The High Court tells Te Arataura where to go: Victory for the people of Tainui

From the High Court, with love

Tuku’s dirty politics don’t pay off.

The Te Kauhanganui tribal parliament had voted in favor of reimbursing Chairwoman Tania Martin’s legal costs incurred during her defense months ago when the Maori king and Morgan attempted to have her fired because she started asking hard questions about the financial state of Tainui.

Despite violating the constitution and Te Kauhanganui Rules, and showing absolutely no respect for the Tainui Tribal Parliament, Morgan and Te Arataura have fought tooth and nail to to prevent Martin’s costs from being paid. Until today. The High Court has displayed common sense and ordered Te Arataura to pay Martin’s costs in full.

The worst thing about this fiasco is the unnessary waste of Tainui money on needless lawyers that cost $1,000 per hour, wasting court time, and a total waste for Te Kauhanganui which Te Arataura are responsible for. Get rid of them.

Power to the People!

Advertisements

21 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Tainui on the Web. Eraka's Blog
    Jun 10, 2011 @ 11:39:28

    The emails are running hot today!

    Reply

  2. unhappy Tainui beneficiary
    Jun 10, 2011 @ 13:52:48

    Way to go Tania.

    Kia kaha tatou te Kauhanganui. Pana rātou katoa te poari ki te taha

    Reply

  3. K
    Jun 10, 2011 @ 20:18:53

    It wasn’t so long ago that this featured in one of New Zealand’s leading newspapers, The Dominion Post.

    To outsiders the feuding within Waikato’s Tainui tribe bears all the hallmarks of a Shakespearean drama.
    It is not entirely clear who is winning or even who is on who’s side, but all the ingredients for a good intrigue are there – purges, public denunciations, accusations of treason and accusations of betrayal.
    In the latest instalment of the drama the Maori King, Tuheitia Paki, has sacked Tania Martin, the elected chairwoman of Tainui’s Parliament, Te Kauhanganui, over a critical report she wrote on the tribe’s finances.
    Among other things, the report alleges that the tribe’s board, Te Arataura, has kept details of its spending from the Parliament to which it is supposed to report and increased its spending at a time when distribution of grants is declining.
    The report alleges that during the past seven months board members have received $546,000 in fees and spent $314,000 on travel and $467,000 on legal fees. It also alleges that a 10-day trip to Australia by board chairman Tukoroirangi Morgan and two Tainui staff cost the tribe $25,000.
    King Tuheitia says the report contains “a seriously inaccurate analysis of Te Arataura’s financial performance” and that Mrs Martin failed to keep her commitment to him to ensure Tainui was no longer brought into disrepute by internal conflict.
    He dismissed her because her actions had rendered Te Kauhanganui “dysfunctional” and “incapable” of resolving the dispute she had created between the Parliament and the board.
    How Tainui orders its affairs is a matter for Tainui’s 57,000 members. It is not a public body.
    However, its members would be wise to pay close and careful attention to what is done in their names. While Shakespearean dramas make for great entertainment they are not a blueprint for how organisations should be managed.
    Mr Morgan, a central figure in most of the drama, has explained that the king had no choice but to intervene in the dispute. “There is only one boss in Waikato-Tainui,” he said, meaning the king.
    In terms of Maori tikanga, that may well be the case. However, kingly authority is an old-fashioned concept that has run its course in Europe and, more recently, Tonga.
    The boss of Tainui should be the people. It was the people, through their representatives in Tainui’s Parliament, who elected Mrs Martin as their chairwoman and it should be the people who dismiss her if her performance falls short of the expected standard.
    Rather than summarily dismissing Mrs Martin, King Tuheitia would have been better advised to put his concerns about her performance before the Parliament.
    Government by royal fiat is not a recipe for long-term success. Tainui has assets worth more than $600 million. They should be a powerful engine for good. However, the return on assets in recent years has been disappointing.
    In a privately owned enterprise, hard questions would be asked in such circumstances. It is in Tainui’s interests for the same rules to apply to the tribe’s financial performance.
    – The Dominion Post

    Reply

  4. MB
    Jun 18, 2011 @ 20:22:27

    To be honest
    You sound just as sick as your frantic bloggs against Tuku because you have no idea how to distinguish indifferences within a tribal vs. governance structure. The new structure is the way forward with capital that you will never better experience. Your emotions are typical because you are feeling left out and your korero displays that you should be getting a bigger portion. When you talk against the leader, you lack understanding. Therefore go back and listen and get qualified within governance and structures. MY VOTE IS FOR TUKU, I support his movements. Compared to corporates, his expenses are not worth talking about. Stay focus on the bigger picture, thats where the vision is… KIA KAHA TUKU & co.

    Reply

    • nosamfree
      Jun 21, 2011 @ 18:21:37

      this was emailed about capital
      a CORPORATION, the government can demand anything it wants from the CORPORATION.
      CAPITALIZATION:
      There are five different levels of capitalization used in names of “persons”;
      1. human-being: john doe
      2. natural-person: John Doe
      3. quasi natural/artificial-person: John DOE
      4. corporation/artificial-person: JOHN DOE
      5. Nomme de Guerre: DOE, JOHN
      Here is a summary of the rights and freedoms of the above “persons”:
      The ‘human-being’ has all the unalienable rights and freedoms as provided by GOD.
      The ‘natural-person’ has all the rights and freedoms as provided by man with the Magna Charta and Canadian Bill of Rights.
      The ‘quasi natural/artificial-person has lost some rights, but not all rights. At this time it is not evident how to quantify which rights have been lost.
      The ‘corporation/artificial-person’ has limited rights and freedoms as provided by the creator of the Corporation.
      The’ Nomme de Guerre has no rights and freedoms and is a complete slave to the Admiral.
      There is so much more than what I have just shared here. It is only the tip of the iceberg. But it is also enough to make you aware of what you are up against and the deceptions built into our system of rule by governments. Somethings to think about. I have no ID, no drivers license, no passport, no bank accounts, no address. I AM, a human being. I require no such things. Free yourselves now. your humble servant, ancient clown.

