The above huis were poorly represented and was a taken bb a facilitator Mark Moses only with questions not being explained by members of the MTA. Any desention the meeting was closed eg. palmerstong North hui.

KATHY ERTEL & Co.
barristers & solicitors
telephone 04 384 1148facsimile 04 384 1199
26 bidwill street mt cook wellington 6021
Free phone 0800 klelaw
Kathy Ertel Principal
Linda Thornton Associate | David Laird Associate

14 December 2012
By email only
Christopher Finlayson, Minister of Treaty Settlement Negotiations
Parliament Buildings Wellington

Pita Sharples
Minister of Māori Affairs Parliament Buildings
Wellington
Tēnākōrua e ngāminita
Muaūpoko Mandate strategy and process

1. This letter is written to bring to your attention serious deficiencies in the Mandate process that is being implemented by the Muaūpoko Tribal Authority. We act for several claimants who are members of the Muaūpoko Claimant Cluster, specifically Wai 52, 237, 493, 1490, 1621, 1629, and 2326. We are writing to you today in order
to avoid claims that our concerns are a function of the mandate vote. Conditions of Mandate Strategy Approval Not Met

2. We, other counsel, and some claimants have written to various OTS and TPK staff complaining about a potential mandate of the MTA both on substantive and procedural grounds. When the mandate strategy was recently released for review, our clients unequivocally objected to that mandate strategy and set forth very strong reasons why it should not go forward. Included in these objections were issues relating whakapapa (claimant definition) and the open hostilities between the two groups. MCC claimants have also asserted their right to hearing and their ultimate objective to embark on their own mandate after hearing. In short, they object to both MTA as a representative and to mandate at this time.

3. As you may know, the MTA mandate strategy was approved subject to two conditions: 1) to rework the whakapapa and 2) to meet with claimants. At a 19 October 2012 hui with claimants, TPK and OTS informed those in attendance,

Hon. Christopher Finlayson -2- 14 December 2012
Hon. Pita Sharples
including counsel, that there were 3 themes to be discussed at a claimant hui: a) the
possibility of progressing a dual process; b) whakapapa and c) representation or how
can the two groups (MTA and MCC) work together.

4. At the Waitangi Tribunal’s 1 November Judicial conference in the Porirua ki Manawatu inquiry, we were quite astounded to hear that the MTA mandate was set to commence in November inasmuch as the conditions to mandate strategy acceptance had not been met, to our knowledge.

5. On 15 November a published notice in the Horowhenua Mail announced the Proposed Mandate of the Muaūpoko claims. This notice included reference to whakapapa that our clients had never seen before. One of our objections to the whakapapa originally proposed was that it was overbroad. The published whakapapa was even worseꈯit added tupuna that are not Muaūpoko tupuna and included 7 hapū that are not Muaūpoko hapū. Our clients cannot fathom whose these additional 7 hapūreally are. It was certainly not done under the auspices of the Kuia Kaumatua
Kaunihere because this group hasn’t met in over a year. This unilateral act by the MTA has so expanded the definition of Muaūpoko as to be unrecognisable and overbroad. It has allowed people who are not Muaūpoko to vote on the future of Muaūpoko claims.

6. On 19 November, at 7:25 p.m., after the voting had opened for this mandate, I received an email message from Mr. Moses, a contractor for MTA. He transmitted a letter inviting MCC to a facilitated huiꈯone of the conditions to the mandate strategy approval, but in this case commenced after the mandate process had begun. I wrote a complaint to Mr. White of TPK and he referred me back to Mr. Moses. One of the features of this invitation was the lack of detail no time or place for a hui. When asked about the meeting details, Mr. Moses suggested that our respective groups could meet on 16 December at 1 p.m. This is after the mandate voting is
closed. When asked about the lack of detail for a hui, the response was that it was that the original letter was intended to determine our interest and then establish a date. This however was not mentioned in the original letter.
Hon. Christopher Finlayson -3- 14 December 2012
Hon. Pita Sharples

7. The letter also invited us to discuss the mandate strategy. This is an extremely cynical effort to comply with Crown conditions for a claimant meeting. Voting Process has been Unfairly Manipulated

8. In addition to a complete failure to comply with the conditions of the mandate strategy, we are writing to express our profound objections and outrage about the way the voting process has been manipulated to prevent votes by those who oppose the mandate.

9. We note that the 15 November published notice states: ��There will be special votes for those who are not currently registered with MTA or for those who do not wish to register with MTA but wish to vote.��The notice is silent about how those special votes are to be obtained. We understand a flyer was sent out that listed the
Freephone number of ElectioNZ as a way to obtain a ballot. However, this flyer was mailed to people who are on the MTA registerꈯthose least likely to need that information inasmuch as they received ballots in the post. The flyer was not made available to those not on the MTA register until the 8 December information hui.

10. Ballot papers for unregistered Muaūpoko were also available for the first time at the MTA hui on 8 December. These hui were quite poorly attended. To the best of our reckoning, there were no more than 70 people at the Palmerston North and Levin hui; about 30 of those were non-registered people who opposed the mandate. This is
hardly the way to reach a broad number of unregistered people. It is quite obvious that the MTA had no interest whatsoever in making sure everyone who may have wanted to vote against the mandate actually had that opportunity. Rather, the process was made to look like it was open to all to vote.

