Sep 6, 2011

Trouble in Tainui continues

The public spat between Tania Martin and Tuku Morgan continues with Tania Martin issuing a press release affirming her position that Tuku was disqualified from Te Kauhanganui (TK). Last month TK voted on a resolution to disqualify Tuku Morgan from TK and Te Arataura. 30 Marae voted in favour of the resolution, 27 against, two abstained and six votes were deemed invalid.

Both parties have obtained separate legal opinions and both opinions put forward a different interpretation of the rules. Tuku Morgan’s opinion (which I have viewed) claims that in order to disqualify Tuku more than 50% of the 65 Marae must affirm the motion, therefore Tuku remains as the threshold is 33 while only 30 affirmed the motion. I gather that Tania Martin’s opinion, from leading firm Chen and Palmer, holds that the threshold is 50% of the valid votes cast, therefore 30 votes is enough carry the resolution.

Given the debate’s descent in to the legalistic you imagine the issue is headed for the Courts.   


  1. These are the facts:

    The Chair in the media released affirmed the vote of Te Kauhanganui based on the 2009 Rules and confirmed by a legal opinion - it is not 'her' affirmation;

    'Te Kauhanganui' is the correct spelling;

    Your statement that Chen Palmer prepared the legal opinion is incorrect.

    The 2009 Rules formula and policy clearly state total marae votes held by members present.

    The argument that abstentions and invalid votes are to be counted as a 'vote' is a nonsense.

    In our general elections it is a criminal office to make any statement that is likely to influence a voter as to whether to vote or not and or which influences people to abstain from voting.

    Tuku Morgan threatened Te Kauhanganui with legal action if they voted against him - not just once but three times. After the vote he returned and threatened those marae who had voted against him with legal action.

    In our general elections invalid votes are excluded from the final count.

  2. 1. A legal opinion is not a confirmation. An opinion is, as the name suggests, an opinion.

    2. I am not an idiot, I know how to spell. It was a mistake.

    3. No one is making the argument that abstentions and invalid votes are to be counted. Tuku argues that 33 valid votes must be cast before a motion to disqualify him can be carried.

    4. I have heard on a number of occasions that Tuku threatened TK and various Marae. Would love to see some concrete evidence though.

    5. Let me be clear, I do not support Tuku Morgan.

  3. Get over yourself! Grow up. No one called you an idiot. Only you described yourself as one.

    You post without confirmation or fact (Chen Palmer for instance).

    You use other blogger's stories to populate your column.
    What you do mean you want concrete evidence?

    In this blog you have used comments from other blogs.

    Why should you demand you be provided with concrete evidence from anyone?

    You are to be commended for your energy and for your analysis. But get over yourself - use the facts and not make them up.

    Better still refrain from commenting on matters when you exhibit such poor or little understanding and knowledge.

    That will save the ink.

  4. I didn't say anyone did. You've utterly misinterpreted everything I just wrote.

    Of course I use other bloggers posts - that's what bloggers do! You are a blogger yourself, right? I have not, contrary to your assertion, used any comments from other bloggers. The comments I have used are my own from previous posts!

    The Chen and Palmer comment comes from Tania Martin's claim to the Waikato Times (and also Radio New Zealand I believe) that she had engaged Mai Chen. See:

    I did not demand any evidence from anyone - I said I would love to see some because all I have seen is claims from the anti-Tuku movement. This was not a "demand", but a statement of my feeling.

    Maybe if Tania Martin fronted up rather than hide behind spokespeople such as yourself there would be no need for me to comment.

  5. Bubs Mahuta and Kingi Porima all over again. Has anyone taken in to account how much it is costing the iwi in this fued between two of Tainui's so called leaders.Power struggles evolve when we become to independent on a organisation that is controlled or governed by an individual.We as Tainui need to collectively unite all the knowledge we have to progress forward if we are reluckdent to find it in our own iwi then maybe we can take a leaf out of the concept of Tawhiao and combine the knowledge of the motu i.e (tekau ma rua)the council ot Te kauhanganui and Te arikinui at the helm.



1. Anonymous comments will be rejected. Please use your real name or a pseudonym/moniker/etc...
2. No personal abuse. Defamatory comments will be rejected.
3. I'll reject any comment that isn't in good taste.