Interview: Rodney Hide, Act party leader

Rodney Hide in his Wellington office.

Act leader Rodney Hide spoke with Herald political reporters John Armstrong and Ainsley Thomson.

Why should people vote for Act at this election?

Because they want a change of Government and a change of direction. Because they want their taxes down, they want to reform welfare, and want to have a decent education and health system.

What do you say to people who say a vote for Act is a wasted vote because it won't get above the 5 per cent threshold?

We are going to win Epsom and get above the 5 per cent, so it is not wasted. And people should always vote for the party they believe in. There is no doubt that we are up against it with MMP, because we have got a good bunch of supporters who prefer Act, but they think the only way to get rid of Labour is to vote National. So we have to overcome that. As we close in I find that voters are more undecided than they were at the start. They are starting to think about MMP and particularly in Epsom. We have a very powerful proposition in Epsom because the National candidate is in anyway, and if you vote Rodney Hide in Epsom, you get me plus the Act MPs, which will make a big difference to the Parliament and indeed to who is in government.

Why have National and Act failed to get some sort of arrangement to ensure that a vote for Act is not a wasted vote? 

I think National decided early on that it could be in government by itself by winning 51 per cent. And so they went out and ate their supporting party and I think that calculation could cost them government. Fortunately National can do something about it because there is Epsom. What Act needs to do is secure Epsom and the prospect of a change of government is much higher on the cards.

Do you expect some help from National in securing Epsom?

I think voters will figure it out, that voting for Rodney Hide adds MPs to the centre right, but voting for Richard Worth doesn't change the outcome. In fact the Epsom electorate is the key to whether there is a change of government. And the biggest wasted vote is one for Richard Worth because he is in anyway and voting for him doesn't add any extra MPs. I don't he will withdraw, but I think the logic for voters is very compelling and it is up to us to explain that. So it is for us to do. I have been to meeting after meeting where I have heard senior National MPs say they will get 51 per cent and rule out the need to have a coalition or support party.

Is it disappointing that National has not been willing to cooperate with Act?

I think it is counter-productive to what National needs to do to be in government and Helen Clark has been more successful in building potential partnerships. I think it hasn't been helped because MMP remains a hard system to understand. If National is ahead in the poll voters think National will win, if Labour is ahead voters think Labour will win - that is the hardest thing that we are up against, the idea that it is somehow first past the post and the party that gets the most votes wins. Actually what we need is 61 MPs in Parliament to win. However I am now finding people are thinking more about MMP and getting their heads around it.

Is Act's current predicament getting in the way of communicating Act's message?

There is no doubt that if you are behind in the polls you are not as news worthy, so there is a consequence to be low in the polls. But we have worked hard and got some strong messages into the media and we are in the television debates and we're pleased about that.

As leader how much responsibility do you take for the predicament Act is in now?

Total. I take responsibility because I am the leader, so I take responsibility for our position and for succeeding at this election. Where I am lucky is that I have a whole lot of people helping me to succeed this election.

Is there anything you should have done, or have not been able to do to turn around Act's fortunes?

I think we should have marked down a more independent position when I took over as leader, because I spent the first six months of my leadership trying to work with the National Party and other parties to try to build-up a centre right alternative. By the time I got to Christmas [last year] I realised that they weren't interested for reasons that I don't comprehend. Having said that, it was worth a try because I think it is important to build up a centre right alternative. I think that reality is now coming to National with their present polling, they can't do it on their own, they can't rely on NZ First. National has to be looking at it and thinking, 'well there is Act, if they could make it and get up a bit and with Epsom they will have the MPs that make the difference'.

Do you think there should have been a more fundamental rethink in Act about policy direction when Don Brash took over leadership of the National Party?

Don Brash has been a surprise in so many ways. On one hand he is perceived to be an Act person, yet if you look at National Party policy now, they have adopted more of the Labour Party policy than they did in 2002. So we have the strange phenomenon of Don Brash heading up the National Party, who has spoken out a lot on Act policy, yet they have adopted Labour policy at just about every turn, the latest one being defence which was truly amazing to us. We obviously want Don Brash to succeed, but they have now conceded so much ground to Labour that it shocking to us. I think we have a lot of room there now and their tax cut policy will be interesting too. I don't think they have left themselves much room to manoeuvre because they signed up to the Cullen Fund. The difficulty is, irrespective of National's policy, that Don Brash will do Act things. And I think as we go into the election an understanding of MMP will be more apparent. We want to show that we can be supportive of Don Brash.

With the campaign launch coming up and with the leaders debates can we expect something fresh from Act?

It will be a little bit fresh at the campaign launch. When we look at it now Act has been amazingly successful in terms of setting up the debate for this election, not to our advantage necessarily. When we started out tax cuts were fringe, welfare reform was fringe, time limits for the Treaty was considered mad, yet all these things now are part of the election debate. So what we need to do now is start looking ahead and see what is beyond that. 