11. At the information hui, MTA speakers plainly stated that all ballots had to be ��received��by noon 16 December. MTA urged people to bring their ballots to a hui set for Sundayꈯa special meeting of the MTA and submit the ballots at that time. Our clients and others like them are extremely disinclined to give their ballots to the
MTA, so we contacted ElectioNZ to determine whether a mailbox rule was being observed. The answer was, Yes, all ballots postmarked on or before 16 December that were received by ElectioNZ by 19 December would be counted. This
Hon. Christopher Finlayson -4- 14 December 2012
Hon. Pita Sharples
information is not available to all voters. Quite obvious, this misinformation will discourage people from voting. To those who do not know about the mailbox rule, it certainly shortens the period of voting; to be received by ElectioNZ on Sunday at noon, the ballot must have been posted by Thursday, possibly even Wednesday. Given that ballots weren’t made available until Saturday 8 December, this has given
those not registered with the MTA a total of 5 days within which to vote.

12. The post-vote review of the vote by MTA under the guise of whakapapa review is another form of abuse of a democratic system. Those on the MTA register did not have their whakapapa reviewed, certainly not in connection with a contested mandate. It is hardly an impartial exercise to allow those who seek the mandate to
review the votes of those who opposeꈯparticularly since these are presumably the people who managed to generate 7 new hapūand two additional tupuna. If there is to be a whakapapa review it should have been managed in an impartial way.

Conclusion
13. This process is not just unfair, it has been subject to outrageous manipulation. This is not a democratic process; it is a process that has been put in the hands of people who are not afraid to engineer the outcome. It is one thing for a group to go to such lengths to claim a mandate, it is quite another for a government to sanction this
conduct. Accordingly we are writing to demand that the Crown immediately disaffirm this process.

14. Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions you may have.
Very truly yours,
Kathy Ertel & Co.
Linda Thornton
Associate
cc: Mr. Tom White
Ms. Jaclyn Williams

More constructive work must be attended to as the MTA continues to fight amongst themselves. They need to include the claimants and come together as the issues are basically personality family conflicts & nepotism amongst them. It does not help our mokos, our kuia and koros and we are losing what little we have now. It has to stop and guidance can be had from Te Puni Kokiri which we hope will return a fragmented Iwi back to normality.

MTA Governance in Question

November 2nd 2013 this meeting regarding his independent review report of the MTA was held at 11am at the Levin Memorial Hall to outline the current and past MTA governance. In attendence approx 30+ tribe members. Wira Gardiner set puit his recommendations and well done. It was not a good showing of the MTA business efforts up till now from 2010 and in fact has been a total failure in his eyes. Sir Wira outlined that the MTA are only concerned about the $$$$ they hope to get from the Government by going direct negotiations bypassing the Waitangi Tribunal and nothing to do with good governance or the tribe's well being. In fact he is so right as the MTA never voice their opinions on our Lake issues, never make statements unless to patronize themselves and never assist the mainstream of the tribe. He is dead correct in what his report showed and he has put tpgether 21 proposals that should be followed. It may be that Steve Hirini's CEO job being discontinued was actually justified as the question what he has done to improve the tribal affairs was indeed sad. In fact it was a shock to the system as basically he is on a payroll but has achieved very little except self gain. Sir Wira Gardiner's Independent FULL report was not given out to anyone least of all any registered members and the MTA said that if one wants to read it they can at the MTA office. However the 21 recommendations what this MTA needs to establish are available.

I wonder if Pita Sharples will ask for a copy of the full report or TPK, now that this has come out? as this could make a difference on the mandate process AND SO IT SHOULD.

Now as a member of the MTA would it not be right to put the cards on the table and allow members to have a copy of this independent report by Wira as it is a damning report on the MTA to date. Should they have the mandate; should they lead the tribe when the MTA is for a few. Well after reading this report maybe the Government and Pita Sharples will have to go with the Section 29 that has been with the MLC [Maori Land Court] for near 3 years to get the Tribes affairs straightened out. You got it, many trusts are defunct;

Hokio A & Hokio Maori Township Trusts

Lake Trustees

Lake Domain Board

Houses at Hokio have been vandalized & one just got burn't down with no insurance, zero rents, zero rates and noone pays so owners suffer. Lake Trustees have spent most of the money and achieved nothing. Lake Domain Board is also defunct as it meets every 2 months but still does not address a polluted Lake. Hokio A & Township still are not collecting rent from the squatters in the houses & yet another house was diliberately burn't down recently. No rent, no rates paid, no water paid? The tribe is a mess and the MTA have done nothing to get it right or help in any way with some of the same people living in these houses. The actual shareholders receive no rental.

Some of these are committee members of the MTA and should lead by example but of course we know they are for themselves noone else. Then we have those Independents who formed this Special meeting are also MTA Board members while 2 others support the MTA on the Board so guess what they are thinking. They certainly won't want Wiras report to be looked at?? Sir Wira said having 2 from each hapu is one too many--he is right. . Also the number of Boartd members should be 7 not 14 at present which is far too many. When he asked for a show of hands they were slow to put them up for 7 but when he asked for a show of hands for 14 noone responded. So what does that tell you?

It also makes for certain families getting on to control as well so becomes dictatorial and Sir Wira is correct in what he says. Of course those on the MTA which is now divided into 2 factions will go along with getting anything passed as they are in for the $$$$$$ & when you see the track record of those who initiated this then you will understand. To be an effective body the MTA must not have conflictions; the Board must be representative for all not a few families. Most of all they need to be honest and when you look at their track record its far from that.

Whanau wake up............ the truth has come out and none better than from Sir Wira Gardiner in his independent report. He called for a full AGM to be ASAP.

Those of you from overseas have your say and tell us what you want by writing to us:

E hiahia ana ahau kia rongo i au whakaaro mo runga i tenei