The ACT List
ACT has released its party list. The top 12 are:
- Rodney Hide
- Heather Roy
- Sir Roger Douglas
- John Boscawen
- It’s a secret
- Hilary Calvert
- Peter Tashkoff
- John Ormond
- Colin du Plessis
- Shawn Tan
- Ron Scott
- Aaron Keown
I used to think they would have Sir Roger at No 6 to encourage people to give them 5%, but after Rodney said on Agenda he would be in the top three, I figured he would be No 3. It would have been a bad look to demoate Heather from the No 2 spot. I have a lot of regard for Heather and hope she would be a Minister if the election outcome allows it.
Smart to have a second woman in the top six
They have not put Kenneth Wang on the list to boost his chances against Pansy Wong in Botany. I can’t see it working as unlike Rodney winning Epsom, there is no strategic reason for National voters in Botany to vote for Kenneth. If Kenneth wins the seat, then ACT just get one less List MP. In fact on current polls Kenneth winning Botany would keep Heather from returning to Parliament. I guess they are trying to appeal to Asian voters to get two Asians into Parliament by vote splitting.
Quite a smart move putting John Boscawen high up, as his profile from his anti-EFA campaign is quite high. It also aligns ACT with the popular opposition to the EFA!
Hilary Calvert seems to be the new name. Don’t know much about her, but CV looks useful. Who will be No 5 is interesting. Maybe Derek Quigley? 
August 20th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I met Hilary once, through her work with the Otago Central Rail Trust. Seemed like a smart cookie, i’m sure she’ll make an excellent edition to the Justice & Electoral Select Committee.
August 20th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
Now that John Boscowan is a candidate, does his anti-efa spending have to be re-evaluated? It didnt count as 3rd party electoral advertsing, so he didnt have to register…. might it count as candidate advertising? Has he already out-spent his limit?
August 20th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
DPF
Any chance Prebble might come back at number 5 ?
August 20th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Don brash?
August 20th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
doubt prebs would be happy with being ranked lower than douglas and john
can’t be don brash as he’d be way more high profile than john
August 20th, 2008 at 3:33 pm
it’s probably some random no-one would have associated with ACT before but supposedly held some high position, kinda like whatshisname who was #5 last time… i’ve already forgotten his name but he was some treasury economist or something
August 20th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Theresa Gattung?
And don’t pooh-pooh it, I was right about John Boscawen!
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2008/08/act_party_list_out_tomorrow.html#comment-475654
August 20th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Muriel Newman?
I mean, it’s kinda like the Wellington Central announcement – built it up with a whole bunch of hype and ended up just being Heather Roy. A #5 Muriel Newman announcement would probably be along the same effect.
August 20th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
All wrong.
It’s Phil U.
August 20th, 2008 at 3:44 pm
Maybe Rodney’s persuaded Krystal to stand.
August 20th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Dime is stepping up! I want to give something back to the community.
I’m gonna bait Mallard til he takes a swing at me, then I will end him
August 20th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Derek Quigley … would be a giant leap backwards by ACT for someone who is remembered as having given Labour the excuse to destroy the combat air force. Something all my ACT friends fall over themselves in trying to excuse. One even had the ‘temerity’ to suggest that DQ had lost his marbles. Perfect candidate for Winston First.
But get real folks with the debate over No. 5 … 1.2% = 1 MP (perhaps).
August 20th, 2008 at 3:49 pm
It means that they think they need someone else high profile so as to pull the punters in. They don’t actually know who it is (based on Rodney’s comments), but are trying to convince a few different people. If they don’t find anyone, they’ll just move everybody up one. Gattung wouldn’t be impossible, but probably wouldn’t be the publicity boost they need.
As for polls – every election ACT polls 1-2% in the lead up, then got more like 5%. In fact, over 5% in a couple. Last election was the exception (OK, small sample size), but the media went to town on how Rodney wouldn’t get Epsom (when it was obvious he would), and Brash dragged ACT voters into National. ACT will do a lot better than 1.5% this time round.
