This site is an archived version of Indymedia prior to 5th November 2012. The current site is at www.indymedia.org.nz.

Self-governance for Ngāi Tūhoe “on the table”

in

Activist Tame Iti says that not very long ago, the Crown thought Tūhoe was absurd to think of sovereignty and self-governance, but the matter is now on the table alongside financial compensation. A meeting was held in Wellington yesterday (11 August) between 40 iwi members and the Crown to hear its first offer of settlement. It is still unknown what the offer is. Te Kotahi ā Tūhoe chairman Tamati Kruger said the offer will be taken back to the people at a series of hui on Tuesday night and on Wednesday.

Tame Iti says the offer is just the first step and he believes the Crown will improve the offer. It is estimated that the offer will be similar to the Waikato-Tainui and Ngāi Tahu financial redress of $170 million. "Unless the same level of quantum is reached ($170 million), Ngāi Tūhoe will not be able to reach [an] agreement with the Crown." Tamati Kruger explained the journey to reaching settlement was long and tumultuous however necessary and that the descendants of Tūhoe could now realistically look forward to a brighter more independent future as a result of pushing forward with the settlement of Tūhoe claims.

Mana motuhake: recognition of Ngāi Tūhoe as a nation

From the Negotiator Reports - Issue 7: "The Ngāi Tūhoe interests that have been discussed with the Crown include:

  • Mana motuhake: recognition of Ngāi Tūhoe as a nation
  • Acknowledgement and ownership of Ngāi Tūhoe homeland i.e. Te Urewera is a homeland not a National Park
  • Ngāi Tūhoe viewed by the Crown as a 'nation' not just an iwi. Seek a political relationship with the Crown 'nation to nation'."

Self Government

"The Mana Motuhake o Tūhoe as an original claim, became the mantel upon which all other claims were posited. It has been just over 110 years since the last expression of self government in practical terms was witnessed in Te Urewera. The Tūhoe General Committee of 1898 was at that time chaired by Numia Kereru and heralded the resurgence of Tūhoe self government prior to its demise only a few years later. Having come under untenable political pressure of government officials of that day, not withstanding the internal wranglings which tested the integrity of the General Committee and threatened to decimate the unification of Ngāi Tūhoe. Incidentally this coincided with the emergence of the prophetic leader Rua Kenana - a prophetic and evangelical leader who rose to power at the height of Tūhoe's social disruption following the colonial wars. It can be argued that the features of this colonial and historical past mirror those events and experiences that are bound in Te Urewera and impact on Ngāi Tūhoe as an iwi in the present day." (from Te Kotahi ā Tūhoe)

Internal conflict - the creation of Te Umutaoroa

Several hapu have split from Te Kotahi ā Tūhoe in recent months and have formed a new body - Te Umutaoroa. Ngāti Haka Patuheuheu and Tamakaimoana are opposed to the forming of the Tūhoe Establishment Trust. A roadblock was set up in Waiohau over the weekend by members of Ngāti Haka Patuheuheu. "All we want is for us to put our voice out there, especially to the Government, because they're not listening to us ... [Kaingaroa] are our forests as well and we are being swallowed up by Tuhoe" said Anitewhatanga Hare.

Te Ringahuia Hata said police arrived armed and threatened to arrest people - turning a peaceful protest into an aggressive one (see photo). Ms Hata claimed the protest took place on land owned by the hapu. She said the hapu was protesting because members were concerned about talks between the Crown and Tūhoe authority Te Kotahi ā Tūhoe. The hapu was a major claimant and should be included.

Court hearings were held in Wellington in June over the dispute. The Judge reiterated that disputes of tikanga should properly be resolved by the internal processes of the iwi and that differences among members of Tūhoe as to the requirements of its tikanga must be discussed and if possible resolved within the iwi.

Links: Te Kotahi ā Tūhoe | Te Mana Motuhake ō Tūhoe | Ngāi Tūhoe

(This is all VERY complicated, and the author of this article is just trying to collate information and does not claim to know much of anything - nor take sides. But it seems it's simply the old 'divide and rule' tactic.)

Comments

Maori protesters threaten more road blocks

Te Umutaoroa executive Hiraina Hana who was at the hui, said there was dissatisfaction within Tuhoe.

"The hapu's voices have been silenced and the people are sick of it, they are over it. We've been to court, we've been to the Waitangi Tribunal ... We've had no choice to go down those pathways because we can't even have decent mediation with our own people."

In June, the Waitangi Tribunal rejected the group's application to be separated from Te Kotahi. She said the hapu's frustration at not being heard had resulted in Monday's road block and if the Crown continued to ignore Ngati Haka Patuheuheu, road blocks could happen again.

"At the end of the day, you've got to accept they are an aggrieved people, they are an aggrieved hapu out here. They'll do what ever it takes - that's how it is."

Te Kotahi a Tuhoe could not be contacted for comment.

http://www.rotoruadailypost.co.nz/local/news/maori-protesters-threaten-m...

The thing that gets me is,

The thing that gets me is, you have a tribe pushing for self governance, and this Umutaoroa ropu go running to the Crown to sort their troubles....whats the scoop with that??? If Hakapatuheuheu cannot sort its stuff within the realms of Ngai Tuhoe without tugging the pants of the soon to be former slave master for help at the first sign of raru, then maybe that Umutaoroa lot need to address whether like the rest of Tuhoe, it is Mana Motuhake they truly want, or is it that they themselves just want that treaty cash and nothing else....