      Reply

  5. Marise Bishop
    Jun 19, 2011 @ 15:57:11

    To be honest
    You sound just as sick as your frantic bloggs against Tuku because you have no idea how to distinguish indifferences within a tribal vs. governance structure. The new structure is the way forward with capital that you will never better experience. Your emotions are typical because you are feeling left out and your korero displays that you should be getting a bigger portion. When you talk against the leader, you lack understanding. Therefore go back and listen and get qualified within governance and structures. MY VOTE IS FOR TUKU, I support his movements. Compared to corporates, his expenses are not worth talking about. Stay focus on the bigger picture, thats where the vision is… KIA KAHA TUKU & co.

    Reply

    • Tainui on the Web. Eraka's Blog
      Jun 20, 2011 @ 06:02:00

      Marice, you don’t get the picture do you? Tainui is different to other structures as Tuku and his cronies are continually interfering with tribal and management structures…

      Reply

      • Marise Bishop
        Jun 20, 2011 @ 14:18:16

        What picture do you want me to encapsulate? Explain the elements of a structure your referring to. This will confirm you are learning something at uni. If your an A+ student, tell me the indiffernces vs. corporate structure and what are the similiarities with the Tainui vision that you have serious problems with. DON’T FORGET, SPELL MY NAME CORRECTLY – good luck with your application as the CEO?

    • nosamfree
      Jun 21, 2011 @ 18:02:28

      Form of Government

      New Zealand is a sovereign state with a democratic parliamentary government based on the Westminster system. Its constitutional history dates back to the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840, when the indigenous Maori people ceded sovereignty over New Zealand to the British Queen. The New Zealand Constitution Act 1852 provided for the establishment of a Parliament with an elected House of Representatives. Universal suffrage was introduced in 1893. Like Canada and Australia, New Zealand has the British monarch as titular Head of State. The Queen is represented in New Zealand by the Governor-General, appointed by her on the advice of the New Zealand Government.

      As in the United Kingdom, constitutional practice in New Zealand is an accumulation of convention, precedent and tradition, and there is no single document that can be termed the New Zealand constitution. The Constitution Act 1986 has, however, updated, clarified and brought together in one piece of legislation the most important constitutional provisions that had been enacted in various statutes. It provides for a legislative body, an executive and administrative structure and specific protection for the judiciary.

      Legislative power is vested in Parliament, a unicameral body designated the House of Representatives. It currently has 122 members, who are elected for three-year terms through general elections at which all citizens and permanent residents over 18 years of age are entitled to vote. Authority for raising revenue by taxation and for expenditure of public money must be granted by Parliament. Parliament also controls the government by its power to pass a resolution of no confidence or to reject a government proposal made a matter of confidence, in which event the government would be expected to resign.

      The executive government of New Zealand is carried out by the Executive Council. This is a formal body made up of the Cabinet and the Governor-General, who acts on the Cabinet’s advice. The Cabinet itself consists of the Prime Minister and his/her Ministers, who must be chosen from among elected Members of Parliament. Each Minister supervises and is responsible for particular areas of government administration. Collectively, the Cabinet is responsible for all decisions of the government.

      this is not the way fwd ALL GOVERNMENT ARE CORPORATE COMPANY NZ INCL..

      Reply

      • nosamfree
        Jun 21, 2011 @ 18:05:32

        the for of nz government was email to me by an unknown author

      • Takutai
        Oct 31, 2011 @ 14:22:58

        You are so clever you publish what you read your forgot to mention The Royal Crown Commission the business arm of the British royal family and its parliament who are strongly represented by MPs who are also extended members of the royals These are the true beneficiaries of the NZ gvt.co inc.assets and revenue. And how about the IMF and World Bank The British Commission’s very own Reserve Bank.Our Government has a monopoly over NZ corporations, Incorporation’s, Business’s etc, Crown commission has a monopoly on them but there Reserve banks they own it all you know how the Game goes and who really Dictates Governor General hes just the middle mans front LOL

  6. Marise Bishop
    Jun 19, 2011 @ 16:03:09

    You are taking your time to activate my message.

    Reply

  7. Ana
    Jun 20, 2011 @ 17:08:00

    @marise so is being patient & polite if your looking for a bigger audience go to Facebook & smile it may improve your attitude

    Reply

    • Marise Bishop
      Jun 20, 2011 @ 17:22:50

      Anna
      Not sure what your referring to. Are you claiming that the audience in here are not intelligent to respond to the bloggs, hence referring the viewers to facebook. What is the point of ‘ERIKA’ etc… Do you feel that the adverse response is not within your expectations to justify the bloggs. Hmmmmmm, concerns that your coping.

      Reply

  8. Marise Bishop
    Jun 20, 2011 @ 17:24:13

    Meant to read, the last line to previous msg.
    CONCERNS THAT YOUR NOT COPING…

    Reply

  9. unhappy Tainui beneficiary
    Jun 20, 2011 @ 19:02:48

    Boy Check it out, MB has a bee in her bonnet!!!. Getting personal are we!!! Nice, Mature response!!!

    Reply

  10. Marise Bishop
    Jun 21, 2011 @ 10:13:01

    Take care all. All the best on this thingy blogg. Remember, make sure your own back yard is perfect.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: