MWWL, David Rankin and Billboards

I’ve missed a bit of news over the past few days so I’ll briefly comment on a few issues in this post:

----------

Hannah Tamaki has failed in her bid for the presidency of the Maori Women’s Welfare League. From Radio New Zealand: 

The new national president of the Maori Women's Welfare League (Kataraina O’Brien) says the co-founder of Destiny Church, Hannah Tamaki, who was also vying for the role, did not go about things in the right way.

This, I think, is true. Hannah Tamaki took an unorthodox approach to her campaign. Previous campaigns for the presidency have been, for want of a better term, discrete. However, Tamaki took a glamorous approach to her campaign producing professional campaign material and travelling the country attending league functions and so on. In my opinion this gave her an unfair advantage over the less well-known and less wealthy candidates. Hannah Tamaki also appeared in the media, on numerous occasions, and passed comment on her bid and the League’s attempts to stymie her. The precedent is for members to keep contentious issues within the league and refrain from commenting to the media. Tamaki, quite clearly, departed from this precedent.

I think this is the best outcome for the League. Hannah Tamaki’s bid has reenergised the otherwise declining movement. It would not have been in anyone’s interest for Tamaki to win – I know if she had of won over the weekend a vote of no confidence would have been moved immediately. This would have divided the league even further.

----------

David Rankin has opened his mouth again, this time labelling Margaret Mutu a racist after Mutu called for a restriction on white immigration. From Stuff.co.nz:

Mutu's controversial comments came in response to a Department of Labour report which found Maori are more likely to express anti-immigration sentiment than Pakeha or any other ethnic group. 

The head of the university's department of Maori studies, Mutu agreed with the findings and called on the Government to restrict the number of white migrants arriving from countries such as South Africa, England and the United States as they brought attitudes destructive to Maori. 

Firstly, I agree that some white immigrants bring racist attitudes, however restricting “white immigration” is probably, and I do not want to devolve into semantics, racist. Certainly Joris De Bres, the Race Relations Commissioner, seems to agree. In a free society people are entitled to their own views - even if those views are repugnant. There is no infallible mechanism to prevent racist migrants from coming to Aotearoa and I suspect Professor Mutu knows this. In my opinion, this is not a debate worth having. The racists from both sides, Maori and Pakeha, will ensure any debate turns toxic while the clowns like David Rankin will add legitimacy to anti-Maori sentiment.

----------

I covered a fair chunk of the country over the past week and made a few election-related observations. Firstly, Labour MP Sue Moroney’s billboards dominate Hamilton West. I didn’t see anything from the incumbent Tim Macindoe. Sue probably stands little chance of winning the seat given the way the party vote went in the previous election and Labour’s current performance in the polls. Hamilton West, and Hamilton East too, are considered bellwether seats. Nearly every party since 1972 that has won both seats has gone on to form the government. In my opinion Hamilton is a very rural city. Hamilton services the Waikato hinterland (i.e. the farms which make up most of the Waikato) and this pro-National hinterland probably influences the political leanings of Hamilton residents. Having said that, Hamilton West, in contrast to Hamilton East, is quite working class and the seat has been held by Labour on more than a few occasions. So maybe I am too slow to write off Sue.

I was also in the Hawkes Bay and couldn’t drive more than a kilometre without coming across a National Party billboard. Either National is recycling the “building brighter futures” line or some enthusiastic supporters are erecting signs from the last election. The Maori Party candidate, Na Rongowhakata Raihania, also had a few billboards which were, to be honest, visual chaos. Too many colours, the contrast was too sharp and his name is too long. Good to see he has got a head start over the competition though. Labour’s signs were also prominent in the Manawatu, especially in the small towns surrounding Palmerston North. Palmerston North is the only rural seat Labour holds and you would expect them to put in a big effort to retain it.    

Controversy erupts in the Maori Council

Controversy has erupted in another Maori organisation. The New Zealand Maori Council is making waves with the news that senior Council member Maanu Paul has been expelled for speaking publicly on behalf of the organisation. After falling ill last year Chairman Sir Graham Latimer appointed Maanu Paul to act on his behalf. However, the Executive Committee held that Sir Graham was acting unilaterally and did not have the power to make such an appointment. The Executive Committee argues that in Sir Graham’s absence the elected Deputy Chair, Richard Orzecki, acts in the Chairpersons role.    

Maanu Paul has been acting under the title of executive chairman and commenting on a number issues including the Councils activities surrounding an impending treaty claim. The claim concerns Maori rights to fresh water. This clearly got up the nose of the Council members, but mainly the Deputy Chair, and they have resorted to the strongest response possible – expulsion. However, Maanu Paul maintains that he has not been sacked and will continue to comment publicly until Sir Graham directs him otherwise.

This internal strife speaks to the growing irrelevance of the Maori Council and is illustrative of the growing political conflict in the Maori world. The National Government has selected the Iwi Leaders Group (ILG) as their Maori vehicle of choice when it comes to consultation and access. The problem for the Maori Council is that they are a creature of Statute (The Maori Welfare Act 1962) and, consequently, relies on the acquiesce of the government of the day. On the other hand the ILG set their own mandate and enjoy access to their own capital, i.e. the government does not fund them and, therefore, cannot strangle them when they fall out of favour. The Maori Council is also, ideologically speaking, non-aligned with the current government whereas the ILG falls firmly in line with the Nat’s ideological position (e.g. privatisation). The Maori Council is creating issues for the government, for example by fuelling debate on Maori rights to fresh water, while the ILG is actively supporting the government’s asset sales campaign. It is easy to see why the government has turned to the ILG at the expense of the Maori Council. 

The battle within in the Maori Council is also indicative of the larger political conflict occurring within the Maori world. At its most obvious the conflict is typified by the conflict between the Mana Party (representing the working class) and the Maori Party (representing the Maori ruling class interests). There is also conflict in Tainui between Te Arataura (the Tainui elite) and Te Kauhanganui (the Tainui people at large). Also the Maori Women’s Welfare League between Hannah Tamaki and Destiny (the Maori elite) and the traditional members (the people at large). Of course it is more complex than just a battle between the poor and the elite, but at its most simplistic we are seeing a class conflict. 

I also wonder whether Maanu’s connections to the Maori Party have anything to do with his expulsion. Maanu is one the Party’s most prominent and vocal supporters. It will be interesting to know whether his connections and pro-Maori Party/National Party actions were getting up the nose of the increasingly left-wing Maori Council. 

I’ll be following this story very closely and update any further developments.       

Hannah Tamaki's run continues

Unsurprisingly, Hannah Tamaki is back in the running for the presidency of the Maori Women’s Welfare League. Tamaki took her case to the High Court after members of the League removed her name from the ballot papers amid fears that Tamaki, and by extension the Destiny Church, were attempting a hostile takeover. Justice Kos in his ruling on Wednesday held that Hannah Tamaki is entitled to run for President of the League. However, the Court also expressed concern around the creation of ten Destiny affiliated branches, in which Hannah Tamaki had a hand in creating, and held that those branches are ineligible to vote. Justice Kos held:
  

I find the manner in which the new branches have been established completely contrary to the practices and tikanga of the league.

Although, the Court did single out three branches with loose connections to Destiny as legitimate. The Court made it clear that Tamaki's religious beliefs do not preclude her bid. The MWWL is strictly "non-sectarian", this means the organisation itself cannot proclaim and/or take a religious stance. It does not mean that the organisations representatives are not entitled to hold personal, or more specifically, religious beliefs.

In short the actions of the League were unlawful, but perhaps justified in the sense that the League is attempting to protect its history and mana. Hannah Tamaki should have the opportunity to stand, however her minions should not have the opportunity to vote. Hannah Tamaki has, according to the Court, conducted her bid lawfully. She has not, however, conducted her bid with integrity. Rigging the competition is not on and if Tamaki has any sense of fairness she should stand down. I have said it again and again: Destiny Church wants to secure social services contracts. The government has, on a number of occasions, refused to award contracts to Destiny Church. Clearly the Church cannot secure contracts under the Destiny mast. Consequently, the Tamaki’s have identified the MWWL as a potential vehicle for their new money spinner, i.e. providing social services. The MWWL is one of the most respected Maori organisations in New Zealand and can run on their record promoting Maori wellbeing. The MWWL provides an attractive prospect for the Tamaki’s.

I doubt Hannah Tamaki will win. Many League members are fiercely opposed to her candidacy and will make voting against Tamaki a priority. I guess Tamaki’s play has been good one respect: the MWWL appeared to be in decline, however Tamaki’s play for the presidency appears to have energised the League and spurred renewed interest in the League and what it stands for.

Maori Women's Welfare League Strike Back

It looks as if the Maori Women’s Welfare League (MWWL) may be inviting a legal battle. From the NZ Herald:

Destiny Church's Hannah Tamaki has effectively been disqualified from the presidency race for the Maori Women's Welfare League after her name was left off voting material. 

Mrs Tamaki's derailed candidacy comes after an alleged direct challenge from a MWWL member - Prue Kapua - who argued to the national executive that because Mrs Tamaki's branches were aligned to the church they were unconstitutional. 

Unfortunately, I cannot track down a copy of the charter. However, I will tentatively suggest that the MWWL may have overstepped the mark. I say, with a fair degree of certainty, that former presidents have had or retain some connection to faith based organisations. I fail to see how faith would be a disqualifying factor. The MWWL is strictly non-sectarian in outlook and approach, but that does not mean members or leaders must disown their religious beliefs. Although I do not support Hannah Tamaki’s bid for the presidency, in fact I actively oppose her bid, striking her name off of voting papers is unfair. Having said this, I cannot say with any certainty whether this move from the MWWL is legit without viewing the charter, however, prima facie, it appears that the MWWL have got ahead of themselves.

In a double blow, church members who are also in the MWWL might not be able to vote regardless of Mrs Tamaki's candidacy status. 

Yesterday, Mrs Tamaki, the wife of Destiny's Bishop Brian Tamaki, was considering legal options. A letter was sent to the MWWL executive team in Wellington asking for an explanation about the situation by 3pm.

What the Bishop wants, the Bishop gets. Or at least that is how he sees it. I have no doubt that Hannah Tamaki and her husband will invoke the law as a means to their end. Mrs Tamaki’s bid for the presidency is, in my opinion, an attempt by Destiny Church to seize control of a respectable social organisation and, subsequently, access social service funding. The Church has identified government contracts as a new money spinner and they are hell bent (terrible pun I know) on securing them. Providing social services is a way to make money under the guise of doing God's work.

Hannah Tamaki is running an expensive campaign for the presidency. She is distributing promotional material, attending MWWL functions and, according to reports, instructing Destiny Church members to form their own MWWL branches and join existing branches. However, the MWWL is firmly opposed to such moves and they are beginning to play the game. Three Destiny Church affiliated branches of the MWWL have not received voting papers due to their connections with the Church. The MWWL is also investigating other methods to block Destiny branches and Destiny affiliated members.

I hope this whole saga turns out well for the MWWL. The League is one of the most respectable Maori organisations in the country. A Destiny Church take over will only serve to smear the organisation. Hopefully the MWWL can keep it clean and minimise the damage Destiny has already inflicted.