Editorial: Roy right - Act must return to roots or die

Heather Roy. Photo / Brett Phibbs

Opinion

Amid all the complaints of bullying, breaches of security and disloyalty, a fundamental cause for the dumping of the Act deputy leader Heather Roy has tended to be overlooked.

This was a confrontation over the direction of the party, which pitted Mrs Roy and Sir Roger Douglas against the party leader, Rodney Hide, and its two other MPs, John Boscawen and David Garrett.

The victors were those ploughing the more pragmatic and populist course. In terms of Act's future, however, Mrs Roy was right when she insisted it must return to its ideological roots.

Currently, the party's five MPs owe their seats in Parliament to Mr Hide's victory in Epsom.

With polls indicating its present level of support runs at about 2 per cent, down from the 3.65 per cent of the vote it received at the last election, it is tempting to assume that will also be Act's only viable lifeline next year.

But this cannot be taken for granted. Even before this week's hugely damaging ructions, the party had badly blotted its copybook. Mr Hide's self-confessed "mistakes" over his taxpayer-funded overseas travel with his girlfriend totally undermined his popular appeal as a perk-buster.

And he hardly endeared himself to Aucklanders with his attempted bulldozing of the Super City legislation.

The Prime Minister may well be having second thoughts about whether it is worth going out of his way to save Act. Certainly, he is not beholden to it, thanks to relationships forged with the Maori Party and United Future.

It is possible, as Mrs Roy suggests, that Act's factional disarray could persuade John Key to put up a strong National Party candidate in Epsom next year.

He may decide, indeed, that National supporters will no longer tolerate the accommodation with Mr Hide, and that National's party vote in the electorate could suffer. Further out, changes to MMP could, in any case, deprive Act of the benefit of winning the seat.

Mrs Roy and Sir Roger advocate abandoning the reliance on Epsom and aiming to garner more than the 5 per cent needed to meet the threshold for getting MPs into Parliament. Current polling suggests Mr Hide's approach is unlikely to achieve that.

The pair believe a return to the party's founding principles, based around free enterprise, individual freedom and low taxes, will. In that respect, National's drift towards the centre of the political spectrum is an undoubted benefit.

There is ground to be occupied. This was denied Act by Mr Key's predecessor, Don Brash, who co-opted many of its policies on crime and race.

Equally, a restating of its ideological base would help Act differentiate itself from National and avoid the ballot-box punishment usually dealt to minor support parties.

Underlining a more purist Act identity must become the thrust of the party's MPs over the next 15 months. Clearly, Mr Boscawen, the new deputy leader, has a key role to play.

Mrs Roy's presence among four male MPs carried its own appeal to female voters, in particular. Mr Boscawen brings a diligence and a ready fit with the party's self-help credo.

But if the party is to survive with anything like the present number of MPs, he must also supply ideas. So, too, must Mr Garrett, who now holds the casting vote in the party caucus. More must come from him than the extremely conservative law and order agenda that has pitched him into Mr Hide's populist camp.

Act has defied predictions of oblivion before. But if it does not rediscover its founding convictions and achieve a convincing unity of policy and purpose, the end of the road may, indeed, be near.

The party has two strikes against it - Mr Hide's ministerial blundering and the messy dumping of Mrs Roy. If it does not adopt a new approach, the electorate might well decide it is three strikes - and out.