Key Takeaways:
- The Pūwhakamua programme, which houses offenders released on parole, is operating in a rural area without necessary consent under the District Plan.
- A local resident, Lauren Fraser, has expressed concerns about her safety and the impact of the programme on her property, which has been in her family for six generations.
- The Department of Corrections provides funding for the programme, but there have been issues with the number of offenders residing on-site and allegations of breaches of parole conditions.
- The matter has been elevated to the Environment Court, which will determine whether the programme’s activity is permitted or requires resource consent.
- The programme’s founder, Billy Macfarlane, and the Tikanga Aroro Charitable Trust have declined to comment due to the matter being before the court.
Introduction to the Issue
The Pūwhakamua programme, a rehabilitation initiative for offenders released on parole, has been operating in a rural area without the necessary consent under the District Plan. The programme, which is funded by the Department of Corrections, has been the subject of controversy due to concerns about its impact on the local community. Lauren Fraser, a local resident whose property has been in her family for six generations, has expressed concerns about her safety and the effect of the programme on her property. Despite the programme’s aim to support the rehabilitation of offenders, Fraser’s experiences have raised questions about the suitability of the programme’s location and its management.
The Programme’s History and Funding
The Pūwhakamua programme has been operating in the area for several years, with the Department of Corrections providing funding of $2.6 million since November 2022. The programme is permitted to provide for up to 14 men at one time, with eight allowed to live on-site. However, there have been instances where more than eight offenders were found to be residing at the site, which has raised concerns about the programme’s management and compliance with its agreement. The programme’s founder, Billy Macfarlane, has a history of working with offenders and has been involved in several rehabilitation initiatives in the past.
Concerns about Safety and Compliance
Lauren Fraser’s concerns about her safety and the impact of the programme on her property are not isolated. There have been allegations of breaches of parole conditions, including the presence of alcohol on-site, which is prohibited. Fraser has also reported being verbally abused and threatened by people associated with the programme, and has found litter and other signs of disorderly conduct on her property. The Department of Corrections has acknowledged these concerns and has reminded the programme’s management of the expectations of their agreement. However, the issue remains unresolved, and the matter has been elevated to the Environment Court.
The Role of the Environment Court
The Environment Court will determine whether the programme’s activity is permitted or requires resource consent. The court has scheduled a court-assisted mediation, which will bring together the parties involved to try to reach a resolution. The mediation is expected to take place in the coming months, although a new date has not been finalized. The outcome of the mediation will have significant implications for the programme’s future and its impact on the local community. If the programme is found to be operating without the necessary consent, it may be required to cease operations or make significant changes to its management and operations.
Community Response and Advocacy
The issue has sparked a strong response from the local community, with many residents expressing concerns about the programme’s impact on their safety and well-being. Rotokawa Mana Whenua group leader and advocate Renee Kiriona has been a vocal critic of the programme and has advocated for Lauren Fraser’s rights. Kiriona has complained to Corrections and the Independent Police Complaints Authority (IPCA) about the programme’s management and the police response to incidents. The IPCA has acknowledged Kiriona’s complaint and is investigating the matter.
Conclusion and Future Directions
The Pūwhakamua programme’s future is uncertain, and the outcome of the Environment Court mediation will be closely watched by the local community and stakeholders. While the programme’s aim to support the rehabilitation of offenders is laudable, the concerns about its management and impact on the local community must be addressed. The Department of Corrections and the programme’s management must work to ensure that the programme is operated in a safe and responsible manner, and that the rights and concerns of local residents are respected. Ultimately, the resolution of this issue will require a balanced approach that takes into account the needs of both the offenders and the local community.
