He rakau tau matua, he huinga manu. Kei nga kaka waho nui o te Ao Maori, tau mai ra ki te rakau korero o Te Hui. Ko Mihingarangi tenei. E mihi atu nei. Nau mai, tahuti mai ra. Welcome to The Hui, Maori current affairs for all New Zealanders. E taro ake nei... she thought she'd found everlasting love. Instead she ended up spending three years in an Argentinian jail for drug trafficking. Sharon Armstrong shares her story in a new tele-all book. And the Ngati Manuhiri Settlement Trust front up to address allegations over a multimillion-dollar land deal and their tribal register. So do you accept that you've made a mistake as a trustee? Oh, absolutely. Yeah. And that is what the decision says ` that there was a perception ` not an absolute conflict. It was a perception. Plus, the Minister for Veteran Affairs and Defence, Ron Mark, is studio. Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. Copyright Able 2018 Karahuihui mai. Well, she was a sensible, successful woman who found love online with a handsome stranger. She flew halfway around the world to meet him, only to be arrested and jailed for carrying 5kg of cocaine. It sounds like a film, but for Sharon Armstrong, it was fact, not fiction. Seven years on from her arrest in a Buenos Aires airport, Armstrong has penned a book about her harrowing experience. Organised Deception how she felt prayed to a sophisticated drug-smuggling ring and her time in an Argentinian jail. She hopes sharing her story might prevent other vulnerable women from falling victim to romance scams. (SOMBRE MUSIC) I had no intention to be part of a drug-trafficking organisation, and if I had known that there were drugs in my bag, I would've gone to the police. I probably wasn't thinking as the Sharon that I've been (SOBS) for at least the last 20 years. It's been seven years since we last saw each other. And when we did we were at Ezeiza Prison in Argentina. And I just look back at that interview, and it strikes me how well-spoken you were back then. How is that for you? Well, it was fabulous to see you. It was fabulous to see someone from home. It was great to probably have the first opportunity to tell the story from my perspective. It's hard now. I've looked at that since I returned, and what came through for me was I thought, 'Oh, yes, I was very much a victim.' I could see in myself that I was a victim. I'm certainly hoping seven years on that I've totally moved out of that victim mode and now into survival and moving forward. Understandably, of course. You know, when we read your book, there's a whole chapter on the psychology of being scammed, behind a scam, and it suggests that perhaps 20% of women in international jails, in prisons, have been scammed in romance scams. Did you see that? I did, and that's frightening. However, after my experience and subsequently being contacted, not just by people in New Zealand but people overseas as well, they don't actually surprise me, the figures. When first went into that first prison, the women that you were in there with, what were their crimes? There were three sections. The section I was in was section B, and that was for all the internationals. At any one time, there was approximately 60 of them there, all of them in there for drug offences, attempted drug trafficking or successfully having trafficked drugs. That must've come as a real surprise for you, given that you also had just realised that you were a victim of a scam. It was a huge surprise. I learnt a lot. I learnt a lot about drug mules. I learnt a lot about the whole drug industry, really, and realised that for many of these women that were locked up, that knowingly trafficked, I was in no position to judge. I wasn't walking in their shoes; I wasn't facing their choices. And for many of them, family members were threatened. The other alternative would've been children into slave trade, prostitution. So it didn't take long, really, for me to realise that I was in no position to judge, and why should I? These women made choices against some very terrible odds. Tell me about when the red flags first appeared for you. There were times throughout the five to six months that I was being romanced that there was some things that possibly didn't quite add up. However, 'Frank', using quotation marks, because I now know Frank was possibly more than one person, they were very good at batting off any concerns that I raised or anything that I may have challenged on. They always seemed to have an answer. And at that time, I see now, that I had rose-coloured glasses on. I think, at that point, I wasn't seeing what I needed to be seeing. In an exchange with your daughter, Ariana, she said to you just after you'd been arrested that you'd been in a really vulnerable state for the last 18 months prior to that. For me, the word 'vulnerable' is really interesting, because I think