COMMENT
You would not put big money on Rodney Hide becoming Act's leader, although it might be worth a small flutter.
But you can bet your bottom dollar on one thing. Every word Hide utters at this weekend's Act conference in Christchurch will be scrutinised for hidden meanings.
Moreover, what the pretender to Richard Prebble's job does not say during his 10-minute speaking slot may be more important than what he does say.
Will he give a ringing endorsement of his leader? If so, will that count for anything if Act's oblivion-beckoning slump in the polls persists?
The leadership is not on the formal conference agenda, nor is it likely to be raised during open debate. But it will hover in the background all weekend.
This is Act's 10th anniversary conference. That is already sufficient reason for party activists to chatter among themselves about where Act is heading and quietly ponder who might lead it into that future.
The party's poor standing in the polls has added the fear factor to those backroom debates. The polls will add bite to the contest for the party's vice-presidency, which sees a longstanding Hide backer among the four candidates for the post.
The polls also mean media coverage of the conference will concentrate on Prebble's leadership, with delegates vox-popped on whether his eight-year stint at Act's helm has been long enough.
The Prebble camp is resigned to that. But it has structured the conference programme to lift delegates out of a trough of self-destructive introspection and assure them the party can reinvent itself, despite its distinctive brand being diluted by a Don Brash-led National Party.
Act half-anticipated, half-feared it would suffer in the wake of Brash's attack on special treatment for Maori. It never expected its awful drubbing in the One News-Colmar Brunton poll, in which its support slumped to 1 per cent - way below the 5 per cent threshold.
Subsequent polls have the party registering between 1 per cent and 2.4 per cent, raising the spectre of it now falling victim to a self-fulfilling prophecy of a vote for Act being a wasted one.
Prebble is under huge pressure to reaffirm delegates' confidence in him when he delivers his keynote conference address.
However, his leadership is not under immediate threat. He retains huge respect within the party, not least because of his handling of the crises that buffeted Act last year, notably the fraud charges against Donna Awatere-Huata.
However, National's spectacular recovery invites an inevitable question: National took a big punt on Brash. That worked. Might a change of leader also work for Act?
Prebble has not helped his cause with last month's spectacular public relations disaster of his website poll gauging Act supporters' views on a merger with National.
It was presumably Prebble's intention to triumphantly announce there was an overwhelming rejection of the idea, thereby silencing those in National pushing for a merger. However, the poll was inevitably misinterpreted by some media as Act contemplating packing it in for good.
The publicity stunt backfired horribly just as Hide was making preliminary noises about the leadership.
The only solace for Prebble was that Hide's challenge was just as inept. Hide employed the old trick of failing to give unequivocal support to his leader, while his supporters in the wider party embarked on a whispering campaign to persuade other members a coup was under way.
It was the classic tactic of destabilising the leader by trying to turn talk of a leadership coup into another self-fulfilling prophecy.
Hide did not have the numbers and his coup fizzled before it had barely begun. But he may have had more backing than has been credited.
He has been ridiculed for having secured only one vote in Act's eight-strong caucus - his own. But some party sources suggest he might have had up to three votes amid signs that some of Prebble's colleagues are wavering.
The threat to Prebble posed by the combination of poor polls and Hide's ambition has since seen the party hierarchy try to buy Hide off by giving him the green light to go all out for the constituency vote in Epsom.
That concession is a u-turn on Act's previous insistence that its candidates concentrate solely on securing the all-important party vote in such seats.
Effectively the party is telling Hide that if he can do it in Epsom then the leadership might follow - one day.
Hide may have populist appeal. But his penchant for chasing headlines means he is not widely respected within a party whose adherents are more interested in pushing ideas than exposing scandals.
Prebble's supporters will no doubt stress to activists that Hide would divide the party rather than uniting it in its hour of crisis.
And though it might look as if the Grim Reaper is knocking on the door, they will also argue there are real grounds for optimism because National's rejuvenation suddenly makes a centre-right government a distinct possibility.
Act needed National to become electorally relevant before it, too, could become relevant.
That is the good news. Unfortunately for Act, National has become relevant under a leader who embodies Act's own message.
How does Act counter the Brash-driven drift of votes away from Act to National? It can hardly attack someone who talks its political language.
Act's new strategy is to argue that Brash needs a strong Act beside him to keep the rest of National honest.
Act also thinks there is a limit to how much Brash can squeeze it on the right, because National must pitch its message centrewards to counter Labour. Early evidence of that is Brash's attempt to shut down the superannuation debate this week by saying he would not raise the age of eligibility.
Act also believes it can move out of Brash's shadow by offering bigger tax cuts, tougher sentencing of criminals and more market, pro-consumer models for health and education.
Above all, Act needs fresh ideas. To stimulate thinking, this weekend's conference will hear from doyens of the not-so-new New Right - American publisher Steve Forbes, merchant banker Alan Gibbs, the Business Roundtable's Roger Kerr, Act co-founder Sir Roger Douglas and former Finance Minister Ruth Richardson.
It is a line-up designed to put the backbone back into Act. It is a line-up designed to persuade delegates that Act's credibility rests on the combined strength of its ideas - not the untested leadership qualities of one individual.
New Zealand