Unfortunately there is another sinister aspect to this counter claim. Hakapatuheuheu weren't agrieved through the mandating process of Te Kotahi A Tuhoe were they, Robert Pouwhare who is one of those heading this counter claim, was strategic in getting the mandate from his hapu for TKAT to front the claims on behalf of all Tuhoe. That was of course, when he was sitting himself next to Tamati Kruger at every TKAT mandating hui, pretending to be the Krugers offsider.

Makes me wonder if he just has sour grapes when he didn't get elected as a negotiator for Ngai Tuhoe and has pushed his hapu into this route of conflict for those selfish reasons.

YOU ARE SO CORRECT

Te Umutaoroa is exactly that, a group of people who did not make the grade and thank the Atua that they were not selected as Negotiators because look how they behave.  Give it up Te Umutaoroa, Hiraina, Robert, Kirituia - you were all not capable of doing this job and taking our iwi to the new tomorrow of Mana Motuhake.  Kai te pai, because there is still other mahi that is better suited for you all just not in the lime light!  Kua hoha a Tuhoe i wa koutou rukahu!

I find it abhorrent that you

I find it abhorrent that you cannot use your own name on this website. You hide behind a pseudonym much like Hare Paati who stole the whenua from Patuheuheu and Ngati Haka at Te Houhi. Those who cannot speak and use their true names are not worthy of being heard.

What you say in your korero is whole load of rubbish. You, like many others have been sucked in. Use your brain and think critically about what is happening in Tuhoe. Don't be so naive and reductionist.

Just keep in mind that Tuhoe as an iwi does not have mana whenua at Kaingaroa. Everyone knows that the mana whenua belongs to Ngati Haka Patuheuheu, to the hapu of Ngati Manawa and the hapu of Ngati Whare. Mana whenua belongs to hapu.

My contention is that within Tuhoe nothing is clear and transparent. It’s all smoke and mirrors: illusions of deception. You talk about certain people being upset because they didn’t get to become negotiators. Well look at the pathetic offer that the self elected negotiators got for Tuhoe! How utterly pitiable and feeble!

Look at the shambles of the Tuhoe Waikaremoana Trust Board, how many people did not receive their voting papers on time?!

There is corruption within Tuhoe and people need to wake up, sniff it out and get rid of it!

Tena koe 'Yeah Right' What a

Tena koe 'Yeah Right'

What a pity you don't know the true facts regarding the 'Negotiator Elections' The elections from each rohe was scrapped.  Matt Te Pou was chosen by the collective hapu of Tamakaimoana and other rohe. Robert Pouwhare chosen by Ngati Haka/Patuheuheu and other rohe.  They along with Tamati Kruger were the favourites. Two of the  three Negotiators now were SELF APPOINTED or let me put it another way, 'SHOULDER TAPPED'. They were not chosen by their hapu.

Tamakaimoana ki Maungapohatu support Ngati Haka/Pautheuheu because we believe in the old ways 'That the hapu chooses who should speak on their behalf not Self Appointed Leaders.'  I would say that 'He takahi tenei i te Mana whakatau a Ngati Haka/Patuheuheu.' TKAT is very good at this, ' ki Te Takahi Mana’. Ask yourself why? Robert Pouwhare along with his hapu fought this kaupapa as you well know, for 20 to 30 years and they never gave up.  They didn't have to put their claim with Tuhoe. They were then with Te Ika Whenua Trust.  The Koroua of Ngati Haka/Patuheuheu told Robert to go with Tuhoe, now we are at this stage, Tuhoe with the GOODS but the hapu that fought for this kaupapa for so long Ngati Haka/Patuheuheu are now outside looking in while Negotiators who were not in the CNI claims process for the long haul take the credit. 

Oh by the way TKAT are very clever, they are encouraging members of the hapu of Waiohau to create a new hapu to be called, Ngati Haka ki Tawhia or Tawhi. 

In Ruatahuna due to Tamakaimoana ki Maungapohatu Hapu pulling the Trustee position and support from TKAT Trust, TKAT support members who affiliate to our hapu are also talking about the revival of an ancient hapu Ngati Huripapa. TKAT want to maintain the hold of the claims within each area, now how greedy and devious is that. To hold on to the different rohe will enable TKAT to carry on accessing funds from OTS, CFRT and so on… They encourage and support lying and continuous violence among the whanau.

Te Umutaoroa took the kaupapa to the Tribunal and High Court because our own people were using the Crown systems against the hapu that had pulled out of TKAT but, they also used 'TIKANGA MAORI' to hide behind.  Te Umutaoroa fought the Crown, TKAT and TET. I was sitting above Kirsti Luke in Court and blow me down we watched the Crown Q.C. looking at her for guidance and she was nodding her head profusely to let the Crown Q.C know what to do.

Who do you think caused the split within Tuhoe?  I can answer for Tamakaimoana ki Maungapohatu - the Manager of TKAT, one Trustee the one we're trying to get rid of and the Chairman. I have the proof, if you want copies of the letters, minutes or whatever correspondence you need, I will email them to you or, I will use this forum.  We believe in telling the truth.  "He Mana to te KUPU."   

Tena koe 'Yeah Right' there is so much more to tell you.  I will do my utmost to oblige, I haven't even started.  

