31 October 2023
Barry Murphy
[FYI request #24063 email]
Tēnā koe Barry
Thank you for your request to Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities, dated 6 September 2023,
which you made through th
e www.fyi.org.nz website. You requested the following information under
the Of icial Information Act 1982 (the Act) (Request 1):
1./ for a copy of any reports, documents, texts, any communications, relating to conflicts of
interest declared by Giles Tait in the last 2 years.
2./ why was Giles Tait placed on the Teitei Drive, Ohakune project
3./ what resources or input did Giles provide to the project
4./ What design changes were made due to Giles for Teitei Drive
5/ Was Giles placed on the team to speed up the process and obtain a non notified consent?
6./ Did Kāinga Ora know that the disposal of land (Teitei Dr) had not been consulted with the
community or advertised in the LTP?
7./ Did KO seek advice on Local Government Act (LGA) breaches or obligations, if so please
provide reports.
On 15 September 2023, you made an additional request (Request 2):
1./ the date he started working on the project,
2./ the date he voiced his verbal conflict to his manager,
3./ the name and date the manager made note of such conflict and copies.
4./ the date a written conflict was made and copies
5./ the date he was removed from the project and reasons why and by whom the decision was
made.
6./ the authority he had on the project including any signatory authorities.
7./ who carried out the investigation referred to in parliamentary questions and answers
8./ what investigation was done into the claim the reserve being extended was for storm water
requirements
9./ council records, professional advice, an inspection of the site, have all been reviewed,
which do not support parliamentary answer stating the reserve needed to be extended for
stormwater, so a report to support such claim in question 8
10./ any documentation, reports, notes, emails, or texts or any other communication medium,
regarding the matter of Giles taits conflict at teitei drive or his home owned via trust.
11./ what project has me tait been moved to
12./ since being removed from teitei drive project, has he had any further involvement or been
sent any communication regarding the teitei project.
13./ was it me taits recommendation for the access way between Snowmass and teitei to be
diverted, if not, who’s advice was it and why.
I wil answer each of your questions in turn:
Request 1 (6 September 2023)
1./ for a copy of any reports, documents, texts, any communications, relating to conflicts of
interest declared by Giles Tait in the last 2 years.
I refer you to five attachments of email correspondence about the perceived conflict of interest which
can be found at the following link:
OI 23 504 conflict of interest for external release
I am withholding the declaration details under section 9(2)(a) of the Act to protect the privacy of natural
persons. The details of the declaration are considered personal information and were provided in
confidence to Kāinga Ora.
2./ why was Giles Tait placed on the Teitei Drive, Ohakune project
The staff member is a Senior Development Manager and has provided land development experience
and subject matter expertise to this project, working with specialist consultants and other Ruapehu
District Council, Ngāti Rangi and Kāinga Ora team members with their own areas of expertise and
responsibility.
3./ what resources or input did Giles provide to the project
I refer you to our answer to Question 2
4./ What design changes were made due to Giles for Teitei Drive
Kāinga Ora notes that the staff member was not leading the project, nor responsible for design
changes. The Teitei Drive, Ohakune Development Project is a partnership with Ruapehu District
Council, who owns the land, and Ngāti Rangi, the Central North Island iwi. Al decisions regarding the
project are, therefore, made on the advice of the appointed project consultants and mutually agreed by
all three development partners. I refer you also to our answer to Question 2.
5/ Was Giles placed on the team to speed up the process and obtain a non-notified consent?
No. I refer you to our answer to Question 2.
6./ Did Kāinga Ora know that the disposal of land (Teitei Dr) had not been consulted with the
community or advertised in the LTP?
There is no need for Kāinga Ora to be involved with Council’s operations.
7./ Did KO seek advice on Local Government Act (LGA) breaches or obligations, if so please
provide reports.
There is no need for Kāinga Ora to be involved with Council’s operations.
