BNZ, Gloriavale, Unity and Ironies
Opinion piece: Liz Gregory.
(Thoughts, opinions and views expressed here belong to Liz Gregory and may or may not represent the views of all leavers, current members or the Trust).
After the Court of Appeal’s decision to allow BNZ to cut ties with Gloriavale earlier this week and close Gloriavale’s bank accounts within three months, I’ve had many conversations with former members who had plenty to say about the issue. While Gloriavale’s arguments in court were wide-ranging, the ironies embedded in them are hard to miss. Here is a compilation of some reflections from leavers and myself.
The Irony of Vulnerability
Gloriavale’s lawyer argued that its members are vulnerable and that cutting off banking services would exacerbate their hardship. This is true—but not in the way Gloriavale would like us to believe. Their vulnerability stems from decades of systemic abuse, exploitation, and deprivation perpetuated by Gloriavale’s leadership.
I find it astounding to now weaponise this vulnerability in court to keep banking services—a tool historically used to enforce their servitude. How do those members feel knowing their leadership has turned their suffering into a legal strategy?
Fiduciary Duty of Care
One of Gloriavale’s key arguments was that BNZ breached its fiduciary duty of care. But let’s not forget the duty of care Gloriavale owed to its members—care that was glaringly absent.
For decades, the leadership turned a blind eye to rampant sexual offending, denied members access to adequate healthcare and nutrition, education, employment protections, and controlled every aspect of their lives. How does their leadership reconcile these failures while demanding perfection from a corporate entity?
“Proper Process”
Gloriavale argued that BNZ failed to follow the proper process when giving notice to terminate the accounts. Yet this is the same organisation that has operated as a dictatorial regime, offering members no due process. Members who voiced dissent were excommunicated without a moment’s warning, left to face the outside world with no resources or support. What does “proper process” even mean in a cult?
Terminating Contracts
Another claim was that BNZ shouldn’t have the right to terminate a banking relationship at will. But for decades, Gloriavale’s leadership has terminated relationships with its members on a whim, often with devastating consequences. The irony of demanding loyalty from a bank while practicing unyielding disloyalty toward their own people is staggering.
Unity and Banking
Another irony involves their unity principle. With BNZ closing Gloriavale’s corporate accounts, the community faces a significant challenge: how to maintain the golden rule of “unity in the community”? Will Gloriavale individual members and Gloriavale businesses have two different banks?!
(Just a note, individual members do have their own bank accounts in Gloriavale – that’s how their Working for Families Tax money was always paid. But up until 2022 they did not have access to these bank accounts, and had no control or visibility of what was going on inside them. Half way through the Pilgrim Employment trial in 2022 Gloriavale started a major mission with BNZ to ensure that every member was able to at least access their bank account online. But most have still opted to allow Gloriavale operating permission – the standard expectation).
With this in mind, and in light of the new ruling, will Gloriavale members boycott BNZ and migrate their individual bank accounts elsewhere? And will all the members be expected to bank with the same bank – for unity’s sake? What a headache. What if members start going rogue? I wonder whether the banks on the West Coast are ready for an influx of new customers? Just a few thoughts to ponder.
A History of Broken Promises
During the Court of Appeal arguments, Gloriavale likened itself to an organisation trying to change its ways, comparing its situation to a carbon-emitting group that has reformed. Yes you heard that! During the court hearing, Judge Goddard put it to Gloriavale’s Lawyer Richard Raymond that,
“a bank could write to a company it banks, saying it wants to terminate its relationship because of its carbon emissions, for example.” and “if that company could not get anyone else to bank it, one could assume the bank was acting correctly.”
Raymond responded,
“What if the company had not emitted for some time?”
Yes, I spluttered at that statement. Gloriavale lost the case in 2022 and the BNZ acted immediately. It was Gloriavale who strung these proceedings out until the end of 2024 – but they want a pat on the back for not indulging in child or adult forced labour “for some time”?!
Except HE IS WRONG!! After the ruling, and even today, there are still children working at Gloriavale in an entrapped situation fearful of not doing what they are told. Yes for the young men it might now be dressed up in “self-employed labour contracts” (that’s a whole other story – especially where there is social and spiritual pressure to hand over their money). There are still children and young people now “under Mum or Dad’s supervision” rather than Peter Righteous or Mark Christian’s direct orders. But the concept remains that there is a lot of practical and physical work to do at Gloriavale, and young people are still involved in that.
So we’re not talking about family chores that every family out here would consider acceptable for their children either. As an example, over 50 tonnes of rocks was picked off a farm just two weeks ago for Young People’s night! (Voluntary of course…).
Since the Girls’ (Pilgrim Court case) there has been no establishments of contracts and payments for the young ladies working in the domestic realm. They still cook and clean and look after children (large families, including some with high needs). Yes they are having the odd day off here and there, and working a few less hours – but they are exhausted. Throwing out a few crumbs is not going to keep them at the community – as is evidenced by the run of young ones leaving the community this year.
Back to Mr Raymond’s comments. Can we realistically suggest that child labour and carbon emitting are anywhere near similar?
While leadership and lawyers claims progress, many harmful thinking patterns and practices persist – but they are just veiled more cleverly at present: many young people (and most adults) remain either unpaid or underpaid, decisions are still made without consultation, and court battles are prioritised over genuine reform.
Good Faith?
During the hearing Gloriavale’s leadership accused BNZ of not acting in good faith. But let’s ask a few questions:
- Was Gloriavale acting in good faith when it created a self-sustaining colony built on the exploitation of its members?
- Was it acting in good faith when it made hollow promises of change while resisting accountability at every turn?
- Did Hopeful Christian act in good faith when he falsely declared himself a New Zealand resident by birth in legal documents?
Political Donations and Protection
The Court of Appeal’s decision raises broader questions about Gloriavale’s influence. How has this group remained so protected for over 50 years? Former member Pearl Valor rang Newstalk ZB this week and asked how we can find out if Gloriavale ever made political donations. She is wondering how they have been protected for over 50 years… I don’t know the answer, and neither do I know how to find out. But if they did make donations, I wouldn’t expect to find a paper trail…
Perhaps transparency on a number of issues could shine a light on how such an oppressive system has been allowed to thrive for so long.
The Path Forward
BNZ’s decision to sever ties sends a clear message: institutions built on exploitation and abuse cannot expect blind loyalty from the corporate world. For Gloriavale, it’s yet another wake-up call. True change requires more than legal maneuvering and cosmetic reforms. It demands honesty, accountability, and a willingness to dismantle the very systems that have perpetuated harm for decades.
We look forward to the day where there is honesty and accountability.