Monday, 19 September 2005

Did ACT really win?

GMan asked the question, "Did ACT really win?" It got me thinking--a dangerous thing.

I think the answer has to be: "No." ACT has lost seven MPs out of nine, a huge loss by anyone's standards (although the loss of ACT's conservative wing is long overdue, and will perhaps follow this loss). But there's something in the numbers that shows, I think, a greater loss, and which Rodney's against-the-odds victory in Epsom has somewhat obscured.

Rodney received 13,661 electorate votes to win the Epsom seat, 44% of the total votes cast. A tremendous personal achievement, and a tribute to him and his enthusiastic team in the face of naysayers everywhere, including myself. He and his team has earned the right to gloat (feel free to do so below).

But across the country, with all its profile and all its advertising and money, ACT itself received only 31,074 party votes, and of those only 1,078 were from Epsom. Compare that to Rodney's 13,661. Rodney's personal support in Epsom then was just under half that of his party's support across the country, and even in Epsom--awash with ACT campaigners--the ACT party vote failed to even reach the 5% 'threshold.'

So Rodney won, but ACT lost.

This wasn't just the collapse of the minor party vote that all minor parties experienced; this suggests to me at least that the support for Rodney is largely personal support, rather than support for ACT's principles and policies, and the support for ACT's principles and policies themselves is largely down to its rump. Who after all could even name some of those policies, or the principles?

What that means for ACT's future then is unclear, but it seems to me that if it does want to pick itself up then it needs to become principle- and policy-driven, rather than being just another of Parliament's 'attack dogs.' That Rodney is the man who would need to drive the party's change of direction is perhaps an interesting irony.


  1. I would say that this is the perfect time for Libz to join ACT wholesale and grab it by the scruff on the neck while the Conservative wing is in chaos and move it in the direction you want.Form a Libz caucus within ACT and do the changnging from the inside while ACT is still in parliment and its two MP's are both Liberals/libz to the best degree availible in the current may never get another chance as

  2. Why do you say "That Rodney is the man who would need to drive the party's change of direction is perhaps an interesting irony."?

  3. How much credibility do you have left pc after having predicted and read the numbers for ACT in Epsom completely wrong? How much faith should we put in this analysis??

  4. I think PC's right...

    Roger Douglas said a similar thing a day or so ago, as did Lookinginnz and Cathy Odgers.

    Purge the conservatives, merge with libz and make it a real "liberal" party. Both Rodney and Heather are true classical liberals c.f. some of the others (whom I still have a lot of respect for).

    I think the election result was shit for the left, but might have been just the right thing for ACT.

    ACT should be pulling votes from both the liberal left and the liberal right. There is no point in having two classical liberal/libertarian parties competing for the same vote.

  5. In the last year or so, Act has BECOME Rodney, don't you think? For the average voter, who else is visible? It's tirades rather than policy -- not a 'party' but a person. And one tarred with the brush, rarely contested, of the 'far right.' Maybe the party can find a way to become less personality driven and more clearly articulate its policies over the next year or so -- before the snap election. As an American, I have to say, Act really looks pretty mild, hardly 'far right' at all. So I'm always surprised at how well the mud of that attack sticks, even in this (often unwittingly) socialist country.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.