Hooton rules out Epsom and ACT

January 14th, 2014 at 8:08 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Right-wing lobbyist has ruled himself out from contesting the party leadership.

He has joined former leader Rodney Hide in removing himself from the list of potential candidates in the past week.

In a column written for the National Business Review, Hooton said he was certain he would win the electorate if he stood, but felt he was too closely aligned to the National Party.

“If ACT is to succeed in the longer run, it must strongly differentiate itself from National, especially given the interventionist tendencies of the current regime, and it must be a genuine party, without any suggestion of being a subsidiary of the bigger brand,” he said.

Hooton endorsed a split configuration of former Cambridge philosophy-lecturer-turned-management-consultant Jamie Whyte as leader of the party, and David Seymour as the candidate for .

Hooton’s column is here.

Compared to Matthew’s current earnings, being an MP isn’t a living wage :-)

 

 

Tags: , ,

30 Responses to “Hooton rules out Epsom and ACT”

  1. freedom101 (504 comments) says:

    Not sure if the living wage reference is a joke or not DPF, but it is true that for those in Labour, Greens, NZ First and the Maori Party a back bencher salary is the most they could ever expect to earn. It makes it hard to give it up, which presumably explains the problems these parties have in renewing themselves.

    What would Trevor Mallard earn in the real world? On the other hand, if he waits around he will probably be given a couple of $50,000 per year SOE directorships by an incoming Labour regime.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. RRM (9,917 comments) says:

    Like herpes, the tag “Former Act Party MP ______ _______” is for life.

    Maybe 2014’s going to be Kolun’s year to shine then?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. tvb (4,418 comments) says:

    Being an MP for most people is a crap existence with moderate pay you are in the public eye the whole damn time going to endless boring functions and splitting your time between Wellington and the electorate plus other travel. For what I ask. Keep your mouth shut and don’t rock the boat especially as a Government backbencher. Why I ask??

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. eszett (2,408 comments) says:

    Compared to Matthew’s current earnings, being an MP isn’t a living wage

    Meaning he is not independently rich enough to qualify?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. bhudson (4,740 comments) says:

    Hooton endorsed a split configuration of former Cambridge philosophy-lecturer-turned-management-consultant Jamie Whyte as leader of the party, and David Seymour as the candidate for Epsom.

    History shows us that it wasn’t a great strategy for Don Brash in 2011

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. itstricky (1,830 comments) says:

    Funny how you judge the guy by how much he earns and assume that is why he would turn it down, regrdless of whether it was a joke. Says a lot really.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Steve Wrathall (284 comments) says:

    If the ACT board go for a split Seymour/Whyte strategy, they must be prepared for the unfortunate eventuality of not getting enough PVs to get the leader in. As 2011 showed, the Epsom candidacy is effectively the #1 list position and that person may end up leader. Also there must be no daylight between them on any issue or the media will pounce: e.g. Brash/Banks in ’11 on Marijuana, or in ’99 when Mad Dog had to suck up to the art farts of Wgn Central, while the rest of ACT opposed subsidies for artists.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. RRM (9,917 comments) says:

    Maybe Cameron Slater could have a go?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Alan (1,087 comments) says:

    It has the potential to be a good strategy, if executed well. Brash and Banks didn’t do so. The two of them are required to be simpatico in all things. The media highlighted the large policy differences between them. Obviously really given the very different policy viewpoints, only Brash really should have been in ACT.

    The problem that the two guys standing now have is neither of them have any public profile and building it in 8 months during a very crowded new agenda is very hard. The media will only want one face for ACT.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. nickb (3,687 comments) says:

    Why any supposedly bright young guys would get involved with the ACT basketcase is beyond me.

    Banks has fucked it beyond salvage. It needs to die and a new party spring from its steps. There is certainly room for one with National taking Labour’s nanny state to new highs (lows?) and with Colin Craig’s nationalist policies and shambolic political skills.

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. freethinker (691 comments) says:

    Act is dog tucker, Banks is absolute poision and possibly a criminal so best to just to give the party a quiet burial.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. JeffW (326 comments) says:

    I’m surprised Hooton is described as right-wing. Certainly he is not consistently right wing, and often makes left-wing contribution/statements. He is not the type of centre-right person NZ badly needs to argue the case against the nanny state.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Richard29 (377 comments) says:

    “Hooton said he was certain he would win the electorate if he stood.”

    This is why he is well suited to being a pundit – good at making claims that he is never going to have to be tested on…

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Pete George (23,559 comments) says:

    Banks has fucked it beyond salvage. It needs to die and a new party spring from its steps.

    It’s very difficult to make a new party work, the success rate so far has been very poor.

    Most of the public don’t notice or care about most of what happens in politics. It will be easier to rebuild an established name with an established party infrastructure that has at least some (500+) members and supporters.

    If Act packs up at best only some Actoids will shift to this currently mythical new party. Even Craig’s huge budget failed by a sizable margin last election.

