Te Pāti Māori made an offer to MP Mariameno Kapa-Kingi to retake the vote regarding her membership in the weeks before her court hearing challenging the expulsion.
Speaking at the Wellington High Court, the lawyer for Te Pāti Māori president John Tamihere, Davey Salmon KC, told Justice Paul Radich an offer was made to conduct another vote by the party’s national council over whether Kapa-Kingi remained a member of the party, but it was declined.
It follows the party’s decision to expel Kapa-Kingi last year, which the party claims was prompted by the MP bringing the party into disrepute and misusing funds for her personal gain.
Kapa-Kingi has contested both claims and is challenging her expulsion while also seeking John Tamihere’s election as party president be invalidated by the court.
Radich concluded the day’s hearing by promising to rule on it as “efficiently as possible”, noting it was an election year.
Earlier, Salmon said the party’s offer was conveyed in a letter on January 16 which acknowledged Kapa-Kingi’s concern her Te Tai Tokerau electorate committee did not partake in last year’s vote to expel her.
He said it was proposed the vote, regardless of the outcome, would be agreed to. It would also require Kapa-Kingi to abandon her action regarding Tamihere’s presidency.
However, Salmon said the offer was declined. He claimed Kapa-Kingi remained concerned about the allegation of the misuse of funds.
Kapa-Kingi’s lawyer Mike Colson KC later added the offer was rejected as simply retaking the vote didn’t satisfy the party constitution’s dispute resolution pathway, in her view.
Salmon, speaking after Kapa-Kingi’s lawyer Mike Colson KC this afternoon, attacked Kapa-Kingi’s position on several fronts.
Chief among them was to appeal to Radich about how the case should be treated, not as a judicial review as it was currently, but as a contractual issue. Expanding on that, Salmon argued it was clear Kapa-Kingi had breached her contract with Te Pāti Māori and it was not for the court to decide if the contract was fair in the setting of a judicial review.
He touched on the quality of the party’s constitution, which was a topic covered during the initial hearing in December in which Radich decided to reinstate Kapa-Kingi on an interim basis ahead of this more substantive hearing.
Both Salmon and Radich agreed at times the constitution was poorly written and difficult to interpret.
A central issue is whether the party followed proper process and whether the constitution required the complaint concerning Kapa-Kingi be referred to a disputes committee.
Salmon has argued the party’s ultimate authority was its national council, claiming the process to allow the council to vote on Kapa-Kingi’s membership last year was within the party’s rules.
He also dismissed attempts to disqualify concerns about Kapa-Kingi’s forecasted $133,000 overspend of her Parliamentary funding, saying the constitution’s mention of misuse of “Pāti funds” should include Parliamentary funding.
Salmon later slammed Kapa-Kingi’s desire to have the court invalidate Tamihere’s presidency, which the party claimed was reaffirmed without contest 16 months ago. He argued challenges to Tamihere’s presidency could have been made at the time of his election and after it.
He suggested there was a “political” motivation behind including that with Kapa-Kingi’s court action regarding her membership
One of Kapa-Kingi’s claims is that her electorate committee did not attend a relevant party Zoom hui concerning the MP’s actions was down to fears it was not a safe environment. Salmon doubted safety was in question.
“These are tough political actors willing to stand up in front of cameras and courts.”
This morning, Colson laid out his case arguing Kapa-Kingi’s expulsion breached her party’s constitution and how an overspend of her Parliamentary budget could be explained.
Colson argued the exclusion of Kapa-Kingi’s Te Tai Tokerau electorate committee from hui considering Kapa-Kingi’s conduct conflicted with the emphasis the constitution placed on the authority of whānau, hapū, iwi and electorates.
He also reinforced his position that the process outlined in the constitution for dealing with disputes was not followed.
He honed in on the constitution’s rule that should a complaint remain unresolved after engaging with an MP’s electorate council, it would be referred to a Disciplinary and Disputes Committee.
Noting that the committee did not consider the matter, Colson said it was “fatal to the purported decision” to expel Kapa-Kingi.
While addressing the allegation Kapa-Kingi had misused funds for her personal gain in allowing an $133,000 budget overspend to occur, Colson revealed financial records that showed the party’s co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi were also projected to commit an overspend of about $42,000.
Colson noted it was “ironic” that it was claimed Kapa-Kingi had misused funds as the co-leaders were in a budget deficit.
It’s understood the party contests Colson’s claim.
Kapa-Kingi came to the Wellington High Court this morning, flanked by fellow expelled MP Tākuta Ferris, who is not included in the court action.
Also in attendance were Tamihere and party secretary Lance Norman.
Adam Pearse is the Deputy Political Editor and part of the NZ Herald’s Press Gallery team based at Parliament in Wellington. He has worked for NZME since 2018, reporting for the Northern Advocate in Whangārei and the Herald in Auckland.