Letter to the Editor, Thursday December 24, 2015

A bitter pill

In March 2011, Te Runanga Nui o Te Aupouri Trust was ratified by the iwi as the mandated post-settlement governance entity to manage and receive fisheries and historical settlement assets. Having attended that meeting, and being elected as the youngest trustee, I clearly remember the feeling amongst the people on that day and the understanding that other Te Aupouri entities would cease to exist.

Although the now former Aupouri Maori Trust Board could not be officially wound up until settlement legislation had passed, the general understanding was that apart from the social service delivery arm, the former trust board too would be somewhat dormant.

Dormant indeed. The recent report by Ernst & Young, commissioned by the Minister of Maori Development as the Minister responsible for the board, makes for painful reading, and summarises "[b]etween late 2012 and 2015, AMTB embarked on a period of rapid growth, expanding in size and increasing its diversity of operations. This included the establishment of an additional five subsidiary companies".

The findings, limited by the inquiry's terms of reference, were that there was no direct evidence of fraudulent or criminal activity, but has characterised the failings as poor financial management (including a $540,000 debt to IRD - some people just don't like paying tax), inadequate governance and key financial issues not being raised by management with the board.

However, this is no Christmas present, and as an iwi we are now staring down the barrel of costs ranging from $1.5-3 million.

What is highlighted in the report is that of six strategic decisions made by the former trust board, four were not discussed with Te Runanga Nui, one was rejected (many times over), and only one decision was eventually agreed.

Sadly for any of us who were close to the situation, being told about the 'benefits of hindsight' and 'we didn't know,' which I characterise as wilful blindness, is a bitter pill to swallow.

The other important consideration outside the scope of the report is the decision made by Te Rnanga Nui not to extend the contract of an individual owing to personal financial circumstances. That person was then subsequently hired by the trust board, which coincides with the dramatic increase in volume and operations of the AMTB, and ultimately its insolvency.

As to the future, this is a plea by and for and on behalf of future generations, to those who put themselves forward for positions to consider if they really do have the necessary skills, experience and capability to act as custodians of commercial settlements. Consider how else you can meaningfully contribute to advance iwi interests.

The Crown must also carefully consider the findings, and exercise any relevant powers to ensure that the doors of the remaining statutory trust boards in the country are all but closed before legislation is enacted.

EBONY DUFF

Auckland