August 20th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
would be awesome if it was don brash! or mad dog!
August 20th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Act would probably poll higher if they included self-employed business numbers in the poll rather than just home numbers…
August 20th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
I’m Spartacus!
August 20th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Brash, Quigley, Prebble…any of them would do me.
I do NOT want Gattung, for some reason the bloody woman is held up as some type of business guru when all she did was run a company that held the monopoly.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Once Key had effectively ruled out a place for Roger Douglas in cabinet, it was inevitable that he would be placed third, even if Heather had been willing to give up her number two spot. Two cabinet positions is all they can reasonably expect in a coalition with National.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
No!
I’M Spartacus!!
August 20th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
“Brash, Quigley, Prebble…any of them would do me.”
What, you’re so good looking you can turn them all gay?
August 20th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
Fletch
As it happens I am a chick magnet, its not a bed of roses I can tell you, so many chicks so little time!
August 20th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Who the hell let ‘Lord Flasheart” here in anyway?
August 20th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
It’s probably not Ken Shirley, but I’m sorry his name is absent. Likewise Lindsay Mitchell. Probably their own personal decisions.
Brash, Prebble, Quigley, Muriel Newman……..yeah, I’m with all those……..has anybody suggested Bob Jones?
August 20th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
if Gattung is number 5, they lose my vote.
What was Telecoms share price when she got the top job? and what was it when she finished? and remember that audio clip of her speaking to telecom staff? “we can keep overhcraging and thats fine, or we could…” blah blah blah she sounded like my dopey hair dresser.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
It’d be great if it was Brian Nicolle. Somebody get this guy a wife so he can become an MP.
Oh yeah, where’s Aaron Bhatnagar these days anyway? It was fun trolling his blog at the last elections.
August 20th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
I think its Terry Heffernan, because I think Act’s the only party he hasn’t stood for (‘cept maybe the Greens)
August 20th, 2008 at 5:21 pm
If it were Bob Jones ACT would get more of the party vote than labour!
August 20th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
DPF: Is it true that Rodney has asked Ron Mark to jump from NZ First and take the number 5 spot for ACT?
[DPF: I doubt it greatly. And I doubt I would know if he had
]
August 20th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Shawn Tan (at No 10) used to be a Green Party member. And he did a lot of work developing the Green Party’s Immigration Policy (yet to be released).
Sorry you had to go to the “Dark Side” Shawn.
Oops, the Dark Side’s McCully, not Rodney, isn’t it? At least ACT have some principled integrity, unlike the Member for East Coast Bays.
August 20th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Jim Hopkins was certainly considering standing – I hope you’re right David.
August 20th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
Well if an ex-Greenie like Shawn Tan can be number 10, then Phil U could be number 5.
Tan is linkled to various leftist causes, including unions and supporting Palestine, so his candidacy is most interesting.
August 20th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
There are some high-powered people in there, all right. It’s a sign of the weakness of democracy when we get governments that illustrate the principle of “the scum floats to the top”, while a party like ACT that really is the party of the most intelligent, hasn’t a look-in. Tall-poppy-ism at work, too, I suspect.
August 20th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
I was wondering if it was the same Shawn Tan. Hilarious! (Frog, you’re sure it’s the same guy, right?)
We did a bit together in the Auckland Uni Greens, back in the day. A nice guy certainly, but I would have never picked him as an ACT voter or candidate. Hmmm, since it doesn’t seem hard to get up that list, perhaps I should give it a go?
August 20th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
Surly ACT can’t have an ex Melon on staff. Is nothing sacred? Guess then there is always hope for Toad and his mate Philu to come over from the dark side.
August 20th, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Ex Green and ex Finsec? Why would a centre-right voter taker the risk with their party vote and potentially elect someone who up until twp years ago sat on the hard left?
