Just as I have been predicting there has been a well organised campaign to undermine Tront. Where does this place Runanga leaders invoved in this plot?
Resignations one hopes. The same fate should befall the Tront reps involved.
It would interesting to know whether the Tront reps involved have breeched their duties as Trustees
Note the email referred to is dated 1 Feb 2009 well before the start of start of leaks around 28 Feb. So there has been serious plotting going on for some time.
Should "The Press" really continue to use Potiki as a columnist?
In my view, no. He is a thoroughly discredited individual up to his armpits in this campaign.
The story that "We have to be relatively discreet as whenever anyone in that tribe puts their hand up to make a criticism or generate debate, they are persecuted." is nonsense. I have been a critic of Tront and some of its members for some time on this blog. Tront welcomes healthy debate
News Leaks Were Last Resort – tribal leaders
"The Press" Sat 14th March 2009
"A string of stories about Ngai Tahu unrest have been leaked as part of an orchestrated media campaign led by a former journalist.
Discontented Ngai Tahu leaders say they used the media as a last resort to inform whanau of serious ongoing issues at Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (Tront).
The Press has been told the group's aim was to cause enough concern amongst Ngai Tahu members to support a legal challenge to its charter the document defining how Ngai Tahu's central body interacts with its 18 regional runanga.
Comment:The place to challenge the Charter is at the Tront table
The communication strategy was designed by former New Zealand Herald journalist Jon Stokes.
Members of the group who received a briefing document from Stokes, include former Tront chief executive officer and Otakou runanga chairman Tahu Potiki; Kaikoura runanga chairman Thomas Kahu; Hokonui runanga Tront representative Terry Nicholas and leader Netta Mackintosh; Wairewa runanga chairman Robin Wybrow; Awarua runanga chairwoman Hana Morgan; Ngati Waewae chairman Francois Tumahai and Tront representative Lisa Tumahai.
The briefing document and other emails on the strategy were leaked to The Press, illustrating the extent of the behind-the-scenes power struggle within the tribe.
In a February 1 email, Stokes identified Tront's plan to spend $52 million on a cultural centre and office block called House of Tahu as a "key plank" in the collective's message as it demonstrated Tront's lack of transparency and poor decision-making.
Stokes recommended using the issue to begin "a timeline of public criticism. Perhaps with a fresh and well thought out and supported issue each week".
Comment: The last two paragraphs demonstrate that this group had a covert PR strategy in my view to undermine Tront and NT Shareholders.
The story made front-page news in The Press on February 21.Following those revelations would be the increase in kaiwhakahaere fees, which was highlighted in a New Zealand Herald article on February 28.
In it, Wybrow said he was "angry" at finding out about the increase through the media.
Comment: But Wybrow was a party to PR strategy. And was in my view complicit in the leak about fees.
According to an email, Wybrow and his runanga have committed $10,000 alongside other runanga to "clarify the role of Ngai Tahu Papatipu Runanga as members of Tront and to identify breaches of the charter that have occurred within Tront".
Comment: $10,000 that will not go to shareholders that his Runanga represents
Wybrow said he had heard some conjecture about an increase in fees, but did not know the details until phoned by a Herald journalist.
Runanga leaders were sick of being underfunded and shut out of decision-making and with no tribal elections for six years,
Comment: Wybrow needs to speak to his Runanga rep about this issue. Its clearly documented.
a. Potiki banned elections.
b. Underfunding of Runanga is a balance between Runanga and other commitments Wybrow should know this.
-felt using the mainstream media was the only option, he said. "Legal redress and media aren't the preferred options, but unfortunately we don't feel there's any other mechanism to get these [issues] addressed."We have to be relatively discreet as whenever anyone in that tribe puts their hand up to make a criticism or generate debate, they are persecuted."
In the briefing document, Stokes said any legal avenues taken must be presented as a "last-resort mechanism taken by the collective to protect the interests of All Ngai Tahu Papatipu Runanga and Whanui members"."Perception of misuse of tribal funds, a culture of extravagance and lack of accountability within management are themes that will resonate and cause shared concern among all iwi members, and stimulate the interest of external groups," it said.Stokes said the existence of a concerned group of runanga leaders was no secret.
Comment: Its a little disingenuous of Stokes. After all his clients his clients did not want to know what was going on.
Releasing information to the media was seen as an "expedient mechanism to communicate to other Ngai Tahu whanui", as there were no forums within the tribe's structures to resolve their concerns. Potiki said he had asked Stokes for advice but had no idea about any "negative publicity campaign".
Comment: This defies credibility. Potiki, as the ex CEO should know intimately where concerns can be aired. "No idea about any negative publicity" Yeah right – its so apt.
"We have been majorly concerned about the fact Tront has involved itself in the management of the commercial assets which was never intended," he said.