Kare, I think you either need

Kare,

I think you either need to come home or get yourself to some hui to know what's really going on, its not for us to inform you from what we see is right but for you to seek the right korero so that you are able to sleep well at night and know it wasn't just sour grapes.

It seems you do need to come home or seek some sort of provision as far as you're language is concerned. As you will(well should) know it is Ngati Haka Patuheuheu NOT hakapatuheuheu. Once again in you're comment you're KUARETANGA rather than you're TUHOHOETANGA  has made its self sooooo clear.

Whakaarohia i mua i to tuku korero ki te ao.

Kia Ora 'Yeah

Kia Ora 'Yeah Right'

 

Firstly I think that your entire korero smacks of reductio ad absurdum!!! I will write a proper response to you in due course.

What I want to say to you is get the name right! We are not 'Hakapatuheuheu'. There are two hapu who are united in Waiohau and they are Ngati Haka and Patuheuheu. So get that right.

 

Byron

Tena koe ‘Yeah right’ You

Tena koe ‘Yeah right’

You have stated:

“The thing that gets me is, you have a tribe pushing for self governance, and this Umutaoroa ropu go running to the Crown to sort their troubles....whats [sic] the scoop with that???”.

Well ‘Yeah right’, the “scoop with that”, as you have so inauspiciously and unflatteringly purported,  is that Te Umutaoroa were virtually forced to seek assistance from the Crown because of the oppressive tactics and strategies being utilized by TKAT. The ‘scoop’ is that self-appointed leadership is tantamount to tyranny and despotism. Antonio Gramsci’s (1971) usage of the term ‘hegemony’ is useful here to describe and analyse the ways in which modes of domination are being employed within Tuhoe currently. Stuart Hall (1997) notes that Said’s definition of power relates closely to both Foucault and Gramsci’s ideas around hegemony: the ability of the ‘ruling’ culture to induce the subordinate culture in a way that “appears natural and inevitable” (Hall, 1997, p.259) to substitute their own values and beliefs for those of the dominant culture. Hegemonic methods are being utilised by sinister groups within Tuhoe to seduce the masses into believing that the ideas of a few self-elected people will be sufficient to create transformative futures for Tuhoe. For you see, neo-colonial manoeuvres are presently being operationalized within Tuhoe; thus, from a Freirian perspective, the cyclical colonising process is nearing its completion with the utter domination and oppression of marginalised hapu, claims and claimants, as the formerly oppressed has become the oppressor – that is the “scoop” you attempt to refer to here.

You have also asserted that:

“If Hakapatuheuheu [sic] cannot sort its stuff within the realms of Ngai Tuhoe without tugging the pants of the soon to be former slave master for help at the first sign of raru, then maybe that Umutaoroa lot need to address whether like the rest of Tuhoe, it is Mana Motuhake they truly want, or is it that they themselves just want that treaty cash and nothing else....”

It is not about cash at all and you know it. In October 2007, Tamati Kruger stated that Mana  Motuhake is about freedom; about freedom to be Tuhoe, Waikato, Pakeha. What about the freedom to be Patuheuheu, Ngati Koura, Tamakaimoana? If Mana Motuhake is actually about freedom, then why can’t hapu be free to negotiate their own claims within the constructs of a parallel negotiation model. CNI was an example of a parallel negotiation model that for all intensive purposes worked. That you would reduce Te Umutaoroa’s desires down to mere ‘cash’ is nauseating, and is a blatant example of reductio ad absurdum! The prophecy of Te Umutaoroa, given to the people of Te Houhi in 1886 by Te Kooti, was not about ‘cash’, it was in my view about transformation – recompense for the sins of Harry Burt on the people of Ngati Haka Patuheuheu; a compensatory narrative to inform the future and give the people of Ngati Haka Patuheuheu hope after their loss of Te Houhi.

Another statement from you:

“Unfortunately there is another sinister aspect to this counter claim. Hakapatuheuheu [sic] weren't agrieved [sic] through the mandating process of Te Kotahi A Tuhoe were they, Robert Pouwhare who is one of those heading this counter claim, was strategic in getting the mandate from his hapu for TKAT to front the claims on behalf of all Tuhoe. That was of course, when he was sitting himself next to Tamati Kruger at every TKAT mandating hui, pretending to be the Krugers offsider.”

This whole paragraph makes no sense and as such I will not need to respond to it. When I say that it makes no sense, I am talking also, and probably more appositely about the fact that it is poorly written.

Your last allegation:

“Makes me wonder if he [Robert Pouwhare] just has sour grapes when he didn't get elected as a negotiator for Ngai Tuhoe and has pushed his hapu into this route of conflict for those selfish reasons.”

Now this is really interesting ‘Yeah right’. So what you’re saying here is that Robert Pouwhare is selfish and has sour grapes. I’m fairly certain that most of Tuhoe wouldn’t agree with you there. Everyone knows that Robert has worked tirelessly for the iwi for years and years, there is no doubt about that! Many have experienced his generosity and kindness, and we all know that his heart is huge and his willingness to give, immeasurable. It’s not about sour grapes – what a reductionist claim. It’s actually about the fact that there is major corruption within the governing bodies of Tuhoe. It’s really about the fact that the negotiators chose themselves – they are self-elected “leaders”! This is really about the fact that those who applied for positions as negotiators didn’t even get a letter back to say that their applications had been received. This is about the fact that there should have been more negotiators to be more representative of the diversity of the 32 claims. Look at the pathetic offer that the current negotiators worked for! It was insulting and quite rightly was rejected.

