Pasifika Medical Association (PMA) and its CEO Debbie Sorensen are seeking an injunction against the Herald in an effort to prevent reporting on the charity.
A filing was made in the High Court at Auckland on Wednesday, which also seeks unspecified damages related to the Herald’s previous reporting.
The claims come as the Herald is preparing a further story related to PMA.
They also follow the release of an independent review of PMA-owned entity Pasifika Futures.
The review found no evidence the charity misspent Government money earmarked for commissioning health and community services for New Zealand’s Pasifika people, but it left considerable unanswered questions.
It considered what happened with $2.45 million of public Whānau Ora money across four financial years that was paid mainly to Moana Pasifika Charitable Trust, which had community-level sport and wellbeing programmes and was the shareholding entity of the professional rugby team Moana Pasifika Ltd.
The funds bought community-level services ranging from women’s rugby initiatives to sporting and mental health programmes for school-aged children, invoices provided to the review said.
Community sporting engagement was among the Whānau Ora contract purposes.
In June, the Herald reported the Pasifika Futures funding was paid to Moana Pasifika, the professional rugby team; in most instances, it was not paid directly to Moana Pasifika Ltd, which operates the team, and in large measure was paid to the shareholding entity Moana Pasifika Charitable Trust – a correction was made.
On July 1 last year, PMA took ownership of Moana Pasifika Ltd.
The Herald’s questions around the use of Whānau Ora funds for the Moana Pasifika entities prompted the review.
The review also noted four areas where Whānau Ora commissioning funds were applied “for the benefit of Moana Pasifika entities”, and it was unable to establish “whether and to what extent” spending met the Whānau Ora purposes.
These instances included funding for the set-up of the legal structure of the Moana Pasifika Charitable Trust, which would hold community programmes and the professional rugby team Moana Pasifika Ltd (it was not clear if there was any apportionment of costs); support for “Pacific athletes residing in New Zealand and their families”; the purchase of Moana Pasifika rugby game tickets; and Pasifika Futures’ stall space at the stadium during Moana Pasifika games and Moana Pasifika players’ creation of “video content to speak to Pasifika young people about health and wellbeing”.
Pasifika Futures said the Pacific athletes’ funding did not cover Moana Pasifika players and their families, and that the game tickets were given to school children; the review could not settle the matters.
Pasifika Futures held the contract for Whānau Ora commissioning for Pasifika from 2014 until July 2025 – the contract enables a devolved model for buying community-level health and wellness services for families and communities with public money.
The programme is managed by Te Puni Kōkiri (TPK, the Ministry for Māori Development).
Pasifika Futures recently lost the contract after a shake-up in the Government’s approach to commissioning.
The review also raised questions, ultimately unresolved, about how PMA funded a $3m loan to the team.
It highlighted a $2.9m loan from Pasifika Futures to its parent PMA, and a $3m loan made by PMA to Moana Pasifika Ltd.
The review noted it is unlikely the Pasifika Futures’ loan to PMA has been paid back; the PMA loan to Moana Pasifika Ltd has been converted into equity in the team (there is no suggestion the funding has not gone to support the professional team, the review said).
Pasifika Futures said none of its loan funding was derived from Whānau Ora commissioning funds, but the review said it was a possibility: “It appears at least possible that some of the commissioning funding was applied, at least in the short term, to assist with Pasifika Futures’ parent organisation’s cashflow.”
The review said an audit of sources and uses of funding would be required to determine whether the use of public funds was appropriate – this was beyond the review’s scope.
Pasifika Futures said other sources, including other Government contracts and retained surpluses from the administrative allowance on the Whānau Ora contract, funded its loan to PMA.
The review was undertaken by Doug Craig on behalf of TPK and released in early September.
It was a desktop review of Pasifika Futures documents and interviews were limited to senior TPK staff.
Across the past four full financial years, Pasifika Futures’ Whānau Ora funding totalled more than $182m, constituting the vast majority of its revenue, though it also has contracts with Health New Zealand and possibly other entities and public agencies.
Health NZ is currently conducting its own review of contracts with PMA and its entities, including those with Pasifika Futures.
The Moana Pasifika entities were either related parties to PMA or owned by PMA for the period the review covered.
Ultimately, the review was “unable to answer fully” the questions in the terms of reference, “whether, consistent with the outcomes agreement and annual investment plans, the use of public funds was appropriate?”; and to discover, “the way in which public funding from the Whānau Ora appropriation and paid under the outcome agreements was used, and whether it was used for purposes not associated with Whānau Ora”.
Its finding was that “[it] did not identify any evidence that money provided for delivering Whānau Ora commissioning outcomes was spent on matters not associated with Whānau Ora. Nevertheless, this review has not been able to conclusively answer a number of complex questions, including the source and use of certain funds investigated”.
In a public statement Pasifika Medical Association chairman Kiki Maoate welcomed the review findings.
“We are happy with the findings of the review, which found no evidence that Whānau Ora commissioning funds were spent on matters outside Whānau Ora,” he said. “As we expected, the review also did not disclose any breach of the outcomes agreement in relation to conflicts of interest.”
He said the review “noted areas where greater clarity in documentation and contracting processes would have reduced complexity” and that PMA accepts the findings.
The review said “complex questions” remain. Pasifika Futures’ Whānau Ora contract allowed 20% of the total funds to be spent on overheads and administration, and surpluses were accrued from this portion of the funds.
Pasifika Futures told Craig it accrued as surplus a fixed amount of 5% of these operating costs annually (about 1% of the total contract value) and otherwise paid PMA operating costs amounting to around $10m each year.
Pasifika Futures has no staff of its own; it is operated by those of its parent, PMA.
Pasifika Futures did not report any underspend of operating costs to TPK in the relevant years (2021-2024) and “it was not apparent from its audited financial statements that the fixed amount had been retained”, the review said.
The review noted the TPK contract was “unclear and ambiguous” on how surpluses on operating costs should be dealt with and was “not active in monitoring surpluses as part of its contract management practices”.
TPK has said this is now a focus under the agreements it has with its new Whānau Ora commissioning agencies.
In response to the review, TPK said it has referred to the Public Service Commission the issue of surpluses and investment returns generated from Government contract funding “so agencies can reach a system-wide view”.
It has also written to Pasifika Futures seeking more answers on related party loans.
In July, the Herald also raised questions around conflicts of interest thrown up by Pasifika Futures’ and PMA’s related party transactions, as well as family-related contracting.
The review found no breach of the Whānau Ora outcomes agreement conflicts policy, but it said management of conflicts of interest and perceived conflicts of interest “should have been more closely attended to by Te Puni Kokiri”.
“In general, the [Pasifika Futures’] register recorded the conflicts we would have expected to see as regards personnel who had dual roles in Pasifika Futures and PMA and all Moana Pasifika entities. It also recorded conflicts arising from family members’ ownership of entities that contracted with Pasifika Futures. The register stated that those with dual roles in Pasifika Futures and Moana Pasifika entities would not take part in decisions relating to Moana Pasifika generally,” the review said.
It also noted that, for the most part, only the interest register applied to the conflicts and not a seemingly more recent company policy.
It said Pasifika Futures “also told us it had robust conflict management policies and provided a copy of a policy dated October 2024” but the date was “after all but one of the contracts were entered into”.
Until May 2024, Debbie Sorensen was CEO of PMA and Pasifika Futures and also a director of Moana Pasifika Charitable Trust and Moana Pasifika Ltd.
Sir Michael Jones was a director of Pasifika Futures and of both Moana Pasifika entities until last year.
Pasifika Futures bought services, through the Whānau Ora contract, from Ah Mau Sports and Wellbeing Consultancy, owned and controlled by Rose and Leeson Ah Mau, the daughter and son-in-law of Sorensen.
Kate MacNamara is a South Island-based journalist with a focus on policy, public spending and investigations. She spent a decade at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation before moving to New Zealand. She joined the Herald in 2020.