Author Archives: Admin

Kahukuraariki Trust Board management close their Facebook account

The Kahukuraariki Trust Board management have closed their Facebook account cutting a vital channel for open and transparent communicate with their members and beneficiaries.

When I emailed the Trust Board asking them why they had closed it, I was told that all information for Kahukuraariki is now on their website, please see link

When I pressed as to why it was closed, I was told that it was a management decision until they have had time to formulate a wider communication strategy.

I’m not really sure what that means, but hey it’s the Trust Board.

Unfortunately, the Kahukuraariki website hasn’t been updated yet with the recent SGM&AGM hui minutes, nor has a link of the zoom meeting recording been posted on their site to date.

Kahukuraariki Trust Board – Trustee Election Results 2022

March 8th, 2022

Morena koutou,

please see below the results for the Trustee Election 2022.

Congratulations to Otangaroa – Ana Hotere, Te Komanga – Roger Kingi, Taemaro – Hone (JJ) Ripikoi, Waimahana – Jean Joseph.

No election was require for Waihapa – Teresa Tepania-Ashton, Mangatowai – April Hetaraka, Waitaruke – Norman McKenzie and Taupo – Waitangi Wood.

Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa Ratification Hui June-August 2015

OIA Response 13 March 2018 to an OIA Request 18 February 2018.

Details the four Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa Ratification Hui between June 2015 and August 2015. Each hui had extremely low participation:

  • 27 June 2015 – only 15 people attended
  • 2 July 2015 – only 34 people attended
  • 18 July 2015 – only 48 people attended
  • 1 August 2015 – only 24 people attended

Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Bill – Third Reading – 16th August, 2017

At the First reading of the Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Bill in April 2016, objections were heard which were referred to the Māori Affairs Committee. Numerous objections were formally lodged and discussed in Wellington in April 2017. These objections were ignored by Chris Finlayson on the second and third readings. The NZ First party abstained from voting in protest, however the National Party forced the bill through, and the Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Bill was passed into law in August 2017.

A new precedent for hapū settlements?

Analysis – A spat over treaty settlements has seen insults hurled in Parliament, but points at a wider issue around the role of hapū in settlements.

Hapu took to the streets of Whangarei in protest over the mandate.

Protesters took to the streets of Whangarei to oppose Tūhoronuku’s appointment to carry out treaty negotiations on behalf of Ngāpuhi.  Photo: RNZ

In one case earlier this week, insults were hurled between the Māori Party and New Zealand First, after New Zealand First pulled its support for two of five Treaty of Waitangi settlement bills.

The issue at the core of the dispute surrounds a settlement with Ngāti Aukiwa, a small hapū of the Whangaroa Harbour in Northland.

The hapū, which has always attempted to run its own claim, has instead been swallowed up by the larger iwi claim, Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa.

More detail :

Objection to Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Bill Submission by Graham Williams – No Mandate


To the Māori Affairs Committee

Personal Details

This submission is from Graham Williams, PO Box 301347, Albany, North Shore City, Auckland. Currently, I am residing in the UK; however I can be contacted via email at, if you have any questions.


I oppose this bill because:

The Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board has failed to provide up-to-date mandate affirmation reports; and as such have failed to prove their mandate to represent the people of Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa. In fact, they have not even provided one mandate affirmation report detailing voting numbers over the past 8 years.

Actions taken:

  • I have requested a copy of all of the mandate reports from the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board; however my requests have been ignored
  • I have complained to OTS, and have requested a copy of all of the mandate reports provided to them; however the response from OTS was that none have been provided to them
  • OTS has tried to justify the continuation of the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board mandate by speculating that the roadshows, facebook page and website, somehow show that the Trust Board had affirmed its mandate. Unfortunately, the only thing OTS has demonstrated is their bias to support a Trust Board that has failed to prove its mandate
  • I have complained directly to Mr Finlayson; however he has replied saying he had considered my complaint; however that he saw no issue, and provided me with an out-dated copy of the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa mandate document from 2010

I wish to make the following comments:

The Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board has failed to engage with its wider Iwi. I have tried over the past 8 years on numerous occasions to engage with the Trust Board via email and on their facebook page; however they have refused to answer any of my questions, or respond to any of my comments on their facebook page. I have requested copies of mandate reports, hui minutes, copies of the AIP, and the Deed of Settlement; however I have been denied timely access to all material.