When you peel the layers back and look, it’s always about power/knowledge (Foucault, 1980) and control.

I think that you need to use your brain more and think critically about what is happening within Tuhoe at the moment.

 

Byron Rangiwai

Waiohau

 

Bibliography

 

Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. London: Routledge.

Bolaffi, G., Bracalenti, R., Braham, P., & Gindro, S. (2003). Dictionary of race, ethnicity and culture. London: Sage Publications.

Derrida, J. (1972). Positions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge. New York: Penguin.

Hall, S. (1992). The west and the rest: discourse and power. In S. Hall and B. Gielben (Eds.), Formations of modernity (pp. 276-320). Cambridge: Polity Press and Open University.

Hall, S. (1994). Cultural identity and diaspora. In P. Williams and L. Chrisman (Eds.), Colonial discourse and post-colonial theory: a reader (pp. 392-403). New York: Columbia University Press.

Hall, S. (1997).  The spectacle of the ‘other’. In S. Hall (Ed.), Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices (pp. 225-92). London: Sage.

Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday Anchor.

Gramsci, A. (1971). Selections from the Prison Notebooks. International Publishers

Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. London: Penguin.

Te Umutaoroa executive

Te Umutaoroa executive Hiraina [Hona] mentioned in the above news item. Here is Hiraina signing the agreement with the crown on behalf of Te Whaiti, which was an agreement that Tuhoe was to appoint a few negotiators to broker a deal with the Crown on behalf of all Tuhoe.

So what happened between that time and now, well, as usual there were about a million hands that went up to be negotiators, and only 3 chosen, it seems a few of them seem to have got the pip that they didn't get chosen to be negotiators and went running to the colonial office to try and get their way.

They didn't get their way, so went back and fired up their hapu and so we have todays internal conflict.

Far Out

Its shameful that you are attacking individuals that are making a stand in defence of their Haapu. The settlement process is all about the ethnic cleansing of Haapu & the extinuishment of Land rights, if you think thats okay then you are really doing the work of the crown.

Whats problematic with this

Whats problematic with this spiel firstly no guts to put their name to it, secondly totally ill-informed and uninformed.  Our challenge to you is to come to a Te Umutaoroa hui and confront the people.  We have been in front of the iwi on several occasions, several failed mediation attempts with our own.

We signed in good faith the problems arise when there is a failure on some parties behalf to to uphold their side of the bargain.  Your delusional if you think its about money for us, you obviously dont understand mana motuhake.  The Sunday before that signing I spoke directly with Mr Kruger and tabled minutes from Te Whaaiti in dispute of the Tuuhoe terms of negotiation that respected the 'mana motuhake' of the Crown.  I argued with Mr Kruger that the Crown do not have 'mana motuhake' we argued throughout the Te Urewera hearings that the Crown had kawanatanga.  Hence the pathetic offer that has been made to Tuuhoe - the negotiators returned with jack shit - No mana motuhake and no Te Urewera!  In the real world they would be sacked!

I agree this page is about divide and rule and those responsible i.e. TKAT  (poor leadership and management) have taken no responsibility but have their own write ludicrous statements to cover up their dumb deal - sounds desperate to me.  As I understand it at least three of the first lot of TKAT Crown offer hui have rejected the offer.

Just so you understand TKAT is a charitable trust operating under Pakeha law

Ignorance is the Oppressor

 

Hiraina Hona

Tamakaimooana ki Te Whaaiti nui aa Toikairaakau

 

Tena korua wahine  said:"The

Tena korua

wahine  said:
"The settlement process is all about the ethnic cleansing of Haapu & the extinuishment of Land rights..."

Noone is holding a knife to the throat of Tuhoe to settle, it is their/your choice to do so. If they are not aware that this process is fraught with that sort of bs then something is really wrong over there.

Hiraina said:
"I agree this page is about divide and rule"

Which is a pertinent point considering the way the process has broken down and two groups have formed rather than stopping the process in its tracks, and dealing with the mandated group for whom you all voted for and putting a stop to them period if they won't listen. Thats not dividing, splitting and trying to put together a second negotiation group is dividing.

"Your delusional if you think its about money for us, you obviously dont understand mana motuhake."

It may not be about money or about getting in a huff about not being appointed as negotiators for you and the Te Whaiti lot, but financial benefit in my belief is the core underlying raru for some of the others who are a part of your group or whom are fuelling this from behind the scenes. Because you are all in one break away group, it is understandable that you might get lumped with their 'other' motives.

"The Sunday before that signing I spoke directly with Mr Kruger and tabled minutes from Te Whaaiti in dispute of the Tuuhoe terms of negotiation that respected the 'mana motuhake' of the Crown.  I argued with Mr Kruger that the Crown do not have 'mana motuhake' we argued throughout the Te Urewera hearings that the Crown had kawanatanga.  Hence the pathetic offer that has been made to Tuuhoe - the negotiators returned with jack shit - No mana motuhake and no Te Urewera!  In the real world they would be sacked!"

Tika tera about kawanatanga. But isn't it a key part of the process for the negotiators to convey the Crown deal to Tuhoe (which is never going to be what you are asking for, not the first time round anyways), and for Tuhoe to accept of reject it. In my opinion, no matter what they come back with, if it isn't exactly what you are asking for then reject it outright, simple, in that there isn't a problem in my mind concerning the process, and no need to create a second group to negotiate with the Crown on that basis.

"As I understand it at least three of the first lot of TKAT Crown offer hui have rejected the offer."

My case in point, everyone should reject any deal that is conveyed back to you until what you want in total is accepted. Now if the negotiators do not convey that message back to the Crown but instead try to whitewash and rort Tuhoe by conveying some pissweak version, then I think there is a case to not form another negotiation group, but to totally shut that thing down.

But if they do their job and take the korero back as it is handed to them, then where is the problem? If the negotiators are true to that role then they basically forfeit their right to have an opinion on the subject bar to carry the exact message they were given back to the Crown. If they are not rorting the process then the power lays with you the people to send them the clear message to be conveyed. 100% return of Te Urewera, and Mana Motuhake or no deal - not split off into two claims.

Also, by splitting into two groups, where does that leave your voice now.

"Just so you understand TKAT is a charitable trust operating under Pakeha law"

Love them or hate them, they are a charitable trust that you all voted to represent your claims to the Crown for settlement which does not give them licence to rort Tuhoe, but their charitable status is politically a moot point in this issue because they were mandated.

Now on that point of Mana Motuhake.

The Crown does not have Mana Motuhake in the eyes of Tuhoe nor in mine, but hold an assumption of it, like when the Filthy Few take your Harley from your garage and dare you to come claim it back.

But in order to begin negotiations with them their usual trick is to probably force or coerce Tuhoe to concede that they the Crown at least hold sovereignty over this country as a general rule, so if Tuhoe do not want to officially acknowledge that the Crown has any sovereignty then there is no grounds for continued negotiations with them, and certainly no grounds to form a separate negotiating team.

The only process left for you then in this revolving world is to either carry on the way you are in limbo, or direct conflict, since war in its various forms is the only option left when two sides will not agree on who hold sovereignty over a contested piece of land and peoples. If you are prepared to do that then your case for Tuhoe to put its foot down and reject any notion of Crown sovereignty is valid, but if that is not on the cards, then there will have to be give and take in order to jossle through the negotiations and come out with the best deal for Tuhoe to finally accept or reject.

Concerning the negotiators. Just so you know I have the same distrust in 'some' of those kupapa negotiators as many of you do, and a similar level of wariness about some of those in the background of TKAT and the agendas of 'some' of those involved in that trust, this also goes for some of those lurking in the background behind your ropu too.

But for all their shortcomings, it wasn't TKAT that dragged this raru away from the covering of the Urewera into the courts of the Crown, but the group for which you are a part of, which says a lot about where your hearts are at concerning the realities of Mana Motuhake, and the work that needs to be undertaken to make sure that this doesn't happen again.

If you want a living example to display to the Crown that you indeed do have undisturbed Mana Motuhake, then you have got to get out of the habit of running to them everytime something doesn't go your way. This is not the way of Mana Motuhake but more co-dependence in their judiciary. Mana Motuhake as you well know, is not something given to you by the Crown, it is maintained, and it is choices like this one that define its continued existence in reality, or existence in theory.

The Crown and all of its entities have to become completely irrelevant in the determining of internal Tuhoe business, even the bad shit or else you will be fulfilling the words on their mouths that they say in secret between themselves...

"let them have a bit of leash and make them think they have freedom, they will fuck up, and be back in the fold in no time crying for our help".

Which is why I think 'trying to' split into two groups to negotiate with the Crown is playing right into their game of divide and rule. Again, get everyone together and shut the whole thing down if it looks like those negotiators have become complicit to the whim of the Crown, if they are not, and are carrying out their role as agreed, then send them the message everyone else is already sending them to convey to the Crown, no deal, piss off, come back when you want to talk about the 100% return of Te Urewera, and recognise Tuhoe Mana Motuhake over Te Urewera.

Kia Ora Paraone You keep

Kia Ora Paraone

You keep referring to Te Umutaoroa as a ‘breakaway group’. You haven’t explored the reasons around why 15 out of 32 claims would pull away from TKAT. Has this crossed your mind?

Also, what about the self-appointed leadership that destroys hapu unity? You haven’t covered this issue in your spiel. The fact that people with stunning CV’s applied for the negotiator positions and were not even sent a letter of receipt is very suspicious; and everyone is sure that the three negotiators, who all have major conflicts of interest, appointed themselves as negotiators.

You also talked about mandate. Well the mandate needs to be checked for robustness every three months yet no one is doing the checking! This is pretty shocking in my view.

Te Umutaoroa is asking for a parallel negotiation model. People think that it’s not possible, but it is. The whole CNI process is a great example of a parallel negotiation strategy.

The contention here is really about the shocking state of Tuhoe ‘leadership’ – I have put leadership in single commas to show that it is a problematic term within the current political climate of Tuhoe. Where are the true leaders? Where are the rangatira? They are nowhere to be seen and it makes my heart bleed to think that I was born into an iwi that has no true leadership at the moment!