Comment: Again Potiki, ex CEO, demonstrates:
a. he never knew the role/relationship of Tront vis NTHC which is to monitor the performance of NTHC on behalf of NT shareholders. Tront has never been involved in the management of NTHC.
b. he chooses ignore any knowledge he has
c. it does not suit his purpose as a major player, in view in this subversive group
Potiki said there was no fund being set up to mount the legal challenge despite the email regarding Wybrow's commitment of $10,000.Kahu said his Kaikoura runanga was a non-financial contributor to the collective "at this stage".Mark Solomon said he would not be involved in further media debate on "current tribal issues"."
The truth begins to be told. But only part of it.
Last Resort – how to test this lame duck excuse
Did the Press reporter not notice that Tahu was CEO of TR for four of the past six years?
Under his watch he advised Te Runanga to put in place an invalid agreement to restrain the runanga from holding elections and put them all at legal risk.
As Chairs of these runanga these people have the responsibility and duty to have elections. The time to challenge Te Runanga on that topic was then. The so called ban has been lifted since September 2008 – what excuse have they got now?
As CEO, how many times did Tahu go to Te Runanga with plans to send more money to the runanga?
If Robin is outraged about the salary of the Kaiwhakahaere was he also outraged about the salary of the former CEO?
Anyone care to ask these leaders to publish those figures and any payouts any of these people have receieved from either Te Runanga or NTHC in the last six years?
If we were entitled to know about Mark’s salary we are entitled to know how each of these so called leaders are funded and for what.
Did the Press ask these fine examples of tribal leadership what steps they have taken to address their concerns via the normal channels?
I imagine there will be a pretty thick file at HQ documenting the proper steps they have taken before they decided to drag the reputation of the tribe through the media.
I imagine that they have asked the current CEO to meet with them and exhausted that avenue.
I imagine that they have met with the Kaiwhakahaere and exhausted that avenue.
I imagine that they held regional meetings between runanga and discussed those concerns.
I imagine they have been to the tribal kaumatua and called the all together and discussed their concerns.
I imagine they have been to the hui a tau and put these concerns squarely before the tribe.
To think we have had these paragons of virtue held up as Ngai Tahu tribal leaders over the last few weeks.
These posers just want their hands on tribal cash and they want to control it all and we should not tolerate it.
Tahu was sent packing as CEO. But only after he caused havoc. Same dodgy behind the scenes plotting and scheming to control NTHC and the table.
Same players including the former Chair of NTHC. They were thick as thieves when Tahu was CEO and tried to control the tribe by taking away the voices of the runanga. Remember the interim Group Board and the plans to have a permanent group board?
Wally and Tahu were to have full control over assets and cash. When they were in charge they argued for no separation between wealth creation and spending. As soon as they are not in full charge they argue the opposite.
Tahu worked to deliberately silence the voices of the runanga by sidelining the Representatives when he was CEO and now they say that the voice of the runanga are not being heard.
Now they are in control at runanga level they say they have no voice. What they mean is they got used to the sound of their own voices and they have mistaken that for the voice of the runanga and even more arrogantly as the voices of the tribe.
It is time we went home to our maraes and send these guys packing. They are in it for themselves and not for the people.
you are all missing the point.
http://roarprawn.blogspot.com/2009/03/both-ngai-tahu-factions-use-pr-to-win.html
BB says we are missing the point and says come to my place and read all about it.
If the point is that team Tahu are just misunderstood knights in shining armour then BB is damn right I am missing the point.
Team Tahu are slowly but surely being exposed for exactly who they are and what they are up to. And I am not referring to any of the scurrilous crap about their lives outside of iwi politics.
Each of Team Tahu members have different reasons for not wanting Mark as the Kaiwhakahere and for not wanting open and transparent processes at Tront. And they can have this as a kaupapa if they want which is free speech.
Team Tahu tried to remove Mark more than once. Of course Tahu was CEO at the time which may say something about his sense of ethical behaviour.
To use the line Obama used on the Republicans – “there was a vote and you lost”
It seems Team Tahu are bad losers. The complaint appears to be that they failed to undermine Mark and the other Representatives behind the scenes within the structure and so now they have gone to the media with a stated intent to undermine the structure.
They have done it without concern for how much harm it is doing the tribe and what collateral damage may occur as a result.
If the point is TR and team Tahu are both using PR firms then BB should confess what she does for a living.
Team Tahu wants to spread misinformation deliberately because they don’t want free speech they want skewed speech.
BB says she is for exposing misdeeds and bad stuff. So why is she not asking team Tahu the hard questions?
Perhaps BB has been a team Tahu member all along
Still waiting for the missing point.
I get that BB and Team Tahu want Mark to go. Other folks do based on some deliberate misinformation and some for their own reasons.
So what. My point is that Tahu does protest too much about leaked e-mails and dirty tricks.
I note that despite you have the e-mails you have chosen not to share them with the world in the same way you were prepared to share anything that taints Mark or others for that matter.
Your blog asserts Mark leaked the e-mails to the media and suggests he “hacked” a computer or two. What is your evidence for this?
You have already described how you got the e-mails you won’t share – same same same
I am with Hemi
The first I knew that Awarua has such concerns was via the media.
