ACTing Out: How Neoliberal Grifters Helped Dismantle the State

The strangest thing about ACT isn’t that MP David Garrett stole a dead baby’s identity. Nor is it that ex-MP Donna Awatere Huata stole government money to fund her weight loss surgery. The most bizarre part of ACT’s story is that the party owes its origins to Labour.

ACT One: A Brief History

The Association of Consumers and Taxpayers (ACT) was founded in 1993 at the behest of former Labour Party Finance Minister Roger Douglas. During his tenure as minister, Douglas helped bring Reagan-style neoliberalism to Aotearoa.

After years of privatisation, Douglas, having been fired from his own party, sought a new vehicle for “Rogernomics.” In 1994, the lobby group evolved into a political party with the same initials. Douglas, who’d just spent six years wrecking the economy with the ferocity of a second Great Depression, proved about as popular as a nursing home fire and was swiftly replaced by Richard Prebble, another ex-Labour MP.

In 1996, ACT entered Parliament, and Prebble won the seat of Wellington Central. Given that this is now New Zealand’s most left-leaning electorate, a modern observer may find this difficult to fathom.

Neoliberal to White Nationalist

ACT suffered an identity crisis in the mid-2000s. Neoliberal policies had failed to deliver prosperity. Inequality worsened. Almost every economic and social ill currently plaguing Aotearoa can be traced back to the late eighties and early nineties. ACT’s libertarian ideology simply lacked appeal and produced poor results. Socially progressive, economically right-wing voters proved scarce. Hide was followed by former National Party leader Don Brash, who reoriented the party toward white nationalism while keeping the libertarian aesthetic.

The party continued to struggle. Brash’s replacement, academic Jamie Whyte, only managed to win 0.69% of the vote. ACT only survived due to a golden handshake deal that saw the party gifted the seat of Epsom. David Seymour became ACT’s sole MP and eventually, almost by default, party leader.

The ACT Party’s vote share has shot up like house prices.

ACT’s Ideology and the Lie of Libertarianism

ACT, by representing the 1%, couldn’t even secure 1% of the vote. Political reality forced them to change track. Under Seymour, ACT has learned to use race-baiting to attract conservative working-class voters to its pro-billionaire, pro-landlord agenda.

The far-right loves to masquerade as libertarian because it enables them to paint rabid conservatism as the sensible centre. Argentina’s famously libertarian president, Javier Milei, has adopted similar rhetoric despite despising abortion. We’ve seen all this before — Mussolini merged fascism with libertarian-style privatization. It’s exactly this sort of liberty we’re seeing beaten into the people of Minneapolis.

Here - have some freedom.

Capitalism offers liberty to rich men at the expense of everyone else. At least Milton Friedman was honest when he backed Pinochet, noting that democracy isn’t a prerequisite for “true freedom.”

Both Far Right? Distinguishing ACT from NZ First

Aotearoa, unlike Australia (One Nation) or the United Kingdom (Reform), has two parties on the far right: ACT and NZ First. How to distinguish them?

ACT voters, often wealthy farmers, claim that climate change is a hoax because it hurts their bottom line. NZ First voters, who tend to be poorer, browner, and less educated, are more likely to distrust science and believe global warming is simply part of a “globalist conspiracy.” The leaders of each of these parties despise each other, resulting in constant coalition instability. A good example of this is the meltdown following the India Free Trade deal. ACT’s happy being racist towards Indians, but only so long as it doesn’t interfere with profit. Low-wage migrant labour is a boon to their voter base. NZ First, meanwhile, is more stalwart in its anti-immigrant vibe.

Put another way, both parties are overtly racist, but ACT is more anti-Māori, while NZ First is more anti-Asian.

Acts of the Eftpostles

ACT might be New Zealand’s most scandal-prone party. Putting NZ First to shame, ACT has selected a host of oddballs, fraudsters, and criminals. Donna Awatere Huata, originally a communist-sympathetic Māori nationalist, joined ACT New Zealand in 1996 and served three terms as an MP. During this time, she stole $80,000 from a government-funded charity, some of which went toward stomach-stapling surgery.

ACT MPs don’t just steal public funds. Inspired by a movie, ACT MP (and death-penalty advocate) David Garrett was found to have stolen a dead baby’s identity for the purpose of obtaining a passport. Despite receiving a discharge without conviction, Garrett still swore a false affidavit, earning censure from the Law Society. Funnily enough, Garrett was also a communist in his youth. Everyone makes mistakes — and Garrett made a few more: a conviction for assault in Tonga, despite which the Chief Justice there later appointed him to a legal role, and then a drink-driving conviction. At this juncture, I’ll pause, because Garrett deserves his own article.

Former National minister and later ACT candidate John Banks found himself embroiled in a bizarre paternity dispute. The social conservative tried to get his ex-partner to abort their child and subsequently refused to acknowledge paternity until he was legally declared the father. There’s more. From sex offender Tim Jago to homophobic activist Garry Mallett. Nobody acts out quite like an ACT MP.

Where to for ACT?

A decade ago, ACT was polling alongside the Legalise Cannabis Party. Little more than a joke, Seymour couldn’t even secure a ministerial position under the Key government. National tolerated ACT because it helped them push unpopular policies. National has treated ACT with more benevolence than Labour has treated the Greens.

Even if ACT were polling poorly, with Epsom they’d survive. Though electorally weaker than the Greens because they have a less ideologically cohesive voter bloc, ACT does not face the same level of existential threat. Unlike NZ First, the party has a demonstrable history of outliving its leader. Uniquely, ACT — unlike other parties — has produced few breakaways, possibly because it functions more like a lobby group for the ultra-rich, cloaked in vague libertarian conservatism without any true ideology.

ACT’s success has effectively blocked Aotearoa from developing a successful Christian Right. Conservative voters don’t want to risk losing representation. The future looks promising for ACT. Winston’s getting old, and as the populace becomes more multicultural, ACT is primed to become the predominant defender of white identity.

Objectively, the party is bad news for Aotearoa. Unlike the Greens, who’ve never held real power, ACT – via Roger Douglas, has had the opportunity to impose its ideology. The result? Failure. ACT represents passive income earners at the expense of workers and small business owners, surviving only because white anxiety and latent misogyny yield them a stratum of the lumpenproletariat.

Beneath David Seymour’s quirky incompetence and goofy smile lies something ugly: an Atlas Network–backed party ready to cut social services and pour money into Zionist causes. A party that can only survive because it lies to the bulk of its voters. ACT is New Zealand’s most class-conscious party and, no matter its pretensions, puts the wealthy first.