Byron Rangiwai

Te whanau Maki Natana me te whanau Rikiriki Mehaka

 

 

Mana Motuhake o Tuhoe

Kei te panui haere i nga korero, Hiraina, ko to mana motuhake ko te huna i muri i te tarau o te karauna, kua hoha ahau ki te whakarongo atu i aq koe e korero rukahu ana.  No te wa i tutaki koe ki a matau o Ruatoki a Tamati, Tame, te weeti me ahau i mohio ai koe tera kupu te mana motuhake a inaianei kei te pohehe koe kei te marama tika koe.  I DONOT THINK SO!!  kati te rukahu a ko te putea to ariki a pera ano i a koe e mahi ana mo Anamata, Te Kotahi o Tuhoe a utunga katoa te hiahia kare ko te mahi aroha kare i te mana kia tika tonu na korero tuhia e koe a kare i mahia tikahia a na to matau tungane a Te Hue Rangi i pai ai te whakatakoto korero i roto i te rangahau mo Te Whaitinui a Toi ripoata.  A i tenei wa kei te whakapae koe na runga i nga mahi a Tamati raua ko Kirsti i makere mai koe, kei te rukahu koe na runga i to tauarearea tuatahi ki te putea utu a me te puhaehae.

Kia ora Noone, I like your

Kia ora Noone,

I like your name it truly denotes the character of your korero; perhaps you could also use the name 'no-thing' or ‘no-substance’.

Let's be really clear about something because it is blatantly obvious that you are ill-informed and mis-informed. Millions of hands did not go up to be negotiators as your comment suggests - I realise you are using this number (million) to create 'drama' in your korero. You are right about one thing - yes three were chosen. But I ask you who chose them? Well here is the answer: they chose themselves. Aren't you shocked by this? Do you support self-appointed-self-elected leaders? Where are our true leaders and where are the rangatira to correct this tragic situation?

You need to wake up. The three negotiators chose themselves even though they have major conflicts of interest. And what is more, they are doing a totally slack job at negotiating and have managed to negotiate an offer that is insulting and was consequently rejected.

The internal conflict that you are referring to has arisen because of a lack of clear and transparent processes, and due to the fact that there are sinister and deceitful forces at work within Tuhoe which are driven by greed and corruption.

I think back to the meeting at Mataatua marae last year. I think about how disgusted the koroua and kuia were when a woman with moko on her chin and forehead walked across the atea enraged and twisted. Just before she stood up to speak a certain self-elected “leader” appeared to be whispering in her ear – everyone noticed that this was happening. This woman, a trustee on TKAT stormed across the atea and called another woman a “TE ARAWA SLUT”. Words cannot express how disgusted I was at this woman’s behaviour. I wished that my koroua’s like Taurua Natana Koura, Mehaka Tokopounamu, Rikiriki Mehaka, and Hapurona Maki Natana, were here to deal with people like this. Sometimes it seems like certain individuals think that they can “pick on” Waiohau because our powerful koroua are not here to help us. That is where they are wrong because they are here to help us and they do so every day!

So let me ask you ‘Noone’. If a trustee of TKAT can act like this what else are they capable of? It makes me wonder......?

 

Byron Rangiwai

Te whanau Maki Natana me te whanau Rikiriki Mehaka

TUHOE!!

Tena Tatau e nga pumanawa o nga koromatua o Ngai Tuhoe.

Ka aroha ka tangi te ngakau i te totara waahi rua a te iwi.

Ka mihi ake ra ki nga rangatira e aki ana i te kaupapa korerorero taha ki te kawanatanga, me ta ratou pumau ki te kupu a nga maatua, ka mutu, kaare he mana he wariu ranei o te moni, engari ia ko te hoki whenua mai o Te Urewera me nga moka me nga whaitua ki roto i nga ringaringa o nga hapu o te iwi.... kua hoha ahau ki nga korero taunu i a TUHOE, ana hapu tonu e kukume ana i te ingoa o to tatau iwi, o to tatau TIPUNA ki roto i te paru. Maaku e ki atu, na te kooti wehewehe taangata i whai pooro ai koe ki tera korero. Ko wai koutou? E tautoko ana ahau 'ko Tuhoe he whakakotahitanga hapu' no nga kawai katoa o tenei motu. Eaoia, na te kotahi o te whakaaro, nga kawai te wairua me te manawataki a TUHOE i o mua wa, ka whakarohea i runga i te rau o te patu me te tatai whakapapa.... e mea koutou te hunga kaare he mana o TUHOE ki era whenua, e ka tangi kau ana te mapu ki tera....Tuhoe saved many of its hapu from extinction from marauding iwi through kinship ties and matemateaone. If it weren't for TUHOE, affiliating peoples Ngati Whare Ngati Manawa and Patuheuheu would have been displaced by Ngati Pukeko (as happened with Ngati Rongo in Ruatoki, Nga Potiki in Ruatahuna with Te Arohana, Ngati Ruapani in Waikaremoana, Ngai Te Kapo and others in Opouriao and Hurepo etc) but it was TUHOE who banished them back to Whakatane.... then came Waikato, Ngapuhi and Te Arawa, who TUHOE defended you from before some turned coat and became KUPAPA, (sorry for taking off the superman cape from your shoulders) now look at what the iwi gets back in return, nothing but scorn and comtempt....hopefully it can be resolved together, Te Umutaoroa and Te Kotahi, at the one table, and have issues 'aired out'...maybe even a Tatau Pounamu again between the iwi and the hapu....