    Far better trying a known party with unknown candidates than an unknown party with unknown candidates.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. iMP (2,384 comments) says:

    In the latest by-election ACT got less votes than Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis. So, is MH not smoking enough hooch?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Manolo (13,754 comments) says:

    R.I.P. ACT.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. RRM (9,917 comments) says:

    It’s very difficult to make a new party work, the success rate so far has been very poor.

    But isn’t that just a reflection of their quality? Unattractive people with unpopular ideas – surprise! Little support.

    Far better trying a known party with unknown candidates than an unknown party with unknown candidates.

    Perhaps. Parties do have a “brand” that overarches who the current faces are, and if that brand is tarnished…?
    Either way, perhaps the candidates need to do their job – get out there and make themselves known?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Cato (1,095 comments) says:

    Pete George is right. The thing that actually gets voters out is personal contact. Personal contact only comes when you have good networks and party infrastructure. Those things are very, very hard to build up now that the era of mass party membership is over.

    There’s no reason why the ACT brand can’t be completely overhauled (including a new name, though name recognition is important, too). However, that is far easier to accomplish when you have existing systems in place rather than trying to build them from scratch.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. dubya (235 comments) says:

    “In the latest by-election ACT got less votes than Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis. So, is MH not smoking enough hooch?”

    That by-election was in Christchurch East, an electorate that prefers a free breakfast to the free market. Go figure.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Nostalgia-NZ (5,195 comments) says:

    Act has become like a project that could be brought back to life, something of the nature of old cars or boats advertised that will ‘run again and be returned’ to their former glory if but for a little tlc, slap of paint, new jargon. I think that is why Hooton side stepped, the luggage racks are too filled with the past mistakes, rebirths and conflict. Maybe also why Rodney Hide had misgivings which he expressed as a wearied boxer making ‘another’ comeback. It’s almost become free to a good home.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Joanne (177 comments) says:

    Sad. He would have been good.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. David Garrett (7,271 comments) says:

    tvb: Well said…One of the things that used to amuse me was the supposed “perk” of free air travel..for me, that meant a taxi ride of about 1.5 hours to the airport..then a flight to Welly or wherever …on the return, after the House rose on a Thursday I was lucky to get home before about 10.30 at night…both taxi and plane travel “free”, but hardly a perk.

    On earnings, I believe Delahunty once said her highest annual earnings before parliament was about $30,000…this would be the case for most Labour MP’s I suspect…the great majority of those on the right take a pay drop to go to parliament…

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. iMP (2,384 comments) says:

    The trouble is ACT has been inconsistent, had too many leaders, been only 65% as successful as NZF since 1996, and desultory since 2005. If this were the Black Caps, we’d be playing softball.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. The Scorned (719 comments) says:

    If ACT is to survive it MUST be the Classic liberal-Libertarian party its always promised,but never delivered on being to date.

    We have enough State loving anti Individual freedom parties there….one actual party for individual freedom and reason is surely not too big an ask.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. doggone7 (801 comments) says:

    tvb
    Being an MP for most people is a crap existence …

    One of the things that would make it a crap existence would be being judged by know-it-all scornful cretins in places like this. People who have all the answers, know how everything should be run and done, but don’t have the guts to put themselves up for election or the charisma, or whatever it takes, to get elected.

    RRM
    Maybe Cameron Slater could have a go? It surely would be good if he were to go!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. V (719 comments) says:

    @DG

    You knew what you were getting in to. The rest of society has to go and work on a Friday.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Shazzadude (529 comments) says:

    Richard29 “Hooton said he was certain he would win the electorate if he stood.”

    This is why he is well suited to being a pundit – good at making claims that he is never going to have to be tested on…”

    He’s not even good at being a pundit either, why he gets paid for his political predictions I don’t know.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    Make sure that if it does survive the next election that it rebrands itself sufficiently to repell any candidacy or selection of religious social conservative/neoconservative and populist wannabes from fringe groups. Whyte looks like a good choice for that reason. However, I’m unsure about Seymour. Is he a consistent classical liberal or a stealth neoconservative? What’s his Canadian track record like on these issues?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. ChardonnayGuy (1,206 comments) says:

    And may I say I’m sorry to hear about Matt’s decision not to stand as an ACT candidate? A disciplined, high profile consistent classical liberal is what ACT desperately needs.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. deadrightkev (467 comments) says:

    “Far better trying a known party with unknown candidates than an unknown party with unknown candidates.”

    Really PG? How does anyone get to implement meaningful change in this hopeless socialist empire by continuing to vote for the same time after time?

    Act must die and be resurrected as something else, such is the irreparable damage that has been done by the governance in recent terms, there is just no escaping it. As Hooton found out, the small clique of egomaniacs in that fiefdom will not let outsiders despite their incompetence, they would rather go down with the ship, members and all.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote