Nostalgia-NZ (1,651) Says:
December 7th, 2012 at 1:47 pm

I just wonder if it’s anybody’s business apart from Tainui.

It is the business of New Zealanders who support a government which assumes superiority over minorities. The idea of a sovereign and independent Tainui does not sit well with the state doctrine of universalism.

When thinking about it there’s almost an element of the public perception of unionism with Tainui for example, maybe that river with it’s taniwha tends to make some deals very slippery. With no direct aspersions to modern day unionism certainly there have been instances in the past where the impression has been of some bullying and organisers benefiting more greatly than the grass roots. The dear King having called for national unity of some issues was gently rebuked, closer to his throne there is clearly agitation about his ‘royalness.’ You’ve probably had experiences in the islands with such things and Rex’s or somebody else’s comments about wrap around sunglasses comes to mind. Just like in the islands the strong and thoughtful leaders will come through often at the expense of those that ‘inherit’ a title with a good dose of both entitlement and sometimes arrogance. Only in New Zealand.

The “inflation eroded the payments” argument is bullshit anyway; the very same thing happened to anyone who retired on a fixed income prior to about 1970. AMP and the Government Life didn’t suddenly start indexing payments on annuity agreements that had been entered into 30 or 40 years before because inflation eroded their value.

I am more interested in the second bite of the cherry post 1995…my memory is Tainui blew most of the money on stupid or at least ill advised investments such as the Warriors Rugby League club, and then came back bleating about having lost most of it.

As I recall – and I am going from memory – the government of the day then gave them another chunk of cash – not as big as the first, but substantial nevertheless. Someone else will know.

Sorry, I’m not sure I understand your comment. You agree that the leadership of Tainui have a duty to act in the best interests of all members of the iwi but don’t blame them for not doing so? I doubt that can be right… I seem to have missed your point. Care to re-phrase so that I might respond?

What many people forget is that Tainui have a long history of appearing to accept “full and final” settlements and then relitigating them some years later.

A Royal Commission (“The Sim Commission”) was set up in 1926 to inquire into the confiscation of Tainui land and recommended an annual payment of £3000, to be administered through a trust board. To be fair, Tainui were open about their dissatisfgaction with that outcome, and negotiations continued.

In 1946 they agreed to an annual payment of £5,000 (later $15,000) in perpetuity, to be administered by a trust board. The government of the day (Peter Fraser’s) said it saw this settlement as full and final.

By the 1980s inflation had of course eroded the value of the $15,000 (why it wasn’t indexed by Fraser’s government I don’t know) and a dialogue began, which developed into full negotiations by the 1990s. Tainui opted to bypass the Waitangi Tribunal and enter what they called “direct negotiations”, which resulted in the supposedly one-off payment of $170 million in 1995.

I’m not entirely certain of the status after that point, having been absent now for too long to keep abreast of it all. There was the Waikato River settlement, signed on 22 August 2008, which committed the Crown to another $7 million a year for 30 years – $210 million.

It also agreed to fund the “Sir Robert Mahuta Endowment” with an up front contribution of $20 million; a “River Initiatives Fund” which provided $50 million to the Waikato Raupatu River Trust, and $1 million per year for 30 years to “fund the participation of Waikato-Tainui in the co-management processes”. Plus of course covering the operating costs of the “Guardians of the Waikato River”.

Possibly Tainui were a joint beneficiary of the “Treelords” deal in 2008, given that it covered the forests of the central North Island.

So much for that properly speaking up Rex, or taking into account those not spoken for as you see the situation. Can’t blame Mahuta or anyone other than Parliament and their advisors for that despite it being their ‘business’ as you say.

You may be interested in my last couple of comments (and add your two cents’ worth) on the “Treaty Settlements” thread…I refer to the Mahutas’ ancestors in the 1940′s blowing the chance of owning half the Waikato by now…

The Kingitanga movement and Tainui are simply private organisations… They can organize in anyway their members wish.

Legally speaking, yes. But the St Helliers Bowling Club wasn’t given $170 million (in 1995 dollars) of cash and assets, previously the property of all New Zealanders, on the basis that it be used to the benefit of each and every member of the club, and their descendants. Had it been, I’d suggest that imposes some moral obligation to manage the affairs of the club competently and transparently and to honour the commitments it made at the time it received the cheque.

I remember being sent up there by Winston to meet with Bob Mahuta and his cronies and running through a long list of projects with questionable outcomes including the vast “university” he’d built to preside over but which had no staff and no students. It ended up being used as the Tainui offices. The attitude then as now was that it was none of anyone’s business, which I countered by pointing out that if they were not going to speak up for the ordinary members of their iwi who were seeing no benefit from the settlement, then it was properly the business of Members of Parliament to do so.

But, more amusingly, I’m interested to know whether did anyone else found this insight from DPF rather hilarious:
‘I make the general point from history that monarchs who try to rule, not reign, generally end up serving themselves – not their people’.

The thing many Nzers ,outside the “beltway,” think of when it comes to Tainui is underpants and I’m not being facetious.

And I gave up on the idea that the majority of the media and politicos could reflect on anything other than their own interests a long time ago .

The interesting comment about the previous “queen” being well respected. I’d lived in NZ for just over five years when she died. I had no idea that she existed prior to her death; I’m going to assume this is because she’d been quietly and diligently working in the background and not causing dramas. The present “king” appears to be in the news a lot.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1974/0001/latest/whole.html

Tuku Morgan has sparked controversy after saying the Maori King, Tuheitia, should have veto rights or the power to dissolve Waikato-Tainui’s parliament. But it is the people who will decide.

Mr Morgan, whose name will go forward as chair of Te Kauhanganui after Tania Martin was disqualified from the position this week, said, if elected, he plans to change the iwi’s constitution to allow King Tuheitia these over-arching powers.

A small step, it seems, from the wrap-around sunglass-wearing “Tight Five” to enforcer for the Maori King. Maori TV, Parliament, now this… what will it take to loosen this man’s lockjaw-like attachment to the teat of public (in the latter case, the Tainui people’s) money?!

This cheeky little darky is the business of everyone who has paid taxes and reads the newspaper or listens to the radio or looks at TV. His self serving antics along with the court jester (Tuku Morgan) are an embarrassment to all New Zealanders.

As one of their members claimed some time ago when the money from the settlement started to disappear – “we were unfit to accept the money because we didnt know what to do with it” (it wasnt as innocent as it sounds – in typical maori fashion it was the basis for another claim – she reckoned they should have the same amount all over agian since theyd wasted so much of the first one)

My guess is that the Rasputin in this Court is Tuku Underpants.
He certainly wants the power/prestige – especially after being tossed out of his Tainui role and being told by Ngapuhi to bugger off back to the Waikato.
Tuku also needs money for more underpants; where better to syphon that off, than from the Court’s coffers.