Sir Robert Jones, with deputy leader Janie Pearce, founded the NZ Party. Photo / NZ Herald
Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum and the Act Party's demise has created one.
In 1983, a political vacuum was filled by the New Zealand Party, which promoted "freedom and prosperity". Founded by Sir Robert Jones, in 1984 it polled 12.2 per cent but got no seats under first-past-the-post.
Twenty-seven years on, the NZ Party's founder is still cheering from the sidelines for New Zealanders' right to run their own lives. Sir Robert believes the Act Party is dead.
"My guesstimate is that about 10 per cent of the population has libertarian views, thus there's a place for such a party in an MMP system to arise with fresh faces," Sir Robert says.
"A libertarian does not believe it is his or anyone else's business if you want to marry your horse. John Banks would say it is the State's business, as indeed the State makes it, with the existing anti-bestial laws.
"A libertarian believes in a small state. John believes in a social and economic proactive state. While both are legitimate political positions, the fact is that Act was formed as a libertarian party and John has no place in it.
"It is thus fatally tainted and should wind up and allow a new, true libertarian party to arise."
This week, the Herald editorialised on the need for a new liberal party. Already, at least four Act online discussion groups have been vigorously canvassing this likelihood. Now Banks, the sole Act MP, has his hands overflowing with ministerial portfolios, and his chances of rebuilding the party and reining in these breakaway groups look slim.
Even Banks' supporters doubt he can embrace Act's founding principles (which, mysteriously, were deleted temporarily from its website): "That individuals are the rightful owners of their own lives and therefore have inherent rights and responsibilities; the purpose of government is to protect those rights not to assume such responsibilities."
So, can another Act-type party be rebuilt? (I've heard Sir Roger Douglas is already scribbling away on the backs of Air New Zealand sickbags.)
This week, an insider blogged that Act latterly believed the best way to effect change was by being the small partner to a governing party. To that end, focus groups asked "likely targets" what they thought, then repeated the answers back to them to try to get votes.
That's totally unprincipled. Voters' needs change constantly and a party which stands for nothing inevitably falls. Act used to be proudly independent, there to keep the two old parties honest.
Then there's been the so-called "blandification" of Act: "party poopers" was banned from a press release during the Rugby World Cup and Brash's core principles speech was censored for being "hysterical and ranty". Oh dear, horses weren't to be frightened. Act has suffocated to death under a blanket of respectability.
Back when Rodney Hide was notorious for perk-busting, I remember members at conferences getting a little upset at his headline-grabbing. Richard Prebble said that sometimes Hide bit the postman instead of the burglar, but that's the price you pay for having the most effective opposition MP in the House.
Gerry Eckhoff led the charge against the Fart Tax. Muriel Newman held Steve Maharey to account on welfare. Stephen Franks got up people's noses doing God's work on parole hearings and victims' rights.
In 2003, when Trevor Mallard closed a record 96 schools, we opened a website, SaveOurSchools, organised a march on Parliament and led a campaign until he backed down and called a moratorium. And Heather Roy passed Act's only private member's bill, giving students choice in unions. Act was known for punching above its weight, the party of policies not politics.
Now it's become completely politics, plagued by infighting.
A new party should dump the liberal moniker - Act at its best was never a liberal party.
Voters may not understand liberal, but they know what choice, freedom, prosperity and "own my own life" means.
Sir Robert's final observation: "Banks is a true-blue Nat. Paul Goldsmith is at heart an Act libertarian. If they swapped parties, we'd have a philosophically pure situation with Epsom's electorate and (de facto) list MPs."