So far I think the negotiators are doing an excellent job, I know two of them and they have the right SKILLS and EXPERIENCE and WHAKAPAPA (yes and whakapapa) to do the job. Consultation hui with the people of TUHOE TATA and TUHOE TAWHITI took place in which the sum of $120 million was rejected.  But hey, the whakatau must come from the WHOLE IWI, isnt that what happened? If they don't, I reckon they will pay for it natemea he teka noa te korero no te tangata kotahi anake te whenua, TO WENE TO WENE!

but i like all of you, because we need people to ask the tough questions and koira tatau, ahakoa pakanga ai tatau ki a tatau, i te toonga o te ra kua matemateaone tatau ki a tatau, ahakoa ra te mana whakaawe a te Karauna.

 

naaku iti nei he Tama na Tuhoe Potiki   

 

 

 

 

 

Kia Ora,   I agree with some

Kia Ora,

 

I agree with some of what you are saying here. Some questions for you though: who chose the negotiators? Did they chose themselves? If so, why do they get to do that? Do they have the power and mandate to chose themselves as negotiators? What key performance indicators are you using to determine whether or not they are doing a good job? You have indicated that you know two of them and that they are doing a good job; so, what about their performance shows that they are negotiating to a satisfactory level for Tuhoe? What claims have they included and which ones have they left to the side?

Just one more thing. You have

Just one more thing. You have stated: "So far I think the negotiators are doing an excellent job, I know two of them and they have the right SKILLS and EXPERIENCE and WHAKAPAPA (yes and whakapapa) to do the job."

I am glad that you feel that these individuals have the right skills and qualifications to do the job. Many people do not support that notion however, based on the fact that others who submitted their CV's were not even given the courtesy of a letter of receipt which is a 'normal' and 'proper' part of recruitment etiquette. What is concerning here is that the three negotiators have major conflicts of interest. How on earth can we even begin to justify their positions as negotiators when they already have major positions within the governing bodies of the iwi. Surely, we can all see that there is something 'fishy' going on here?

 

  Another thing, and I

 

Another thing, and I promise this will be the last from me today; the problem isn't with TUHOE the iwi, not at all. How can we deny or scorn our iwi. Of course our iwi have always been there for us and we will always be there to support the iwi – and I mean the ‘iwi’ not Te Kotahi a Tuhoe (which certainly is not the ‘iwi’).

I totally agree with your korero around the support that the hapu have had from the iwi. Surely you can agree, nevertheless, that hapu must have autonomy over their own whenua (let’s not equate whenua to money because it's not about money for us).

Let’s just be aware of the neo-colonial-capitalist-corporatizing influences that iwi become subjected to through the settlement process; I don't think that having hapu mana whenua absorbed into corporatized iwi structures is what I want to see happen.

Let me reiterate: the problem is not with TUHOE the iwi, it is with Te Kotahi a Tuhoe and the lack of clear and transparent processes it has demonstrated time and time again; it is also with the impending corporatisation of the iwi, and the absorption of hapu mana whenua into this imminent corporate-iwi structure.

Last thing: I don’t think that a mere three negotiators can fully represent the diversity and spectrum of the 32 or so claims. There should have been more negotiators in my view.

Ae Tena Koe e te Uri, Firstly

Ae Tena Koe e te Uri,

Firstly you ask who chose the negotiators - probably a group chosen by representatives of the iwi mandated group (Te Kotahi).

Tuarua is a question for you: What will you do if all this fails (road blocks, want of Govt interjection etc), will you do the right thing, which is, cut the middle men out (they are the root of all this bickering not just with Tuhoe and this lifetime, but with many iwi) and talk again with the mandated group to discuss what the actual problems are and sort to rectify it among ourselves...if none of use can then none of use deserve to be there....

The 'conflicts of interest', serious accusations. I havent heard that one yet you may choose to enlighten us on that.

Yes I do know two of them, one has been the Tuhoe Trust Board chairman for several years now and the other, Tamati Kruger, was one of the 'chosen ones' spoken of by aunty Kirituia (of Te Umutaoroa fame) above.

'Claims left out by Te Kotahi', unsure about that...are those the 15 of the 32 claims pulled out by Te Umutaoroa or other ones?

'Returned receipts', I mean is that really a big deal? If receipts had been returned would that have made you less paranoid of the selection outcome?

And finally, I agree with you there should've been more negotiators then 3, to represent the diversity of the 32 claims. Is it too late?

If we get over all this political bullshit, and speak kanohi ki te kanohi, without violence, then I welcome and embrace mana motuhake and full governance for Ngai Tuhoe. If we cant then we'll be worse off than our tipuna when they fought all the time amongst themselves..i dont want that, least for myself, but for the generations of Tuhoe to come.

If we cant, then we dont deserve it. Tahia te marae, tahia te marae, whakapaia te whare! 

 

   

 

  

 

 

Tena koe  I totally agree

Tena koe 

I totally agree with what you have said:

"If we get over all this political bullshit, and speak kanohi ki te kanohi, without violence, then I welcome and embrace mana motuhake and full governance for Ngai Tuhoe. If we cant then we'll be worse off than our tipuna when they fought all the time amongst themselves..i dont want that, least for myself, but for the generations of Tuhoe to come."

