Rotorua council publicly notifies Pūwhakamua consent application amid investigation
Photo:
Supplied / LDR
The public will have a say on a controversial plan to move a prisoner reintegration facility to a rural Rotorua valley.
Rotorua Lakes Council has publicly notified a resource consent application for Pūwhakamua to operate in Waikite.
A notice in the Rotorua Daily Post said submissions would close at 5pm on 25 June.
It comes as the council investigates the existing Pūwhakamua facility, based near Rotorua Airport, after issuing, then cancelling, a notice ordering it to cease operations because of consent matters.
Pūwhakamua is a tikanga Māori live-in reintegration service supporting men on parole to return and readapt into the community.
It was the brainchild of reformed drug lord Billy Macfarlane, who works as general manager, and is run by Tikanga Aroro Charitable Trust, with a contract from the Department of Corrections.
Pūwhakamua has been operating on the leased site since 2018 and Corrections has funded it at least $4.6 million since November 2022.
The trust aimed to develop a new site on nearby Māori land behind Rotokawa Baths, but landowners successfully sought an injunction through the Māori Land Court, meaning it had to find another new home.
The trust applied for resource consent in October to relocate to Waikite, about 40km south of Rotorua.
It had requested limited notification be carried out for immediate neighbours and that submissions be invited through a formal process.
Community members told councillors last year they opposed the facility relocation, fearing the rural setting increased safety and security risks. They called for full public notification, allowing wider submissions.
The Rotorua Rural Community Board was advised in a meeting on Tuesday the application would be publicly notified.
About 80 people attended a Rotorua Lakes Council meeting in November, most of them for a petition opposing a resource consent application.
Photo:
LDR / Laura Smith
The trust's application said the rural environment meant a "focus on cultural values can be fostered away from the distractions of an urban environment".
"Full support and care are provided through the programme via on-site resident staff and external agencies. Residents commit to pursuing lasting change through support with daily life tasks, upskilling programmes, vocational education, personal development and employment."
The trust hit consent issues at its current site this year.
On 5 March, the council sent an abatement notice ordering the "unconsented" facility to cease operations and take steps to gain consent.
Rehabilitation centres could be considered community housing under the District Plan, but must only have up to eight residents, whose movements could not be legally restricted - including by parole conditions.
Pūwhakamua was hosting 14 parolees in February when the council inspected after neighbours raised concerns.
The abatement notice was cancelled on 24 March.
Council destination development group manager Jean-Paul Gaston told Local Democracy Reporting an investigation into activities on the site was ongoing.
He declined to comment further, saying the council did not intend to conduct the investigation through the media.
Billy Macfarlane, founder of Rotorua based organisation Pūwhakamua.
Photo:
LDR / Aleyna Martinez
Trust chairman Doug Macredie said the abatement notice was a "non-event based on incorrect information" and was quickly cancelled.
"That said, we've taken the opportunity to review our land use in accordance with tikanga, and will continue in humility and thankfulness."
Macredie said the Waikite Valley consent notification was for the council to decide.
"We are progressing with the full support of our network and observing improved accuracy of information resulting in greater public support."
He previously said no one who could not be safely managed in the community could live at Pūwhakamua and everyone referred was assessed while still in custody.
Active gang members were not considered, community safety was the "No 1 priority" and Pūwhakamua staff were on-site at all times.
A Corrections spokesperson said finding safe accommodation for people lawfully required to be released from prison was one of its "most significant challenges".
"Without supported accommodation, they could be homeless and living on the streets or in cars. This would present an unacceptable safety risk to communities."
According to Corrections statements, the number of men living on site at Pūwhakamua had fluctuated from eight when the notice was cancelled to nine about two weeks ago and six as of Wednesday.
Eight other participants in the programme lived off-site.
Corrections' communities, partnerships and pathways deputy chief executive Sean Mason told Local Democracy Reporting last month that it met with trust and council after the abatement notice.
He understood the trust sought independent advice to ensure Pūwhakamua was compliant and was keeping Corrections informed.
The department had developed a contingency plan in place to safely house the residents if they had needed to leave Pūwhakamua.
Mason said reintegration services were important in reducing the risk of reoffending.