Request 2 (15 September 2023)
1./ the date he started working on the project,
27 October 2022.
2./ the date he voiced his verbal conflict to his manager,
The COI was declared verbally on 27 October 2022, at the time that the staff member was placed on
the project team.
3./ the name and date the manager made note of such conflict and copies.
The staff member declared a verbal conflict of interest on 27 October 2022 to his people leader, the
Director – Greenfield and Complex Projects, and the Kāinga Ora project lead for the development.
There were no notes, reports or assessments made at the time.
4./ the date a written conflict was made and copies
A written declaration was later made on 7 August 2023 as part of annual declarations required of all
Kāinga Ora employees. I am withholding the declaration details under section 9(2)(a) of the Act to
protect the privacy of natural persons. The details of the declaration are considered personal
information and were provided in confidence to Kāinga Ora.
5./ the date he was removed from the project and reasons why and by whom the decision was
made.
As a result of the negative public perception of the declared conflict of interest, and the ongoing
attention being placed on this individual, Kāinga Ora replaced this person on the project with another
staff member. Kāinga Ora emphasises that this step was taken to ensure the wellbeing of the staff
member, while ensuring that work on the development to deliver much needed housing in Ohakune
can continue without unnecessary disruption. This decision cannot be interpreted as calling in to
question our staff member’s involvement in the project.
The replacement decision was made on 22 August 2023 by the General Manager of Urban
Development and Delivery in consultation with the Director of Greenfield Complex Projects. An
internal handover period followed this date.
6./ the authority he had on the project including any signatory authorities.
I refer you to the answer to Question 2 (6 September 2023 request)
7./ who carried out the investigation referred to in parliamentary questions and answers
Kāinga Ora has not undertaken a formal investigation in relation to the response to WPQ 23323
(2023). When the issue was raised, Kāinga Ora followed its internal escalation policy. This is detailed
in the OIA response dated 5 October 2023.
8./ what investigation was done into the claim the reserve being extended was for storm water
requirements
There has been no investigation into the extension of the reserve. The issue was escalated and
followed due process confirming that external consultant advice resulted in the best design accounting
for the technical and ecological requirements of the subject site.
9./ council records, professional advice, an inspection of the site, have all been reviewed,
which do not support parliamentary answer stating the reserve needed to be extended for
stormwater, so a report to support such claim in question 8
Al reports we hold relating to stormwater have been provided. I am refusing this part of your request
under section 18(d) as the information is publicly available on our website, at the following link:
Teitei Drive : Kāinga Ora – Homes and Communities (kaingaora.govt.nz)
I can advise that the stormwater, overland flow path and ecological requirements drove the refinement
of the design.
10./ any documentation, reports, notes, emails, or texts or any other communication medium,
regarding the matter of Giles taits conflict at teitei drive or his home owned via trust.
I refer you to the information provided in Question one of your first request.
11./ what project has me tait been moved to
I am refusing this part of your request under section 9(2)(a) of the Act, to protect the privacy of natural
persons.
12./ since being removed from teitei drive project, has he had any further involvement or been
sent any communication regarding the teitei project.
There has been an appropriate handover to another staff member.
13./ was it me taits recommendation for the access way between Snowmass and teitei to be
diverted, if not, who’s advice was it and why.
No, the proposed realignment of the path between Teitei Drive and Snowmass Drive was designed by
the consultant team and addresses several important considerations. Retaining the existing shared
path would result in a 180-meter-long path with no alternative exits. With private properties on both
sides of the path, passive surveil ance would be hindered, which would not be conducive to the
principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design).
You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of my decision on your
request. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or
Freephone 0800 802 602.
Please note that Kāinga Ora proactively releases its responses to official information requests where
possible. Our response to your request may be published at
https:/ kaingaora.govt.nz/publications/official-information-requests/, with your personal information
removed.
Nāku noa, nā
Mark Fraser
General Manager – Urban Development and Delivery