there's a continuum of vulnerability, and Peter Schaapveld actually says quite strongly that he believes anyone can be scammed, vulnerable or not. I think what happens is as you move up a continuum of vulnerability, you are more open to it. At what stage did you let Frank go or believe or truly understand that Frank had done you over? Was it like immediately or did it take a while? I think immediately I knew I'd been set up, because what was in the bag wasn't what I expected. But I think I held on to a little bit of hope for a little while, thinking maybe he might not have been involved, and I remember in that first month particularly, if the phone would ring, my heart would do a little skip and I'd think, 'Oh, maybe it is Frank. 'Maybe he's found me.' How difficult was it? How do you deal with being that vulnerable and then your story being all over the world? Did you feel ashamed? Oh, absolutely. In those first two months, I think, I was still feeling the whakama when you interviewed me. It was huge. I liken it to something physical. It felt like I was carrying something very heavy, and I guess it got to a point, and I talk about this a little bit in my book, that it got to the point where I couldn't carry it any longer. I knew that to do so was actually going to start to cause me some harm. And so one of the things I thought I would do was to write to Frank, which I did, knowing that he would never ever get the letter and that I won't be sending it anywhere. But it was more about me. It was just a process to go through to try to bring an ending to it. What was it like coming home? Exciting. The, uh... Arriving in Auckland, seeing my whanau, words can't describe it, really. My niece and my grandson were there as well. So I hadn't seen them for some time. It was fabulous. It was just fabulous. Did you expect some of the rejection that you experienced following your arrival home? Yes, I did. I knew that while I'd been in prison that my whanau had protected me to a degree and that some of the messages that they'd received, they were really only reading me the positive ones. I'm not silly. I know that that's not what everybody thinks. So I knew that there was also some of this going on as well. But I'm at a point where I really want to shift that focus now on to what the actual issues are. I really want to be taken seriously; I want people to realise that I have something to contribute and that I will continue to stand up and talk about this. Those that don't believe me are not my focus; they've never been my focus. And I haven't really written my book or I don't stand up and talk about this to actually try to persuade people to believe me. I'm doing this purely for the victims, for those that perhaps aren't as empowered or don't feel as strong or capable of speaking about it as I've become. So there's probably very little now that I can't just brush off. But you're also working with other women in an organisation called MULE. What does that mean? Is it a daily thing or are you the person they ring in the middle of the night? How does that work? We're just a group of people that are passionate about those that are being arrested overseas wrongly. And we want to be there as the first port of call to provide some free advice, how the family can support, who they need to contact ` because that was probably one of the hardest things in my situation. My whanau didn't know what to do. They didn't know where to go. They were being called by media. So we're able to sort of walk some of them through that. Are some women and men in New Zealand kind of sitting ducks, really? Some of the women that I was inside with had been scamming, and they were saying New Zealand's open for the picking ` because we're way down under; we're seemingly not as connected; we're seen as trusting, naive. These were their words, not mine. And I thought, 'Oh my goodness, really?' And I've actually seen that since I've been home. I think people would be really surprised at the number of people that are scammed, and the first response I generally get when talking with a victim is, 'I do not want anyone to know.' Do you have a couple of messages for people out there who might be involved or are just getting into the beginning of being romance-scammed? Check it out. There's all sorts of things I know now that I didn't know then. So you can do a reverse image search in Google, and that will show you whether that picture has been used elsewhere. You can put the person's name in and put 'scammer' beside them and see if there's anybody else that's posted anything up. So there are a number of things that you can do. But the strong message I would give is that if anybody asks you for money, it is a scam. And 'Organised Deception' is available from www.sharonarmstrong.com, or on Twitter, at Stand Up to Scams, or Facebook. Kei tua o nga whakatairanga, Ngati Manuhiri Settlement Trust responds to our story. (DRAMATIC MUSIC) Auraki mai ano. Last week we brought you a story of two sisters who felt shut out of their iwi's settlement business. They claim the iwi settlement trust Ngati Manuhiri sold off land for a development without adequate consultation. They questioned the iwi's tribal register and the leadership of the trust. The chairman of the Ngati Manuhiri Settlement Trust and its CEO, Mook Hohneck addressed the concerns. We begin with the land sale of Te Arai Point. In 2015, tribal members learned of an exclusive deal planned for their lands at Te Arai Point. 