A communication from the council to the trust, sent to Local Democracy Reporting by Corrections, said the abatement notice was cancelled to allow time for an independent planning consultant to consider an assessment undertaken on behalf of the trust.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
29 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Jamie Slater found responsible for murdering Whatitiri Whakaruru at Hāwera accommodation complex
By Tara Shaskey, Open Justice reporter of Jamie Slater, also known as Jamie Shippey, has been found responsible for the death of Whatitiri Whakaruru. Photo: Open Justice / Tara Shaskey Guests at a boarding complex began a night of drinking and playing pool in the recreational area with "no dramas". But when one of the guests, Jamie Slater, had an unexpected change of mood, everything changed in an instant. Without warning, he grabbed a large chef's knife with a 20cm blade from the communal kitchen, headed straight for Whatitiri Whakaruru, and fatally stabbed him in the heart. Whakaruru, 26, pushed Slater away, stumbled backwards, then landed on a couch where he slumped over, bleeding heavily from the chest wound. Today, Slater, who also goes by the name of Jamie Shippey, was found in the High Court at New Plymouth to have been responsible for Whakaruru's death. He was previously found unfit to stand trial on a charge of murdering Whakaruru and has now been detained as a special patient in a psychiatric hospital. The outcome was distressing for the whānau of Whakaruru, who felt failed by the justice system, saying they believe Slater, who appeared via audio-visual link from a health facility, has been allowed to "walk free". Whakaruru was not Slater's first victim. The court has heard he has an earlier conviction for manslaughter, relating to the death of his partner. At today's hearing, the public gallery was packed with Whakaruru's whānau and friends who held photos of him as they comforted one another. Whakaruru's mother described her son as a good, honest and caring young man who had a promising life ahead of him. "He did not have an inch of violence in him," she said in her victim impact statement read to the court. She remembered his great sense of humour and how he would lovingly tease her. Now, he would never have the chance to marry, have children or continue the lineage of his whānau, she said. Addressing Slater, she said she had no words for him other than that he took an innocent life for no reason. "My baby boy is never coming back. From this day, my life will always be shattered and damaged." Whakaruru's sisters also read victim impact statements, with one describing the "excruciating" loss of her younger brother. "I stand here today with a heart shattered beyond repair, grieving the loss of my beloved brother, my parents' youngest child, and my whole entire heart. Whatatiri Whakaruru is his name." She said Whakaruru was "a bright-spirited, irreplaceable soul". His life had been "stolen" by Slater, who she described as a "lowlife, cold-hearted coward". Now, the whānau was left with a wound that refused to heal, she said. Whakaruru's other sister spoke about the outcome of the case and labelled it an injustice for her brother and the whānau. She said Slater had been "allowed to walk free" and felt that his health and background issues were being used as a means for him to avoid accountability. "They [his issues] do not justify your actions," she said. "You were aware of your actions and simply did not care." As the whānau were now forced to confront the reality of a life without Whakaruru, she said the justice system had failed them. "You don't deserve to be granted any special treatment," she told Slater. Whakaruru was killed on 22 April last year, at a boarding complex on Gladstone St in Hāwera, South Taranaki. That evening, Slater had been playing table tennis in the recreational area with other guests before he went to his room. Whakaruru, his cousin Kingi Te Aroha Poutonga Keremeta, and friend Joseph Hori, returned to the complex, where Keremeta was also a guest, around 9.40pm after spending time at another address in Hāwera. Shortly after, the three bumped into Slater in the hallway as they all left their rooms. CCTV footage captured the men shaking hands with Slater, whom they previously did not know, and he walked to the recreational area with them. Whakaruru and his group played pool and table tennis while Slater and other residents also socialised. People were drinking alcohol and the mood in the room was described as being "all good" and "no dramas". At 10.07pm, Slater left the area, walked down the hallway and went to his bedroom. When he returned one minute later, he walked through the communal kitchen, grabbed a knife and headed straight for Whakaruru. Without warning, he stabbed Whakaruru. Slater was then beaten by Keremeta, "as a result of blind fury". Hori grabbed the knife from Slater's hand and threw it on the floor and then went to assist Whakaruru. Other residents phoned 111 and emergency services arrived a short time later. Whakaruru was transported to hospital but he was unable to be revived. The stab wound to his chest went through his heart and was unsurvivable. Slater was later spoken to by police and stated he had been "scared". "There was five or six people. I went to that couch. They said 'you got a problem', I told them 'nah, I haven't got a problem'," he told police. "I got a knife, they were playing pool." He also said he "didn't give a s***" and alleged they were "s****y gang members". Keremeta was earlier sentenced to 10 months of home detention for beating Slater, and on other unrelated violence charges. At today's hearing, Justice Peter Churchman acknowledged the courage and the loss of Whakaruru's whānau, as well as their "frustration" with the outcome. "I acknowledge that for the whānau it will be of little consolation but it is the way the system works with cases like this." Justice Churchman, who previously found Slater unfit, was tasked with determining whether Slater was responsible for the death of Whakaruru, and how to deal with him. He was satisfied there was sufficient evidence to establish, on the balance of probabilities, that he was responsible. The justice then ruled, based on a forensic psychiatrist's report, which was accepted by the defence and the Crown, that Slater was to be detained in a psychiatric hospital as a special patient. He said Slater showed significant behavioural and cognitive deficits such as impulsivity, emotional dysregulation, and limited insight. Slater, who also has irreversible brain damage, posed a risk to himself and was a very high risk of reoffending and was assessed as a "significantly elevated" risk of harm to others. The Minister of Health ultimately determined how long the special patient order detaining Slater remained in force. * This story originally appeared in the New Zealand Herald .
