I watched this report on TV3’s The Nation this morning.
It contains some interesting comments about the ACT Party and the toxicity of John Banks’ involvement, or, as the piece says, ACT’s narrowed focus in winning Epsom as their only hope of ‘survival’ and Banks’ ability to resemble a team player while ‘looking out for number one’. Worth watching.
It must be gut-wrenching for former ACT Party activists like the savvy Cathy Odgers to watch the decay. Or perhaps by now she’s experiencing a different ‘stage’ of grief, and practising detachment? Very Zen.
I briefly had cause this week to remember apprentice political assassin Jordan Williams and his role in Don Brash’s putsch — which aimed at revitalising ACT* but in reality mortally wounded it. I recall Cathy’s trenchant criticism of the Brash effort (and Jordan Williams in particular) over their claimed use of ‘dodgy polls’ to undercut and usurp Rodney Hide as party leader. (There’s a view the polls never existed, and the ‘projected’ gain from a Brash leadership was fiction.)
And look how well that’s worked out (see ACT: ‘Zero backing. Zilch, nil, nothing at all.’ and above). Why, almost as well as Jordan Williams’ (strictly professional) anti-MMP performance and frenzied efforts to demean Winston Peters in the lead up to the 2011 election.
Others may see it differently, but I think democracy relies on citizens having a vehicle for their political ideas and enthusiasms, whether they’re popular or not. But don’t we expect them to be honest about it?
– P
* I don’t buy the theory put about by some that the whole affair was just a vehicle for Don Brash’s ego.
What is obvious here that the good people of Epsom, who as we are constantly reminded are the most intellegent people in New Zealand, so never ever allowed to vote ever ever again. The place is a den of gullability with no original thought. ( I work just outside Remuera and the gulity looks as i suggest to my work colleagues that they ought to be ashamed of being told what to do….hilarious).
Do you mean “should” never be allowed to vote?
If you do, I get your sentiment (and joke?) but no way! Disenfranchising people — even neo-Nazis — is beyond the pale.
It seems to me Epsom National Party voters have got the politicians they have deserved. ‘Two MPs for the price of one’ hasn’t really worked, has it? Rightly or wrongly, their electorate has become a byword for shonky, underhand political deals and double talk.
Rodney Hide shrank the ACT party, and drove through the Supercity amalgamation in a very non-Libertarian if not anti-democratic manner.
Richard Worth ended up under a cloud (back when Mr Key still had the luxury of being able to evince actions on the basis of a code of ethics )
Paul Goldsmith is an expert in biting his tongue, talking in circles, and ‘taking one for the Party’.
I’ve got no real reason to expect that Epsom National voters won’t do exactly what they’re asked to do in the future. The question is, will their Party’s leadership
beingbring itself to drop the same hints next time?Dunno. But a tight election seems on the cards …
– P
No x 2.
Hi Cathy.
Oooh, cryptic! Let me see if can work out what you’re saying.
Either:
(a) It’s not gut-wrenching for former ACT activists to watch the party’s decay, and they’re not feeling detached, or
(b) Democracy doesn’t rely on citizens having a vehicle for their political ideas, and we shouldn’t expect them to be honest about it, or
(c) Something else.
I really don’t understand what you mean by “No x 2” … help me out.
cheers, – P
Peter,
I read the questions / reply as follows:
“It must be gut-wrenching for former ACT Party activists like the savvy Cathy Odgers to watch the decay.”
No.
“Or perhaps by now she’s experiencing a different ‘stage’ of grief, and practising detachment? ”
No.
I could, of course, be wrong.
Rgds,
*p*
Yes, that’s my first ‘option’ too. But Cathy’s *is* a cryptic reply, n’est-ce pas?