Banks will roll Brash as ACT leader, it's inevitable - blog

29 Oct 2011 11:59p.m.

Simon wrote:

This is pretty horrible journalism

08 Oct 2011 05:38p.m.

atrout wrote:

It is inevitable that Banks will take over the ACT Party. It won't be any of the forms that we have seen under other leaderships. Probably undergo a name change in 2 years time. ACT- the Party of lost opportunities.

30 Sep 2011 11:26a.m.

The_Watcher wrote:

Act is a party of clowns and for clowns now and forever more. It's hilarious watching them make fools of themselves. Doesn't matter which way Act goes, whats guaranteed and obvious to anybody with half a brain is that Act is now run by National Party affiliates and will therefore be exactly the same especially if Banks rolls Brash. Gone is Act as Epsom knew it, if they want conservative but don't want National then they should look into the Conservative Party.

28 Sep 2011 02:56p.m.

Irascible wrote:

ACT was the subject of a hostile takeover by National. As a minority player in the conglomerate it is now ripe to be eviserated by the bigger party. Both Brash & Banks are little more than the National Party installed CEOs whose job it is to asset strip ACT by destroying its street credibility while subsuming its policies into its portfolio in the hope of increasing its electoral profit margin. Whichever way you look at it the whole farce that is the Key led National Party and its Brash takeover of ACT stinks of political corruption straight from the trading floors.

27 Sep 2011 09:00p.m.

pat wrote:

Brash and Banks have had their names together somewhere else,something to do with a kiwi-saver co;, they never got charged though,still they know each other well enough to know how each other thinks,is this a rouse to get Banks over the line because Brash knows he hasn't a dogs show of winning any seat or getting the party any more than 2%.
Banks also got rolled in auckland,what does that tell you,he is a political misfit looking for a home,a home that will come with a lucrative salary,perks,tax payer paid benefits and a flash set of wheels,now who would walk away from a life like that,not key's mate,thats for sure.
The mindless epsom voters will probably put their wanna be in because thats what those who look through rose tinted glasses do.

27 Sep 2011 06:56p.m.

Tim Dorrian wrote:

I've never felt such an urge to comment on a news story as I have for this one. The demeaning photo that you have put to represent Don Brash is not only unfair towards someone sticking his hand up for a sensible (I use this word based on the amount of dollars spent by the government on preventing cannabis usage in relation to overall negative effects on society and its users) cause, but also a violation of what you as a news reporter can and should portray. Fair enough that this is a blog, but people still turn to articles like this as a source of legitimate news. The way in which you have portrayed Brash in such a negative and untrue manner (especially in the photo) has severely altered my views of three news. Hell, I don't even support Brash or the use of cannabis. You will struggle to retain my viewing after this article.

27 Sep 2011 05:52p.m.

Siena wrote:

Kiaora Patrick. As far as I am concerned both Brash and Banks associate with people of ill-repute! The only thing I have seen is that they had in common was that both were Directors of Huljich Wealth Management and now their friend's son, Peter Huljich pleaded guilty to misleading investors in his KiwiSaver scheme. Both are self-serving BB's

27 Sep 2011 05:03p.m.

Neil wrote:

I've said it before and I'll say it again Banks belongs with a Christian Party - you can't get a more fundamentalist right wing bible basher than him and that doesn't actually fit with the Act Party - which should by the way be renamed the Libertarian Party. Probably was only ever called the Act party as they hoped people would - but they haven't.

27 Sep 2011 04:06p.m.

Peter wrote:

Brash just saved ACT. It's journalism that's dieing off.

27 Sep 2011 01:18p.m.

Peter wrote:

Banks and Brash was always going to be a bad pairing, Brash (despite his flirtation with social conservatism) is a libertarian at heart while Banks is a classic National-conservative type. Brash represents the original philosophy of the ACT Party, social liberalism + economic liberalism. Banks represents the reality of ACT now: social conservative-authoritarian-farmer party. Neither man has much political future but I suspect you are right Gower about a political coup being inevitable.