RNZ News
an hour ago
- RNZ News
Investigation underway following fatal motorbike crash in South Auckland's Pukekohe
Police had tried to pull the rider over shortly before they were found dead. (File photo) Photo: RNZ / Richard Tindiller One person has died following a motorbike crash in Auckland's Pukekohe, and a police investigation has been launched. Counties Manukau District Commander, Superintendent Shanan Gray said police had been looking for a stolen motorbike in the area when officers saw the bike travelling along Helvetia Rd at 12.20pm on Friday. The officer did a U-turn and attempted to get the motorbike to stop, but Gray said before they had turned on their lights and sirens the motorbike sped off at speed. They then lost sight of the bike. A short time later another officer found the bike crashed on McShane St. The rider was found dead at the scene. A scene examination was underway and the road was closed, Gray said. "There is now an investigation underway, which will work to establish all the facts surrounding this tragic incident." The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) would also be notified. "We are also working to support those affected and their families as well as our staff who were involved," Gray said. "As part of our investigation, we are seeking information from witnesses who may have been in the area at the time, or prior to this incident occurring." Anyone with information should contact police online now or call 105 and use the reference number P063348335. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
The royal commission recommended abolishing time limits on abuse cases – a year on, nothing has changed
By Zoë Prebble of Under New Zealand law, people generally have six years from the time a harm occurs to bring a civil claim. (File photo) Photo: RNZ/Marika Khabazi Among the 138 recommendations of the Abuse in Care Royal Commission of Inquiry's final report to parliament was a clear call: remove the legal time limits that prevent survivors of historic abuse from seeking justice in civil court. That report - Whanaketia - Through pain and trauma, from darkness to light - was published on July 24 last year. One year on, the government has yet to act. Without that reform, survivors of historic abuse remain vulnerable to being turned away by the legal system - not because their experiences aren't credible, but because the law still treats them as being out of time. The royal commission heard from thousands of survivors of childhood abuse in the care of state and faith-based institutions between 1950 and 1999. What stood out was how often that harm was made worse by silence, disbelief and legal systems that failed to respond. Under New Zealand law, people generally have six years from the time a harm occurs to bring a civil claim. That limit is set out in the Limitation Act 2010 for events after 2011, and in the Limitation Act 1950 for events before that. For survivors of historic abuse, particularly childhood abuse, that six-year window rarely reflects how trauma actually works. Survivors often take decades to feel sufficiently safe and supported to come forward and name what happened to them. The 1950 law allowed limitation periods to be paused if a claimant was under a "disability" - a legal term meaning they were either a child or, in the language of the time, of "unsound mind". In practice, this meant the six-year clock usually didn't start for children until they reached adulthood. The 2010 law clarified this by explicitly saying the limitation period for children begins at 18. It also introduced a new "incapacitated" exception, allowing the clock to pause for adults who are unable to make decisions or take legal action because of trauma or other conditions. But in practice it's a narrow doorway. Courts require survivors to prove not just trauma, but a high legal incapacity threshold. This means that even when the abuse is acknowledged, and even when survivors have strong evidence, civil cases are often barred. The bar is not that the harm didn't happen, but that it happened "too long ago". In 2019, former Air Force servicewoman Mariya Taylor brought a civil claim against the sergeant who had sexually abused her in the 1980s while both were stationed at the Whenuapai base. The court accepted the abuse had occurred. But because Taylor was not legally considered "disabled" by trauma, and the six-year window had closed, her case was struck out under the Limitation Act 1950. Adding insult to injury, she was ordered to pay costs to her abuser. At 18, Taylor had entered a rigid military hierarchy where power and discipline made reporting abuse nearly impossible. Her case shows how limitation periods can block even well-evidenced claims, and how institutional dynamics such as silence, shame and obedience often delay disclosure. These same patterns were pivotal to the royal commission's findings. Australia has taken a markedly different approach. In line with the final report of its own Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in 2017, every state and territory removed civil limitation periods for survivors of childhood abuse. Survivors can now bring civil claims regardless of how long ago the abuse occurred. In landmark case in 2023, GLJ v. The Trustees of the Roman Catholic Church for the Diocese of Lismore, the High Court of Australia rejected a request to shut down proceedings even though the alleged abuser and other witnesses had died. The court said the case could still go ahead using available evidence. The GLJ decision is important for New Zealand courts. It shows that while removing time bars doesn't guarantee victory for survivors, it does give them the chance to be heard. Removing time limits for civil claims involving historic abuse, as the royal commission recommended, is now overdue. A first step would be for the government to clearly commit to amending the Limitation Act 2010 to exclude claims of historic abuse - especially child sexual abuse - from the six-year deadline. This would bring New Zealand into line with Australia and recognise what we now know about the delayed nature of disclosure, trauma and institutional silence. It would also honour the spirit of the royal commission's work. As courts and commissions have recognised, removing limitation periods doesn't guarantee a win for survivors. But it does mean they're at least allowed to try. For years, survivors have been told they've spoken too late. Reforming limitation laws won't undo the harm they suffered. But it will show their testimony matters, and that justice delayed does not have to mean justice denied. This story was originally published on The Conversation.
