If you thought the stench around Willie Jackson and his manky missus Tania Rangiheuea at the Manukau Urban Maori Authority (MUMA) could not get any worse, think again. Over the past week, I have hammered Jackson with two exclusives exposing his alleged bullying, union-busting and cronyism to shield his wife from credible accusations of running a toxic workplace.
First, I revealed how Matt McCarten, Jackson’s old union mate, blew the whistle on the whole rotten saga, including a damning independent review that found serious bullying by Rangiheuea and recommended her removal. Then I dropped the documents showing Jackson’s trespass notices designed to ban McCarten and his One Union from MUMA sites, all to stomp on workers’ rights and kill collective bargaining in its tracks.
You can catch up on those stories here: Exclusive: Willie Jackson Accused of Bullying, Union-Busting and Cronyism to Protect His Missus and Exclusive: Documents Expose Willie Jackson’s Trespass Shenanigans to Bust Union and Shield His Manky Missus.
Now the plot thickens: High-powered law firm Chapman Tripp, no doubt on a fat retainer from the taxpayer-funded MUMA, fired off a bullying letter and email to the Platform after Michael Laws interviewed Matt McCarten on 4 December. That interview followed my podcast breaking the story the day before. The letter, dated 4 December 2025, demands the Platform yank the interview by noon on 5 December and apologise, or else face the wrath of the Auckland High Court. It claims McCarten spouted “false statements” and insists there is “no such report” finding that Rangiheuea seriously bullied staff, “no such findings” and that the board sacked the former interim chair because he acted “unlawfully and contrary to the board’s instructions”. You can see the letter for yourself in the image below – it is classic bully-boy tactics from lawyers who think they can shut down free speech with threats.
The Platform, to their credit, told Chapman Tripp to get stuffed and refused to comply. Good on them for standing tall against this nonsense. Meanwhile, crickets from Chapman Tripp to me. Despite my podcast and those two exclusives laying out the allegations in detail, no letter, no email, nothing. Why? Because they know I will fight back, publish every scrap and turn their threats into headlines. But here is the kicker: the documents I am releasing today prove Chapman Tripp’s claims are, at best, economical with the truth. At worst? Straight-up porkies designed to cover tracks in a weapons-grade cover-up.
Start with the first document: a variation to an employee’s individual employment agreement, signed by none other than Tania Rangiheuea herself as CEO on 11 February 2025. This is no bog-standard HR tweak. It bumps the staffer’s hours from 30 to 40 per week, hikes their salary by $13,000 and explicitly states the extra time is “to support the organizational review special project”. The variation runs until 30 June 2025, with the employee following instructions from Deborah Mahuta-Coyle and Mike Tukaki – the very pair who conducted the independent review into MUMA’s workplace culture.
Hang on a minute. If there was “no such report” and “no such findings”, as Chapman Tripp swears blind, why on earth is Rangiheuea signing off on a contract extension specifically for an “organizational review special project”? This document nails it: the review happened; it was a big deal and it required dedicated staff support. McCarten alleges this review uncovered bullying by Rangiheuea so bad it recommended her sacking. Jackson then allegedly strong-armed the board, sacked the chair for pushing the findings and stacked the board with his Labour cronies like his electorate agent Kiri Skipworth and mate Jerome Mika in order to bury it all.
Next up, a bombshell message from Deborah Mahuta-Coyle, one of the reviewers and a former staffer from Jackson’s ministerial office. Dated 10 March 2025, it reads:
Tania made it pretty clear on Friday (without saying so) that she is going nowhere, that she doesn’t accept the feedback – and the problem is with managers. There is a problem, not with her, but the managers. So so disappointing. We are now paying the price for speaking up... getting all sorts of passive aggressive behaviour. Not too sure where we go from here, but unfortunately the plan did not work... she hasn’t spoken to us today or formally let us know her position. She is just acting like nothing happened.
This is gold. Mahuta-Coyle, who co-authored the review with Tukaki (another ex-Jackson staffer), presented the findings directly to Rangiheuea. And what does the CEO do? Brushes it off, blames the managers and digs in her heels. No acceptance, no accountability – just denial and retaliation. If there was no review, why is Mahuta-Coyle moaning about presenting feedback that got rejected? Why mention a “plan” that “did not work”? This screams of a botched attempt to hold the CEO accountable, only for her to double down and make life hell for those who dared speak up.
But the real dynamite is the third document: an 11-page PR strategy penned by Mahuta-Coyle herself, titled “DebMC Plan to remove CEO.” This is a full-blown crisis comms blueprint outlining two scenarios post a MUMA board resolution on 16 March 2025. Scenario One: The CEO (Rangiheuea) gets stood down for an investigation into her behaviour and MUMA’s culture. Scenario Two: She resigns outright.
The document spells out timelines, key messages for managers, staff, stakeholders, funders and even media holding lines. For managers in Scenario One: “I want to inform you that Tania will be taking leave for [XX] days. During this time, the board will undertake a review of MUMA’s workplace culture. The wellbeing of our staff is our priority...” It preps for chair meetings with managers, one-on-ones and staff hui to spin the turmoil as “providing certainty, stability, and confidence”.
For media: Bland holding lines like “The board has made the decision to stand down the CEO while an independent investigation is conducted into workplace culture and leadership.” Or for resignation: “Tania Rangiheuea has resigned from her role as CEO of MUMA effective immediately. The board thanks her for her service...”
It even covers operational priorities like contract renewals, HR and pay equity, ICT staffing, financial planning and board support. Why craft such a detailed playbook – complete with talking points to fend off media enquiries – if there had been no review, no findings, and no push to boot the CEO? This document proves the board was gearing up to act on the review’s damning conclusions. Instead, as McCarten claims, Jackson swooped in, bullied the chair into the dirt, sacked him and installed his puppets to squash it.
These leaks torpedo Chapman Tripp’s narrative. They claimed no report, no findings and the chair’s sacking was for being “unlawful”. Bollocks. The review existed, findings were presented, Rangiheuea rejected them and a removal plan was ready to roll – until Jackson allegedly played Godfather to save his wife’s skin. Now, we have got the reviewers themselves, like Mahuta-Coyle, seemingly denying their own work exists while MUMA lawyers up to silence whistleblowers. This is not just a cover-up: it is weapons-grade, with complicit players rewriting history to protect a powerful couple.
And where is the legacy media in all this? Silent as the grave, of course. Tomorrow I will lay out exactly how the big outlets have sat on this story, suppressed it and let Jackson’s cronies run riot. Stay tuned – the rot goes deeper than you think.
If you have tips or more documents on this saga, hit me up securely at tips@goodoil.news. Time to drag this mess into the light.