Given that your issues are the issues on which the election is being fought, why isn't Act making all the running?

Because National in particular has grabbed them and being the bigger party has had more voice. People have very much thought about it as a two horse race when it never was and never will be. People have made their minds up that they want a change of Government and a change of direction, but they are just making their minds up of how to vote under MMP. We have had this at every election, I mean right up to the last day people are coming up and saying 'I want to support Act, which vote do you want?'."

Can we expect new policy before the election?

Yeah, there'll be some new policy. I think there is a lot of room to go on how we protect tax payers from political opportunism. The Fiscal Responsibility Act goes some way, but I think we can go much further. And we have just seen it with the two old parties, where one comes out and with a bribe 'we will make your interest payment tax deductable' and other party comes out with an even bigger bribe. And I think there needs to be some serious transparency and accountability on the politician's ability to spend other people's money particularly under MMP and we have done quite a bit of work on that. So rather than just talking about tax cuts it about how you put yourself in a sensible position to control government spending and the ability of people like Michael Cullen to come along and continually impose new taxes and new charges.

If you are are part of a centre right government what would you guarantee to deliver in terms of your policy?

I would definitely have tax cuts, there would be no doubt about that and they would be substantial. And there is no doubt that we would deliver on law and order. And I think the key role that we would play is holding National to account for their promises which they would so easily trade away.

Is Act's policy of an immediate tax cut and tax rates of 25 cents in the dollar still non-negotiable bottom-line for you?

Sure. That is a policy that half the National caucus agree with, they are just not prepared to say it. That would be a bottom-line to go into government. Under MMP you have a number of options, so you have coalition or support, so it may well be that we are in a supporting role or coalition. It will depend on how well we go in the vote. If we succeed in having a National/Act government then there would be very few barriers to Act achieving much of its policy because there is no doubt that Don Brash agrees with much of what Act says. 

Given your 'stop Peters campaign' could you work with New Zealand First after the election in a three way coalition?

No. We would support Don Brash but we would stay out of the Government. And I think that a National/New Zealand First government would be totally unstable and counter-productive. We would support Don Brash in confidence and supply, but I just hope that National rule him out. I just think he is bad for New Zealand. It would be a chaotic government, there would be no tax cuts and it would be very bad for the National Party as it was in 1996. I think they would be better off taking a principled stand.

If would mean that you would be able to shut New Zealand First out of government, would you support Labour on confidence motions? 

We would support Labour if they got into some seriously good policy like tax cuts and not just to block out New Zealand First. A Helen Clark New Zealand First government wouldn't last either. I just think Winston Peters is anathema to stable government, who ever he is with. I pick that he will go with Labour for a whole lot of reasons. He is a party of the centre so he has to bounce around, if he consistently goes with National he will loose that status. He is lazy and going with an existing government is so much easier for him - he just has to demand the position and the policies, not go through all the build-up of a government. Helen Clark has the maturity to look after his MPs that he will make ministers, and they will need a lot of looking after and he won't do it. His policies are to spend more money, and Helen Clark is agreeable to that. And she is a player and after the 1996 experience she has learned to negotiate with other parties. I think Winston will see her as a professional politician and someone he can work with. But Helen Clark could decide, for the good of the Labour Party, that Winston should be forced to go with National and wreck them. I think Peters is that toxic.

Do you think Act is now paying the price for trying to appeal to all voters, rather than, as the Greens have done, concentrating on capturing certain segments, such as small business owners?

I believe that Act has always tried to do its best for all of New Zealand, and you can see that in our policies, and in our practise in Parliament. We have always looked at it from the point of view of what is good for New Zealand. I am disturbed by how MMP has played into a Maori Party and factional interests and they just push them no matter what. We have always said we have to get the best policy for NZ. Of course we have a free market view, but when we advocate those policies we are advocating them for everyone and that is the way we have always approached it. We don't think of our policies as being good for one small group, but for being good for everyone.

When will the polls in Epsom start reflecting what you are saying?

Going around the electorate people are starting to be a lot more receptive. So I think there is a change on now even. I think it will take a while, I don't think people are making their minds up in this election until quite late and it is so fluid. We can see that in the polls bouncing around. A lot of people won't make their mind up until the last day because they will be voting strategically and being thinking about what they are doing. We will be campaigning until the last minute.

Can Act survive if you loose your Parliamentary base.

No. I know how hard it was for Act to get in in the first MMP election. The nature of Parliamentary reporting and politics in NZ is that the parties that matter are the one that are in Parliament. If you are out of Parliament I think that is it, it is just too tough. We know that being in the news is important and being considered a political player is important. Once you are out of Parliament you are not. That is why new political parties don't make it in. Once you are out, you are out. What we confront this election is the voters wanting a change of government and a change away from Labour, but under MMP you could get a big swing to the left in our Parliament and in our Government.

If Act hadn't been there it would be a bloody different Parliament, so I am committed to getting back.