Deborah Coddington: Roy's insistence she's right has brought Act to its knees

Heather Roy. Photo / Bay of Plenty Times

I envied Heather Roy when we were Act MPs. She was so single-minded, sure of herself and couldn't be swayed by rational arguments. I admired that quality.

I faffed around, listening to opposing theories before I made up my mind, sometimes changing my view.

I guess it's the journalist in me - old habits die hard and I still bore people rigid with Ralph Waldo Emerson's quote: "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines."

But Roy's foolish single-mindedness in trying to be Act's leader has been her undoing, and, this week, has been a disaster for Act. I doubt it will claw its way back now.

Act's history is punctuated with obituaries but the party wasn't threatened by a renewed and refreshed New Zealand First and the comeback kid - Winston Peters.

Instead, at Tuesday's caucus, Roy was dumped by her colleagues and replaced by John Boscawen. Her sole supporter was Roger Douglas.

There's no lonelier place than the caucus no-friends seat. I know because leader Rodney Hide and Roy have put me there.

Roy, a Cabinet minister on a huge salary, had to take her "support person" and lawyer to caucus. Bad move number one. (Actually, bad move number I've-lost-count because Roy has been misbehaving since she started undermining Hide months ago.)

This wasn't just any lawyer; it was Stephen Franks, former Act MP, former Hide foe, National Party member and candidate at the 2008 election.

Franks, instead of keeping his mouth shut, then went on National Radio on Thursday morning and accused Hide of taking defence papers from Roy's office. The foolishness of all this is truly mindblowing.

Can you imagine Bill English running to ministerial services to pimp on John Key if sensitive files were mislaid? Then allowing his "support person" to tell the nation?

But Roy alone should not shoulder the blame. Act made a mistake when it accepted the baubles of office, ministerial portfolios and melded into the bosom of National. The temptation for Hide to implement legislation which had burned holes in his little pockets since 1996 was huge, but he should have resisted.

While he obsessed over the Auckland local government merger, the party lost sight of what it stands for.

On August 3, David Garrett opposed private property rights when he asked the Attorney-General: "Will he commit to prohibiting Maori owners from charging other New Zealanders for access to beaches? If not, will he at least limit the amount they can charge to $5?" One could imagine the uproar if Garrett, a lawyer, was prohibited by the Government from charging "other New Zealanders" more than $5 for his services.

So now Hide has to try and lead a deeply divided team. I don't know why Act brought Roger Douglas back to Parliament in the first place.

Not that he's not excellent in select committees, at nutting out policy and bringing in money for the Act coffers, but the animosity between him and Hide was never going to heal. It's like going back to a bad marriage.

Get one thing straight. I carry no personal admiration for either Hide or Roy. Both shafted me when I was in Parliament, but that's what politicians do - all of them are at it, you just have to wear it or, as I did, get out.

More fool me for not seeing the knives coming but I don't waste time going round with a face like a dropped pie. As a wise friend once told me, the best revenge is living well.

Roy and Hide are good MPs but unable to see their faults. Hide can't lead because he wants to be liked by everyone. Roy's insistence she's right when evidence clearly shows otherwise has brought the party to its knees.

This isn't the end of Act's troubles by a long shot. For months, sources within Act and National have leaked details of personal issues dogging Roy, affecting her ability to handle her (now stripped) portfolios.

Why else is Franks the lawyer being so protective of his client, Hide being so guarded and Michael Crozier, Act's president, behaving like an undertaker anxious to embalm the corpse?