Sorry ACT – I thought the secret candidate stuff was a clever media stunt, but putting in someone like Tan is, well, risky. And voters don’t like risky.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
An impressive list. Good to see Roger Douglas ranked so high on the list and I look forward to Roger becoming a cabinet minister in less than ninety days. The good news for New Zealand is that with Roger Douglas as Finance minister the economy will soon be placed in the right direction.
Roger Douglas would achieve more in six months as Finance minister than Michael Cullen has in the last nine years. How embarrassing for Cullen, and yet so true.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:20 pm
Has Shawn Tan made any public statements formally renouncing his misguided beliefs regarding the green movement? You would expect to see a statement somewhere given the massive shift from one side of the spectrum to the other and in relative recent history as well.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
OECD do you realise what a dick you you are? By your logic, if ACT appointed Dr Who to it’s No 5 slot, all the problems of the health system would be solved by November 9th.
You need to realise that on current performance, Sir Roger is far more likely to be gracing the opposition benches, watching Pita Sharples perform creditably in cabinet.
August 20th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
Rodney dances withe the Stars; Jim Hopkins is a clown from way back; maybe it’s John Clark (Fred Dagg); Mike King; even a Billy T look-a-like!
The ACT party are all clowns. Roger will be quite at home. The Nats will be scared witless as ACT ambition is really their true intent but they are scared to say so.
Labour by 5%!!
August 20th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Faifacts Media said: Well if an ex-Greenie like Shawn Tan can be number 10, then Phil U could be number 5.
Maybe he is. Given the crap he’s posted on frogblog during his enforced absence here, it wouldn’t surprise me.
He’s even called me a right winger because I said that the ACT Party, like the Green but unlike National or Labour, are actually principled rather than populist.
So I’m now officially (according to Phil U) a right-winger. Does that mean I now get heaps of positive karma points from PhilBest & Murray? Or from John Boscawen – glad to see you are standing for a principled party John, even though I disagree with many of those principles. I hate being down at -11 karma or thereabouts on most of my posts here.
Give a “right wing” toad a break, guys!
August 20th, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Sorry Toad, so long as you believe that the Green party’s social policy goals are more important than their environmental goals, you won’t be getting any belief in right wing from me. According to Bryce Edwards, the Greens are really moving to the centre, and setting up a coalition deal with National. Would you resign your membership in disgust?
August 20th, 2008 at 10:14 pm
Act have a thick hide in placing roger douglas in the list, he already sold most of the country’s silver to his mates in a previous reincarnation, is he now going to try and buy it back for nothing and resell it to his old buddies brierley, fay, richwhite, in a merry go arround? I can never understand how these thieves have the gall to show their faces again..anywhere! They should probably invite mugabe to take No.5….
August 20th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
PaulL said: Sorry Toad, so long as you believe that the Green party’s social policy goals are more important than their environmental goals…
I don’t. I believe they are inextricably interlinked.
The costs of ecnomic restructuring to deal with cliamte change need to be borne by those who can afford it. Probably you and me actually, but not by cleaners, rest home workers and gas station attendants on $12 an hour. Otherwise we get Rogernomics Mk II, where the costs are borne by those least able to afford them.
August 21st, 2008 at 1:01 am
Not a bad list, some surprises there for me and I saw the ballot papers!
Maybe next time I will take longer to look at it.
Excellent talent all through it, I hope that some of the “surprise” people in the top 10 get out there and settle the nerves of the members by articulating their credentials and take some of the work off Rodney and get out there and talk ACT.
Hilary Calvert is a good woman, I met her at Dunedin’s ACT branch. She is a hard worker and very well liked. I’d like to match this list up with the NZF, Labour or Greens list – no contest.
August 21st, 2008 at 8:27 am
I have to say that it is a credit to the ACT Party that they are willing to overlook someone’s past involvement with a political opposite. That Shawn Tan has come from the Green Party and is now in ACT is amazing. I highly doubt that the Greens would be so accomodating to someone who had come from ACT.
