Where Is ACT Heading?
ACT leader, Rodney Hide on the National party and ACT's future.
From Rodney's Blog
I always felt Don Brash was an anomaly for National. Just as was Ruth Richardson.
They never sat comfortably in National. And their vision for New Zealand and their policies were never supported.
They were both dumped ignominously.
National is a conservative party. It is not a party of reform or ideas.
It wins elections by cuddling Labour, adopting Labour policies and promising to adminster them with greater competence.
I don’t believe that is a criticism of National. I believe it to be just a fact.
In my lifetime the best party promoting freedom and prosperity was the Labour Party of the 1980s. The worst was National under Muldoon.
Don Brash has been dumped. New leader John Key is working assiduously to dump any vestige of policy vision or difference with Labour.
There is now clearly only one party standing up for freedom and prosperity. And that party is ACT.
ACT’s aim is to be the third party in Parliament. And not to be a tactical appendage to any party.
After all, in policy terms now, there’s not a lot of difference between National and Labour.
“There is no doubt that we are the party that stands up for individual freedom and personal responsibility and less government, and the National Party, in my view, never has."
From Rodney's Blog
I always felt Don Brash was an anomaly for National. Just as was Ruth Richardson.
They never sat comfortably in National. And their vision for New Zealand and their policies were never supported.
They were both dumped ignominously.
National is a conservative party. It is not a party of reform or ideas.
It wins elections by cuddling Labour, adopting Labour policies and promising to adminster them with greater competence.
I don’t believe that is a criticism of National. I believe it to be just a fact.
In my lifetime the best party promoting freedom and prosperity was the Labour Party of the 1980s. The worst was National under Muldoon.
Don Brash has been dumped. New leader John Key is working assiduously to dump any vestige of policy vision or difference with Labour.
There is now clearly only one party standing up for freedom and prosperity. And that party is ACT.
ACT’s aim is to be the third party in Parliament. And not to be a tactical appendage to any party.
After all, in policy terms now, there’s not a lot of difference between National and Labour.
“There is no doubt that we are the party that stands up for individual freedom and personal responsibility and less government, and the National Party, in my view, never has."
posted by Trevor Loudon at
12/04/2006 10:57:00 AM
12 Comments:
It's kind of hard to believe that ACT is the party of principle when the most obvious examples of publicity its been getting for the last year has been for celebrity dancing, weight loss, breaking election promises and army training.
heck, when one of ACT's own board members resigns because the leader has walked away from the party's core values.....
breaking election promises??
Which promise would that be?? That we would work with National?? Well, we tried, but you couldn't form a Government, back to three years in Opposition for us. We can work with whom we damn well please. If a new Muldoon became leader, would you expect us to work with him?
Publicity only for Dancing etc?? You are forgetting the stadium issue, where did National stand on that again? Hang on, no opinion, what a surprise. I'm glad Locke and Hide got together to stand against Trevor Mallard for the 70% of people against it. Where were National??
Aaron, National has lost and will never regain its monopoly on the pro freedom vote.
I would suggest that is because National has taken it for granted and often treated the principles of individual liberty with contempt.
With John Key hell bent on steering National to the soggy centre, your Party will start to lose many of its more principled supporters and voters
If we work intelligently, ACT will pick up some of that support.
Epsom and Rakaia will prove to the disenfranchised pro freedom voters that ACT is serious and aims to be a permanent third force in NZ politics.
I think you need to accept Aaron that National will need coalition partners and ACT is the best option if you want a freer country.
I would certainly prefer a National ACT coalition government, to a Labour/ACT one.
For that to occur, National needs to get serious about who it wants to govern with.
We'll look after our side.
What is happening to have ACT collect enough votes to be a viable 3rd party in Parliament?
Has National learned nothing from it's dismal result in '02? It stood for nothing and was roundly trounced. Its huge improvement under Brash shows that oppositions only have a chance of winning if they show a real, clear alternative. Otherwise why not stick with Helen if carbon taxes, Maori PC pandering and the no-nuke state sponsored religion is what you want?
Hey Trevor,
Great Blog, A feast of information without being swamped by unsupported opinion.
Have you ever been involved with playing Squash ??
If you have you will know that much effort is expended keeping control of the center court.
You might be facing the walls and whacking the ball into the corners but you sure as hell keep your backside in the middle, your elbows in the opposition's ribs and if you stand on his or it's feet, well thats just one more point towards victory..
If you get hit by the ball in the middle of the back, well you shouldn't have been there..
You can see the similarity with inter party political games - only the players are much more desperate and their objectives are sooo.... personal.
There is no cold beer after a shower and a promise of a rematch.
No, not in Helen's world, if she looks even a litte bit like loosing there is an urgent message out to change the umpire.
Back to the point of the comment: You know that Key MUST play in center court or loose.
If you want Act to have some space on the floor you will have to book your own game time or play in another clubhouse.
National should stick to trying to win an election rather than attack their only friend on the political spectrum.
They wonder why people like Dunne and Peters feel more at home with Labour, which is pretty sad. If National hates losing their grip on the pro-freedom votes then they must work harder to prove that they are a credible alternative to Labour. At the moment I just don't have confidence that Key has the bite to match his bark.
David. Had National not been so consistently wimpish over the years, the political "centre" would be no where near as socialist as it is now.
National under Mr Key has already given ACT a huge amount of space, which we intend to occupy. That is the low tax, small government constituency that National was formed to represent.
I understand why National thinks it has to be so dripping wet. I just don't agree that National had to abandon its founding principles so readily in the first place.
I don't intend to comment much on National. I wish the Party well and recognise its many good points.
ACT however is an independent party with a principled agenda that will work with whoever is most willing to help us implement our policies.
I think that is a winning formula.
All good points Trev. I agree re National. It is tough to have them as our alles when many of them are in political denial about their beliefs and values. A new leader changes everything, and I hope that both parties can work on fixing the gulf between them and towards victory in 08.
Awesome factionalism on the right :)
Nothing to get excited about Cameron, we all know who the real enemy is.
Heh indeed. The right might squabble and throw a few handbags about but the left are the true masters of holding grudges and fighting bitterly.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home