Mr Finlayson in his First Reading of this Bill, eluded to the fact that 78% of the people that voted, had voted to accept the Deed of Settlement. What Mr Finlayson has failed to mention is that only 585 people voted to accept the Government’s offer, of a 3800+ strong Iwi. With a very low voting turnout of only 30%, the 585 who voted to accept the offer represent a mere 15% of our Iwi. I emailed Mr Finlayson pointing this fact out; however he replied saying that 24% of the eligible voters voted to accept the offer, and that that was a sufficient level of support to go forward.


The mandate has not been maintained by the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board, and as such the Trust Board cannot demonstrate that they represent all hapu within the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa area. The very low voting turnout and minority acceptance of the Deed of Settlement, is testament to this fact.

This bill cannot be passed until all hapu have been fully engaged and represented; to do so would be to deny natural justice. The Waitangi Tribunal follows the rules of natural justice to ensure that all parties entitled receive fair representation; this has clearly not been the case.

Urgent Hearing over Ngāti Wai mandate

Failure to actively protect the ability of hapu to exercise their rangatiratanga was central to a decision by the Waitangi Tribunal to grant an urgent hearing into the crowns recognition of the Ngati Wai Trust Board mandate.

Ngati Rehua hapu claimant Huhana Lyndon says they are overjoyed at the decision and the tribunals’ acknowledgement of over five hundred families who signed a petition in support.

In her decision Judge Reeves said, “It cannot go unstated that the issues involved are very close to those considered in the Ngāpuhi Mandate Inquiry Report.”

Te Uri o Hikihiki hapu claimant Miley George said, “We’ve done everything off our own backs we’ve had no resources no putea to be able to communicate and get the information out there but we have conviction and we believe in the mana of our hapu. “

As the matter is before the tribunal the Minister of Treaty Negotiations Chris Finlayson declined our request for comment today.  Meanwhile, Haydn Edmonds Chair of the Ngati Wai Trust Board said they believe the Deed of Mandate they have established clearly provides for Kaumātua, Hapū and Marae representatives to advise the Board at a governance level.

The claimants have been given forty days to prepare for the urgent hearing.

Divided iwi trust returns to Tribunal

The Waitangi Tribunal has granted an urgent claim hearing to 11 groups who opposed the mandated authority for Ngāti Wai late last year.

Ngāti Wai, an iwi located on Northland’s east coast, has about 2700 registered members and was at the negotiation stage of its treaty process.

Fewer than 800 iwi members cast their votes in the Ngāti Wai mandate process, a participation rate of 28 percent.

The Crown accepted it regardless of the low rate and moved into negotiation phase with the Ngātiwai Trust Board.

But 11 claimant groups filed urgency claims with the Waitangi Tribunal claiming the Crown had not ensured the trust board carried out an open, fair and robust process.

Huhana Seve, one of the claimants from a Whangaruru hapū said the Treaty of Waitangi was signed by hapū, and grievances must be settled by an authority which adequately represented all of them.

“The Crown has recognised the mandate that doesn’t have a clear pathway for hapū to be a part of decision making but also that hapū need to consent to even be considered as part of their mandate.”

Ngāti Wai Trust Board chairman Haydn Edmonds said: “As the Waitangi Tribunal decision only came out late last night, we are still processing all the information in the report. It is necessary to take the time needed to absorb the information and to fully understand the Tribunal’s decision.

“We believe the Deed of Mandate that we have established clearly provides for Kaumātua, Hapū and marae representatives to advise the board at a governance level.”

The board will now have to show the Tribunal it represents all the hapū on its mandate list.

Both the board and the Crown will have to show no claimants or groups are being prejudicially affected by a policy, practice, act or omission of the Crown that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The claimants now have just 40 days to prepare and file their evidence and affidavits.