300ha of land was sold to developers. A further 175ha was transferred to the Auckland Council in exchange for the right to develop it. A major transaction is anything that involves more than 50% of the tribe's assets. And for a major transaction to go through, the trust needs 75% of tribal members' support. But there was no vote for Te Arai Point. So you've gone off and got some technical and expert advice to tell you that you didn't sell more than half of the asset, when clearly half of 750 is, what, three` Now` Now you are taking the party of the valuation expert, and you're clearly wrong. What I'm saying is, to me, it looks like you've sold half the asset! that will stay in our ownership forever. We never sold 764ha that we got back. What did you sell? What we sold ` the development that you're talking about. And how much was it? Approximately 270ha. It says on the books that it's 475. I think that's in total with the reserve contribution also ` which also was brought up. So that equals 475? Reserve contribution is a sale? So can you see others might think that you've sold more than half the asset? Well, if they do the sums like you've just done them, they would. The second issue in our story was concerns around the integrity of the tribal register. Annie Barnes was curious as to how 119 people could be registered to just four Rotorua addresses. I'm not privy to where they got that register from, so I think that's incorrect. Well, have you had a look at the register? I'm not privy to the register. But aren't you the membership validation committee? I've stayed a hand's length away from that since I've been a nominee to run for election. Well, I'll come to you, then, Mr Paki. Have you had a look at the register to make sure there's not 119 beneficiaries at just four homes? Absolutely. Um,... I know there's not 119 in four homes. So are you satisfied with the tribal register? I'm satisfied, as far as the register. To register, you've gotta have your name, your birthday, your postal address or email address. And you have to sign your registration form? Who? The beneficiary who's registering. Well, the process with registration is that if they're over 18, they can do it themselves, or if you're under 18, then your parent or guardian can actually do that. So what did you make of the 119 people registered to four addresses? Where do you think they came from? Well, somebody has obviously got an old registration, or... which is some years old, and, uh, it's the sort of thing that could've been addressed beforehand, before going there. But I can assure you the current database used for the current election has no` do not correlate those numbers. No, we did come to you. We offered you an opportunity to come and comment. Yes, you did come to us. But thank you, thank you (!) How many days before then? Before then? A number of days. A small number of days. More than a week. More than a week. We need preparation, Mihi, like anybody else. More than a week. That is not correct. It is more than a week. I can show you the email trail. You and I can argue about pedantic points like that (!) (GUFFAWS) But it's not pedantic, because I'm telling you that I absolutely contacted you guys. Those hundred 119 at four addresses just does not exist. In the next segment, Mr Paki responds to the management of a perceived conflict of interest which occurred when CEO Mook Hohneck ran for a seat last year as a trustee. While he flagged a possible conflict of interest and offered to stand aside, the trustees deemed it unnecessary. The ruling of judge Carol Shaw is that there was a perceived conflict of interest. What's your response to that? We accept the finding. But do you accept that there was a perceived conflict of interest there? According to Carol Shaw, there was a perceived conflict of interest; we went ahead and prepared for the next election. But I'm asking you, as a trustee, whether that's good enough for somebody who is a trustee to not be worried about the perceived conflict of interest, given that you've got iwi members that are sceptical about the way you behaved. So do you accept that you've made a mistake as a trustee? Oh, absolutely, yeah. And that's what the decision says ` that there was