There has been no call to the wider membership of Awarua to come and discuss these issues.
So before Hana complains that Mark Solomon won’t come to hold discussions she should be calling a meeting for the people of Awarua.
Also, when we will be having elections at Awarua. I have seen nothing about this. What are we waiting for? Maria has been there forever and I did not get a vote on that either.
The point I got from Ann and Hemi is that Tahu etc were happy to use the media to smear Te Runanga, Mark and others using a deliberate campaign of misinformation but they are less keen for us to know the truth about thier activities (whatever that may be.
My point is that Awarua is a closed shop so Hana and Maria don’t have any mandate to speak for us all. I don’t want to read what Awarua thinks until we all have a chance to be involved.
Seems to me busted blonde should go on home, get the elections underway, get appointed as the Awarua Representative and stand for Kaiwhakahaere.
Then all the problems of the tribe would be fixed – not.
I am interested in the question of who should be Kaiwhakahare if not Mark. Last time round there was nine Representatives (speaking it seems on their own behalf and not necessarily on behalf of their runanga) who wanted Mark gone but at least three of them wanted the job.
There is no doubt that one day there will be a new Kaiwhakahaere, maybe sooner, maybe later. So who would be acceptable to the tribe. It can not be any of the unethical representatives who have been leaking confidential information to the media.
I am hoping that their runanga will deal to them as their actions have put their runanga at risk. It is not well known that that the runanga is legally and financially liable for any improper actions of their Representative.
Time to get those elections under way.
Thanks BB for letting us know the e-mails are now up on the TR website.
I am looking forward to these named individuals and the rest of Team Tahu turning up on Friday.
Perhaps then we will find out why they had to meet at Arowhenua “in secret” and have a media plan and not a marae plan.
Rather than consulting with PR firms they should have been consulting with our people. No offence meant to PR firms.
Maybe it is because the folks on the marae know the Team Tahu members and to know them is not necessarily to trust them.
The folks on the marae know what is really going on only too well and the only hope for Team Tahu to create havoc is to convince less connected members of Ngai Tahu that they have the good oil as opposed to snake oil.
The misinformation continues on BBs site
For the record – there was no 20% pay rise for Mark or anyone else – the decision on the house of tahu has not happened yet and it does not cost 2/3 of distribution to give out 1/3
I wonder if Maria, Terry, Lisa, Garry and James will be subitting a paper on reducing their Representatives fees as their contribution to reducing costs.
Finally, it has been suggested on BBs site that Hemi and Tim R are one and the same. Another piece of misinformation and guess work.
I understand Tim R also has the annoying habit of having a different view to Team Tahu members but he is not the only member of the whanui who does. Over the next few weeks Team Tahu will find this out for themselves if they are brave enough to show.
Kia ora koutou katoa
Like Rang Edgarton I too was at the meeting on Sunday and so was about 99 other members of the tribe. Although it was wonderful to see so many members of the Ngai Tahu Whanui they really should have stayed at home and worried about their own runanga. I do have to point out that the seven were in attendence and stood up and said who they were and why they are doing what they were doing, even though they are believe they were doing the right thing, once again they should have done it at Rehua on the 20 March, Mark replied to some of their concerns and once again it should have been done at Rehua. THIS WAS ABOUT NGATI KURI NOT NGAI TAHU, the tribe can sort out their problems and leave ours to us!
I was concerned when Rana told the Awarua chairperson to F*ck off and showed her lack of tikanaga, mana and understanding. She would not realise that Hana and the bluff whanau travelled up from Bluff once a month to help build Takahanga Marae, she wouldn’t know this because Rana and her family were never there. Out of her siblings only Mark made an effot to help with the carving, panels, panting etc even though his contrabution was minimal he still helped.
There were many whanau that had not been to a runanga meeting for many, many years e.g. the Timms, King and even some of the Manawatu whanau but because of Mark’s phone ringing they all showed up and to be honest if they hadn’t then it wouldn’t have ended the way it did……..it would have been very different!!
Mark at the beginning was a great rep, I do not regard him as a leader because of his childish behaviour and has a long way to go before Ngati Kuri consider him as such, he is our rep. Don’t get me wrong I love Mark as he is my whanau but I think he has been involved with TRoNT for far too long and should seek employment else where, not only for his health and wellbeing but so the tribe can grow. By no means am I only saying Mark should resign but I believe that every single TRoNT rep should stand down, not for re-election but for good! They have forgotton why each one of them are there and are only concerned about the pay and status they get. Yes alot of industral knowledge will be lost but is it worth it…I think not! There should be a ‘turn around’ of three years and they have to step down.
After reading Hemi’s comments, wow he’s on ‘Team Mark’ and always has been, he is a very loyal to mark but that is most likely because he was “replaced” as a runanga’s alternate.
Ann’s comments were very good, yes the other side do want to be the Kaiwhakahaere but so does members of the ‘good side’they will not say it publicly but they are wishing it…that I can confirm!
I also believe that Angus and this co-partner Gray should be looked at.