August 21st, 2008 at 9:15 am
radar said: I highly doubt that the Greens would be so accomodating to someone who had come from ACT.
Some do move to the Greens from ACT radar. I know a couple of Greens who used to be ACT members – one of them is now highly active in Green fundraising and very likely would have been a candidate had he wanted to be. The Greens also have at least one former National MP – John Elliott – among their membership. Mind you, the Nats have one former Green MP – Ian Ewen-Street – among theirs.
August 21st, 2008 at 10:15 am
Toad: I think you are misremembering history. It is simply untrue to suggest that the pain of rogernomics was borne by those who could least afford it. If you look closely at what went on, large and medium businesses lost most of their concessions, many of them went broke, and they certainly started paying tax where they weren’t before. The average joe, in the meantime, got access to much cheaper imported products, and the quality of their lives improved substantially. In broad terms the people most impacted were at the top.
There were, however, people at the bottom adversely impacted, and unfortunately those impacts were very localised. What I mean by that is that most of the people at the top ended up paying more tax and ended up having many of their weird industry protections removed. Most of the people at the bottom got access to cheaper products and better services, but some of the people at the bottom lost their job. Obviously those who lost their jobs were very adversely impacted. Many of them retrained and reentered the productive workforce doing something that actually increased the value of NZ Inc. Some of them turned out to not be employable doing anything else, and presumably that also meant that they weren’t doing any real work whereever they previously were employed (NZ Post, Telecom, NZ Rail etc). That is unfortunate for those individuals, but quite honestly, why people should expect to get paid for doing no work just beggars belief.
Reminds me of a discussion I had at Treble Cone one day. We went down there skiing, and my partner saw someone she used to teach skiing with. He was now head of operations at TC, and we had a chat to him about how things were going. The comment that stuck with me was one about a conversation he said he had to have with the staff one day. He said it went something like this “The deal is that I pay you, and you do work. If you stop doing work, have a guess what’s going to happen?” Apparently a bunch of them thought it was OK to just not turn up to work, or to turn up to work and do nothing.
I don’t mind helping those who are in need. But my definition of “in need” doesn’t include “don’t feel like doing any work.” That is not a natural part of the human condition – there has never been a time in human history where you could just not do any work and expect to survive. If you want to live, you have to earn your food. As soon as we tell people that isn’t necessary, society will disintegrate. Working is not optional – if it was, who would do it?
August 21st, 2008 at 1:44 pm
It’s Owen Glenn
August 21st, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Keeryst, Shawn Tan:
Law and order isn’t normally a *huge* issue for the Greens(?), so I wonder why he was there in the first place…and even now, ACT is opposed to a lot what the Greens are for , so I would really love to know why he went over.
August 21st, 2008 at 4:46 pm
er, meaning, if there was more to it than Law and Order – school vouchers or somethin
August 21st, 2008 at 9:00 pm
PaulL says on August 21st, 2008 at 10:15 am:
You just describe half the public sector.
Cutting down on the number of people in New Zealand’s burgeoning bureaucracy would be a good start to reducing people who held the above quoted belief.
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:47 am
Hi All,
First of all, I would like to say hi to Lord Farrar himself, whom I bumped into at the Business Roundtable symposium yesterday. I promised I’d post here David, so make a note: this will be the first of many.
I think all of you who have posted here about me warrant a reply, so allow me to do so in a sequential order:
toad:
Haha yes, I have gone to the “Dark Side” dude – whatever that means. Actually, the best way to put it is: I have seen the light.
Now toad, if I were an absolute bastard, I’d bill you and the Party for the work I did on the Green Party’s Immigration Policy – especially since some of it was my intellectual property. But then again, I’m not an absolute bastard. That’s what seven years of associating with tree-huggers does to you.
Anyway, I had my reasons why I left. See below. Oh, and please don’t hate me ‘cos I’m beautiful…I mean, liberal.