a perception ` wasn't an absolute conflict; it was a perception. And she deemed that sufficient to void the election. I respect her opinion. So what do you do now to ease the concerns of some of those iwi members who think that there's conflicts of interest within the trustees and the management of Ngati Manuhiri settlement trust? We took steps to remove Mr Hohneck from` or in fact he resigned from the validation committee. Any trustee who is gonna stand had to resign from the validation committee, and they also had to take no part in the administration and management of the election. Going forward, how do you bring everyone on the same waka? We don't have any problem taking any of the group with us. But I think the first thing is about, uh,... I guess, respecting each other and growing a relationship. If they wanna sit around the table and talk about that, we're quite happy to do that. It's not an issue. It's done nothing for our people having a settlement trust. We have not benefitted at all. They say we have. They always tell us we have, but I don't know what they mean by that. That's what we're doing with the Rahui Fund ` not to be used at least` for at least five years to provide for our future generations. Well, the marae has received grants in 2014 financial year, of $12,000. Another 10,000... for the 15, which Ms McCabe thanked me... and the trust... for. Was provide for maintenance... of the marae... and audit fees and insurance. But you would be looking after your marae. That's your only marae. Well, when they say they haven't received benefits, $42,000 of benefits have gone to the marae. They talk about education grants. 6000 was accrued for this year. Another 8000 will go. So to be clear, have you given any educational scholarships? It's not clear. We're` We're accruing the putea` So no? ...to enable that to happen... in this... financial year coming. So when they say they haven't received any educational benefits, they're correct. Well, they're correct, but you just can't go out if you haven't got the putea to do it. Kia mau tonu mai ra te titiro. Inangeto nei, ka korero ahau ki te Minita mo Aotearoa Tuatahi, ki a Ron Mark. Kei te matakitaki koutou i a Te Hui. Well, this Wednesday is Anzac Day. So to discuss the latest on veterans affairs and defence issues, I'm joined now by the Minister, Ron Mark. Tena koe. Tena koe, mihi. How are you? I'm gonna jump straight into it. The Nepata Brothers, as an opposition MP, you were an advocate for them to receive compensation. After they received` Well, they didn't receive compensation after serious injuries they sustained after a botched training exercises. As the Minister of Defence, you now have the power. Yeah. Look, so I was on that original select committee, and we heard the evidence that supported the petition, and I was one of the people who voted in support of their desire to receive an ex-gratia payment or some form of compensation. Subsequent to that, when I was out of parliament, we then had another select committee inquiry which didn't support that. So now I'm the minister, I have asked for briefings, and I've seen the 2013 paper that was presented at advice to then Minister Coleman. It's fair to say that I'm uneasy with some of the information. I think I need more information to support the assertions that are being made in those papers. It doesn't really sit comfortably with me, so it's something that I` Comfortably that they didn't receive compensation or to compensate them? It doesn't seem... I want to be sure that we do the right thing. Look, I understand the arguments about precedents and the roll-on effect of. We have ACC; that's what is there for. We've had other cases where people have felt they needed compensation, but ACC is there. We don't sue the government in New Zealand. We don't sue anyone. And there are arguments put about precedents and what that roll-out effect will have on a range of other cases. I'm not sure that the evidence that was presented to the previous minister was complete in those assertions, and I wanna have another look at it. Can you give them a time frame? It's been 24 years now they've been waiting. It's been a very long time for their family. They're still waking up every single Anzac Day, getting dressed up and going to commemorate. Yeah, I see Damien on and off quite frequently. A time frame. So just a time. I can't give an exact time frame, and I certainly can't write cheques that I cannot cash. Just an aspirational time frame for them. I would say that... depending on how long it takes people to get back to me with answers to my questions... Six months? It's could be three months; it could be six months. Three months? Six months? It could be six months, but I can't put a seal on that. We'll come back to you... Mm. ...closer to that time. Hey, the Burnham Inquiry. Can you tell me, what will