improved procurement and coordination could save up to $3.9 billion over that period [1]. Major professional services firms have also described current public-sector IT spending as significant, with spending projected to
approach $1 billion in the relevant fiscal year [2]. The current Government has recognised that digital procurement is a major cost issue and has moved towards a more centralised approach through the Digitising Government Programme and the Government Digital Delivery Agency. 

‘Freedom’ supports greater scrutiny of technology spending. However, Open Source First goes further by changing what agencies
must consider before public money is spent. It would require the government to test credible open-source options, open standards, reuse, long-term costs, and vendor lock-in risk before committing to proprietary systems.

At the same time, industry forecasts indicate that New Zealand’s public cloud spend will nearly double from around NZ$5 billion in 2024 to NZ$9.6 billion by 2028 [3].

For ‘Freedom’,  these figures prompt an obvious question: Why are we not systematically evaluating open-source alternatives before committing billions of dollars to overseas vendors?

‘Freedom’ argues that software procurement should be subject to the same scrutiny as any other public procurement. If a bridge, road, or building project could save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars by switching to an alternative provider, the government would demand that the option be thoroughly investigated.

‘Freedom’ further proposes that software developed primarily with public funding should be released under an approved open-source licence by default, unless there is a compelling security, privacy, or national-interest reason not to. This is particularly relevant for councils, schools, hospitals, and government agencies, which often have similar functional needs yet currently purchase or develop separate systems at significant public cost.

International Examples

International evidence shows that New Zealand would not be alone in adopting an Open Source First approach. Several governments have already made similar changes for the same reasons we are proposing here: lower costs, reduced dependence on a single vendor, and stronger digital sovereignty.

● Switzerland: The EMBAG law (referred to in English as EMOTA) requires the Federal
Administration to publish its own software as open source, subject to legal and security
limitations [4].
● Germany: The Schleswig-Holstein state government is moving thousands of computers
away from Microsoft Windows and Office, switching to Linux and LibreOffice instead [5].
● Denmark: The Ministry for Digital Affairs has been piloting or transitioning toward
LibreOffice as part of a digital-sovereignty push, while cities like Copenhagen and Aarhus
have reportedly considered or announced similar moves away from Microsoft dependency
[5].
● France: France has a long history of public-sector LibreOffice adoption, including
extensive use across several ministries and the French Gendarmerie [6].

New Zealand does not have to start from scratch. These examples show that the shift works effectively at different scales and across different political systems.

Artificial Intelligence Changes the Equation

Historically, or as one might say & the challenge with using open-source software was adapting it to specific use cases and existing infrastructure. Organisations often avoided this route because it required deeper specialist programming skills.
With the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs), the barriers to adapting internal solutions are rapidly falling. Modern AI tools are making it significantly easier for companies and individuals to understand, modify, integrate, and further improve open-source software.

AI can reduce the cost of adapting open-source software, but this advantage should not depend entirely on overseas frontier models. New Zealand should support open-weight and locally deployable AI tools so that our ability to build and maintain software is not controlled entirely from offshore. This significantly strengthens the case for the New Zealand government to investigate the adoption of open-source software and local ownership of software systems. 

‘Freedom’ believes New Zealand now has an opportunity to build capability rather than dependence on private companies, particularly overseas ones. Recent restrictions and staged rollouts of frontier AI models show that access to critical digital technologies can be shaped by foreign governments, export controls, and national-security decisions. New Zealand should
assume that access to overseas technology will always be neutral, permanent, or unconditional.

This strengthens the case for building local capability, supporting open-weight and locally deployable AI tools, and reducing unnecessary dependence on overseas technology providers.

Policy Commitments

‘Freedom’  will:
● Introduce an Open Source First rule for central government technology purchasing,
ensuring agencies assess suitable open-source options before buying proprietary
software.
● Require the government to compare the full long-term cost of software, including licence
fees, subscriptions, support, training, cybersecurity, hosting, upgrades, and migration and
exit costs.
● Require agencies to explain why they choose proprietary software over a suitable open-
source option.
● Support stronger adoption of open standards so government data remains portable and
public agencies are less likely to become trapped in vendor lock-in.
● Encourage the reuse of software developed mainly with public money across government
wherever practical, so taxpayers do not pay multiple times for similar systems.
● Build New Zealand’s local technology capability by giving local software, cybersecurity,
hosting, training, and support providers greater opportunity to work on public-sector
systems.
● Ensure Open Source First does not override privacy, cybersecurity, or national-interest
requirements. Sensitive data, critical systems, and continuity of service must remain fully
protected.

Our Vision

We want New Zealand to become a nation that expects publicly funded software to deliver maximum value for taxpayers by being open, reusable, and adaptable wherever practical. When software is funded by the public, the government should avoid repeatedly buying the same solutions, locking agencies into expensive vendor contracts, or paying perpetual licence fees
when better open alternatives can be developed, shared, and reused across the public sector. We want ministers, chief executives, councillors, and board members to ask a simple question before approving major software expenditure:

Why are we sending this money offshore before properly testing whether a credible open-
source alternative exists?

Open source should be the first port of call for investigation, not the last resort.

The goal is to deliver better value for taxpayers, greater economic resilience, stronger local capability, improved transparency, and digital sovereignty for New Zealand.

References
1. Government Digital Changes Bring Big Savings (Beehive Release)
2. KPMG New Zealand Budget Insights (Digitising Government)
3. Spark Research / Reseller Cloud Capabilities Study
4. Switzerland Federal Administration EMBAG Law Guidance
5. The Record Media: Denmark Digital Independence & Schleswig-Holstein Shift
6. Linux Journal: Libre Office Drives Europe