Fairfacts Media:
Actually, if Hillary Clinton fails to be picked as Obama’s running mate, we’ll add her to the pool of contenders for No. 5.
Yes, I’ve most certain been “linkled to various leftist causes, including unions and supporting Palestine”. Then again, as Winston Churchill would say, “If you’re not a socialist by the time you’re 20, you haven’t got a heart. And if you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 50, you haven’t got a brain.”
No, I haven’t lost my heart; neither have I experienced premature brain growth. My point is, my ideals used to be utopian ones, based on the theories I read during my tenure as an undergraduate university student. Having been in the workforce for approximately two-and-a-half years, and in fact having worked in the union movement for virtually that entire period, let’s just say my eyes have been opened to the disjunct between leftist theory and the workings of the real world. My ideals today are therefore based on pragmatism and common sense – values and principles embodied by the ACT Party.
You’re most welcome to have a more in-depth discussion with me by e-mailing me at shawn.tan@act.org.nz, or ringing me on 027-2379606.
As for my union involvement, you may wish to check out today’s edition of the National Business Review. A little birdie tells me there is a wee front-page article about a latest development in this regard.
georgedarroch:
Yes we did, George. In fact, it was your insistence that I come along to a Greens on Campus meeting at Cultural Space back in 2002 that marked the beginning of my Green Party involvement.
Doesn’t seem hard to get up that list? No sir. My ranking was a surprise to me (and others), no doubt. But let’s not cast aspersions on the candidacy selection process. I thank the Board for giving me this opportunity, and who obviously discounted the fact that my involvement with ACT has been a recent one.
That said, you’re welcome to vie for position No. 5 dude.
side show bob:
Yes, ACT do have an ex-melon on their candidacy list – someone often labelled a ‘banana’ too. Funny that – I’ve never considered myself fruity.
I’m not ashamed of my leftist roots. If anything, they strengthen my resolve on the course that I’m on now.
Sushi Goblin:
I humbly submit there where you see risk, ACT see incredible opportunity and leverage. You are welcome to correspond with me personally about any doubts or concerns you may have via e-mail: shawn.tan@act.org.nz. Alternatively, I can be reached on 027-2379606.
radar:
It’s not so much that my Green and various leftist associations have been overlooked; having identified myself as Green and left-wing for the past 8 years allows me to relate to the centre-left, and to convert them into ACT voters. Having been trained in union organising, I am adept at the various recruitment techniques, as well as the right messaging to reach certain target audiences. Thus far, I have already converted six individuals who voted Green last election into voting ACT this election (sorry toad!). I also have the word of eleven other individuals who didn’t vote last election to vote ACT this election. I’m legally trained and qualified, mind you. So the more cynical of you out there (not you radar!) should appreciate that I love arguing and debating. Until I win, no doubt.
OECD rank 22 kiwi:
My first public statement would probably be best described as a statement in a public forum, namely my candidacy speech at the ACT Party Auckland Regional Conference at Epsom Girls’ School on Sunday 10 August. I also happen to be the ACT candidate for the Mount Roskill electorate, and am working on a press release or two at the moment. Watch this space, and thank you for your interest.
stephen:
Nope, but the Greens get it wrong with Law and Order – and horrendously so. Please read my posts regarding Sue Bradford’s comments on the three murders in South Auckland here: http://blog.greens.org.nz/2008/06/28/south-auckland-the-real-issues/. My username is ‘bledback2life’, and I sign off each post with my full name as well.
ACT’s stance on Law and Order is indeed what convinced me to join, though not the only reason why I joined, the ACT Party. My association with ACT is quite simply the culmination of a journey of self-discovery, ‘quarter-life crisis’ and cultural reconnection that began at the end of last year, and precipitated by the ‘South Auckland saga’.