the inquiry focus on? Well, it's going to focus on those matters raised and the terms of reference, obviously, but for me, what was important and why I supported the decision to have this inquiry... Look, every sinew in my body says you do not inquire or expose special force operators to public scrutiny, for security risks and for the risk it poses to them and their family, and risks it would pose to future operations. So why are you supporting it, then? Because there have been some very serious allegations made. We've got defence force personnel out there who've got children who go to school. Those children hear stories said about the SAS, which,... I don't believe the evidence supports, but certain people have tarnished their names with these allegations. Have you seen the footage? I've seen the footage. And what do you make of it? I have said all along, and I'll say it again ` I have absolute confidence, faith and trust in the men and women of 1NZSAS group and the Defence Force as a whole that they act in a proper manner, that they are honourable and they would never` When a 3-year-old child is killed, though, that's a very hard argument. It's a strong allegation. Because what are we saying, that she was... That's a strong allegation. ...that she wasn't a civilian? That's a strong allegation. And I think the reason we have to have this inquiry is to take those assertions, those allegations, those things that have cast aspersions upon the men of the SAS who were in that operation, and have the facts put out in front of eminent New Zealanders who can independently say whether or not those things that are said in that book are true... or not. And if civilians have been killed, is that OK or not? Look, I'm not gonna go there, because there's no evidence. And one of the difficulties is that you can have evidence that says that no one was killed, and you can have evidence` But if the inquiry finds they have? Oh, look, if the inquiry finds` If the inquiry finds truth to those assertions and allegations, then they'll be dealt with. And you'll accept it? Oh, yeah. I wanna talk quickly about the Malaysian soldiers. Mm. This is something that you flagged a little while ago, and last year I watched an online feed of Australia bringing their fallen soldiers home, and it was very emotional. Tell us, what are the plans for our fallen soldiers, and what's the time frame? Well, we'll look at it starting now. We've got a team in Fiji right now that will take care of the first disinterments. And so over the next` right out to, I think, October 2018, we're hoping that we will have finished by then. So we send in teams to do the disinterments. We have to send in specialists teams, victim identification people. One thing New Zealand, unfortunately, has become expert at is identifying remains. And we wanna make sure we have the family member that we think we have and that we don't have someone else. That's a long process. We're also taking the opportunity to provide people in Fiji the opportunity to work with us in that space so they can learn also. So we've got Fiji coming back first. Then we've got Malaysia` So we'll do it in stages? It's four charges. Will it be a national affair. Every repatriation will be treated with exactly the same status, regardless of rank or whoever or whatever. Malaysia will be big, though, because there's 28 coming home. Are you working with iwi or marae? Because many of them are Maori` That's up to the families, and particularly where Maori are involved, it's for them to make that determination as to who's going to be there. But we are very much in the hands of the families. We will bring their loved ones home. We'll meet all the costs of that. We will pay some cost towards their re-interment back in their homes, towards the headstone; if they want a bugler, a padre, pallbearers, we will provide that as well. Just quickly before we finish, for those who don't know where to wear their poppy, where's the right way? There. (LAUGHS) On the left. Ka pai. Thank you very much for your time this morning. Oh, thank you, Mihi. Hei tera wiki, i runga i a Te Hui... (HAUNTING MUSIC) At 64, Lidu Gong is proof you're never too old to learn another language. Hokia ki toku maunga kia purea ai au e nga hau o Tawhirimatea. Te reo has transformed his whole outlook on life. Surprising and inspiring, the man from the TV commercial shares how he was reborn through te reo. Kia ora, whanau. ALL: Kia ora. Mihi nui ki a koutou katoa kua hui mai nei i tenei ra. Tena koutou katoa. Kua hikina Te Hui mo tenei ra. We'll post links to the show on our Facebook page and on Twitter, @TheHuiNZ. And you'll find all our stories on the Newshub website. Newshub Nation is next. Pai marire ki a tatou katoa. Nga kupu hauraro na Glenna Casalme. www.able.co.nz Captions were made with the support of NZ On Air. Copyright Able 2018