You are right!!! However, can we actually do it without people getting violent?? What concerns me is the physical safety of our people, especially our children, kuia and kaumatua. I couldn’t care less if someone beat me up or for that matter shot me in the head – I would go into the after-world willingly! I just don’t want to see my koroua and kuia being beaten up – I know that it happens ‘over the hill’ sometimes.

I direct you to my statement above regarding the meeting at Rotorua, Mataatua Marae last year – that was disgusting!!! I couldn’t believe what I was hearing and seeing. So if we all got together to korero, I hope that it would be ‘civil’. You must have been there, you would’ve have seen and heard the verbal violence in all of its crudeness. These are the kinds of impedimenta that we will have to overcome if dialogue is to be engaged in. We can’t have ‘loose canons’ shooting off at the will and whim of certain manipulative characters – this is sadistic!

You have also stated:

"Tuarua is a question for you: What will you do if all this fails (road blocks, want of Govt interjection etc), will you do the right thing, which is, cut the middle men out (they are the root of all this bickering not just with Tuhoe and this lifetime, but with many iwi) and talk again with the mandated group to discuss what the actual problems are and sort to rectify it among ourselves...if none of use can then none of use deserve to be there...."

I just want us to think a little about this notion of mandating. Now, the mandate is supposed to be checked for robustness every three months. Is it actually being checked to your knowledge? Are all of Tuhoe being consulted as to the robustness of the mandate? And you’re totally right we do need to sort this out amongst ourselves. However, we tried mediation with Wira Gardiner and not even he could help out. Maybe Tuhoe led mediation would be the key, perhaps someone like Professor Wharehuia Milroy could facilitate? We do have some stunning Tuhoe academics out there. Actually, where are they?

You have also said: "'Returned receipts', I mean is that really a big deal? If receipts had been returned would that have made you less paranoid of the selection outcome?"

What I am talking about here is letters of receipt. Now when you apply for a job you're supposed to get a letter of receipt back from the employer to say "we have received your CV and we are processing it" - something like that. And then, when you don't get the job you get a 'Dear John/Jane' letter to say so. This didn't happen - why? When I think of the calibre of people who applied that I know of, it boggles my mind to think that they didn't even get notification – sinisterly suspicious in my view.

I am glad we both agree that there should have been more negotiators to represent the diversity of the 32 claims - you asked if it's too late to have more? Not sure about that – something for us to investigate. Although, I don’t think that the three negotiators in place at the moment would be willing to share power. Last year we asked for more negotiators but no one wanted to listen. It’s clear to me that everything in this regard is about power/knowledge/control – it’s simple really. And if you have read Sun Tzu’s book “The Art of War” it actually allows us to penetrate some of thinking and discourse around TKAT strategies. If you haven’t read it already I would suggest that you do – it’s a good read. You will actually see all the strategies that TKAT has employed right down to the “TET”. It’s all there for you to see.

Byron

Oh and if you're interested

Oh and if you're interested in the "Art of War" here is a chapter content summary:

  1. Laying Plans explores the five fundamental factors that define a successful outcome (the Way, seasons, terrain, leadership, and management). By thinking, assessing and comparing these points you can calculate a victory, deviation from them will ensure failure. Remember that war is a very grave matter of state.
  2. Waging War explains how to understand the economy of war and how success requires making the winning play, which in turn, requires limiting the cost of competition and conflict.
  3. Attack by Stratagem defines the source of strength as unity, not size, and the five ingredients that you need to succeed in any war.
  4. Tactical Dispositions explains the importance of defending existing positions until you can advance them and how you must recognize opportunities, not try to create them.
  5. Energy explains the use of creativity and timing in building your momentum.
  6. Weak Points & Strong explains how your opportunities come from the openings in the environment caused by the relative weakness of your enemy in a given area.
  7. Maneuvering explains the dangers of direct conflict and how to win those confrontations when they are forced upon you.
  8. Variation in Tactics focuses on the need for flexibility in your responses. It explains how to respond to shifting circumstances successfully.
  9. The Army on the March describes the different situations in which you find yourselves as you move into new enemy territories and how to respond to them. Much of it focuses on evaluating the intentions of others.
  10. Terrain looks at the three general areas of resistance (distance, dangers, and barriers) and the six types of ground positions that arise from them. Each of these six field positions offer certain advantages and disadvantages.
  11. The Nine Situations describe nine common situations (or stages) in a campaign, from scattering to deadly, and the specific focus you need to successfully navigate each of them.
  12. The Attack by Fire explains the use of weapons generally and the use of the environment as a weapon specifically. It examines the five targets for attack, the five types of environmental attack, and the appropriate responses to such attack.
  13. The Use of Spies focuses on the importance of developing good information sources, specifically the five types of sources and how to manage them.

Yeah right

Do you expect this to happen when they won't even offer Maori seats for the supercity?

National are racist bastards that won't let things like this happen...

You're right, it's unfair,

You're right, it's unfair, racists and discriminatory that there will be no Maori seats for the super-city. It's unbelievable that over the past 140 years or so, that Maori have only made up less than 1 percent of the total number of councillors on the council! Sickening!

tangata whenua is who we r f

tangata whenua is who we r f u cant agree on that then wats da point n fightin among our selfs we will lose everything our kuia an koro lived 4 an dont 4 get our Moari Battlion so we need 2 hold true 2 who we r TUHOE ANAKE