In fact, my alias ‘bledback2life’ was chosen to educidate my transition (some would say transmogrification) from the Greens and the Left to ACT and the realm of liberalism. I juxtaposed the concept of bleeding/blood loss with that of resurrection, in a deliberate act of oxymoronic temerity, in order to illustrate that it has been the exorcising of my Marxist demons, and the purging of Leftist ideology, from my mind and body which has allowed me to be cleansed and thus feel alive once again.
I’ve always been a civil libertarian, even when I identified with various leftist schools of thought. Now that I have embraced economic liberty too, only now can I truly call myself a coherent and consistent proponent of freedom in a holistic sense.
August 22nd, 2008 at 10:58 am
Shawn, don’t wank in public. It’s not nice.
August 22nd, 2008 at 11:53 am
“…as Winston Churchill would say, “If you’re not a socialist by the time you’re 20, you haven’t got a heart. And if you’re not a conservative by the time you’re 50, you haven’t got a brain.”
Getting a bit “liberal” with your quotations:
Originally the phrase was, “Not to be a republican at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.” Francois Guisot (1787-1874)
It was revived by French Premier Georges Clemenceau (1841-1929), “Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head.”
Winston Churchill was nothing like a socialist at 20. It’s often misrepresented as his words.
August 22nd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
I would *love* to see how you did that sometime – perhaps the next Greens post done by DPF…
People are going to lap up the ‘conversion’ aspect. Thanks for posting!
August 22nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Hi DPF and to all keen bloggers. I’ve monitored the blogs for a long time but thought it was about time to stop lurking and contribute something. Flameproof suit is at arms reach ;o) In 24 hours, on other blogs, I’ve already been called a wanker, stupid, disingenuous and more. So you’ll have to top those to get my attention!
Regarding LIST-GATE: conspiracies are a great way of filling in the period when TV runs soaps and infomercials. I think we’re just seeing democracy laying out its opening bids in what will be a crossroads election for NZ. Whether its National, ACT or whatever, the approach surely would be to align gameplan with team – all blacks or politicians – same deal. There’s always someone who gets benched but that doesn’t mean they won’t start in the next game nor take the field following injury. ACT’s Wang and Nat’s Shanks are two examples.
What is telling re suitability as an MP is the degree of public dignity displayed by those that were disappointed by their selection. Remember how you felt in the school playground when you were one of the last standing aside during ‘pick-up sides’? Compare the dignified silence and resolve of Steve Franks to Lindsay Mitchell’s public dummy spit?
Clearly, Steve has paid the price for his dark background with ACT. Parliament would be much stronger for his presence and I hope he gets there. Regarding gameplan, obviously ACT is not planning a strong welfare message in its campaign bottom line this year. If they were, they would have gone for the Lindsay+Steroids+Experience of Muriel Newman. List places are not just achievement certificates for hard work. No argument from me, for instance, that Lindsay is a good researcher and publisher on welfare matters. But if that’s all it took to be a good MP, then the Parliamentary librarians and most of academia would be running the country. As such, complaining just cements the choice in the minds of the decision-maker.
ACT is wallowing and have taken a similar approach to the Nats in that they have gone for an experienced core supported by fresh faces that represent the future of the party. Why is #5 vacant? It could be clever media management. Maybe someone else spat the dummy like Lindsay, because they wanted something higher, but had the composure to remain silent?
Who is #5? Who could say? I doubt that it will be Krystal…Rodney’s already dropped her once ;o). Maybe his pretend girlfriend that Winston alluded to? Maybe it’s Owen Glenn…gotta be good for funds! Tony Veitch has some time on his hands!
August 22nd, 2008 at 8:20 pm
I heard there was some Holy Water involved.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:15 am
Nice work Shawn, welcome aboard and good luck.
I reckon ACT converts, who have seen the light – in a way, have great understanding in what works and what doesn’t. I believe you have probably more enthusiasm and ideological nous than 2 dozen Nats.
(at least)
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:17 am
Thanks Shawn Tan.
Suspicions allayed.
I wish you every success in your endeavours to become an MP for ACT in the upcoming election.