Key Government out on its own. No one else to blame!

[trustme]

I'll read between the lines & surmise a bit. They all knew the mine was dodgy. They all knew the company was under financial pressure, they all knew short cuts were being taken & best practice was not being followed . They all wanted the mine to succeed , all their jobs depended on it . All the experienced miners , safety officer included must have known they ran a risk but figured it was OK.
It wasn't.

[oldrider]

I'll read between the lines & surmise a bit. They all knew the mine was dodgy. They all knew the company was under financial pressure, they all knew short cuts were being taken & best practice was not being followed . They all wanted the mine to succeed , all their jobs depended on it . All the experienced miners , safety officer included must have known they ran a risk but figured it was OK.
It wasn't.

Hmmmm OK. Well I will just keep my thoughts to myself! ... Thankyou.

[Stylo]

Sounds like Key did a good 'damage control' exercise on the Coast today, so much was out of his control, still glad I voted for him.

Imagine Cunliffe in the same position, that would have been funny , we haven't heard from him for a while ..... hmm

[trustme]

It was the perfect storm for any govt. No matter what you do it's wrong, damage limitation comes to mind. Cynical but understandable.
Any govt would do the same.
Does not help the families at all.

[husaberg]

I'll read between the lines & surmise a bit. They all knew the mine was dodgy. They all knew the company was under financial pressure, they all knew short cuts were being taken & best practice was not being followed . They all wanted the mine to succeed , all their jobs depended on it . All the experienced miners , safety officer included must have known they ran a risk but figured it was OK.
It wasn't.

There were f-all experienced miners there ..........

[Ocean1]

Simple fact is...the MINERS!, who worked that mine for years, have all the experiance and training, ALL say it is possible with minimal risk!, and they are willing to sign any form that states they accept any responcibilty for there own deaths as a result

There is no form anyone can sign that absolves a company from responsibility for their employees. Can't legally be done.

The closest you'll ever see is exactly that turning of a blind eye by those employees to safety related issues that threatened their jobs. And even there, legally the company wears all of the blame.

Doesn't have to be the case. You could legislate policy making employees collectively culpable for site safety. But employees are nowhere near as easy to hold accountable in monetary terms when the shit hits the fan.

There's a clue to the inherent idiocy of modern OSH ideology in the insistence that all accidents are preventable, and by extension that perfect safety is economically feasible if only your procedures are detailed enough. If you believe that then you're part of the problem.

[husaberg]

There is no form anyone can sign that absolves a company from responsibility for their employees. Can't legally be done.

The closest you'll ever see is exactly that turning of a blind eye by those employees to safety related issues that threatened their jobs. And even there, legally the company wears all of the blame.

Doesn't have to be the case. You could legislate policy making employees collectively culpable for site safety. But employees are nowhere near as easy to hold accountable in monetary terms when the shit hits the fan.

There's a clue to the inherent idiocy of modern OSH ideology in the insistence that all accidents are preventable, and by extension that perfect safety is economically feasible if only your procedures are detailed enough. If you believe that then you're part of the problem.

There is such a form it is called being a sercured creditor and the major shareholder ...IE NZOAG they called the shots yet oh sorry it was Pike river Coal not us.........

[pete376403]

It was the perfect storm for any govt. No matter what you do it's wrong, damage limitation comes to mind. Cynical but understandable.
Any govt would do the same.
Does not help the families at all.

Maybe he wasn't wearing his prime ministers hat when he said this:

Prime Minister John Key told the Herald: "It's a significant expenditure, but I have always said as Prime Minister that the issue was never one of cost.

"It was a matter of doing everything we practically could to get the bodies of the victims out of the mine."

Seems to have forgotten that pretty quickly.

[Ocean1]

There is such a form it is called being a sercured creditor and the major shareholder ...IE NZOAG they called the shots yet oh sorry it was Pike river Coal not us.........

What calls the shots in the final analyse is the law. There's just one legal entity responsible for health and safety on any work site: the company managing it. There is no legal way to indemnify that company for any failures in protecting anyone on site from reasonably foreseeable risk.

If you have evidence that NZOAG had the slightest influence on health and safety policy on a site managed by a different outfit then I suggest that you call the sheriff, dude, that shit can't help but stick. If you don't then now would likely be an excellent time to consider that making such allegations looks kinda silly. And possibly very expensive.

[husaberg]

What calls the shots in the final analyse is the law. There's just one legal entity responsible for health and safety on any work site: the company managing it. There is no legal way to indemnify that company for any failures in protecting anyone on site from reasonably foreseeable risk.

If you have evidence that NZOAG had the slightest influence on health and safety policy on a site managed by a different outfit then I suggest that you call the sheriff, dude, that shit can't help but stick. If you don't then now would likely be an excellent time to consider that making such allegations looks kinda silly. And possibly very expensive.

It does not stick its pretty simple they were running the place that's who pike answered to......... but they can never be held accountable and they never will........

Under further questions from Mr Cunliffe, Mr English confirmed that fund managers at ACC and the Superannuation Fund were shareholders of New Zealand Oil and Gas, a large shareholder of Pike River Coal, and had voted against paying compensation to the Pike River families.

"That motion, if carried, would have seen New Zealand Oil and Gas, a 29 per cent shareholder in Pike River Coal, pay out on behalf of the other 71 per cent."

An order for $3.41 million in reparation to the victims' families and two survivors was made in July by Judge Jane Farish who convicted Pike River Coal on health and safety charges. The company is now in receivership.

New Zealand Oil and Gas has already paid $25 million since the disaster for salaries, creditors and tunnel recovery. A resolution at its annual meeting in October to pay more was lost.

Hon DAVID PARKER (Deputy Leader—Labour) to the Minister for ACC: How much did ACC invest in Pike River Coal Limited and in New Zealand Oil and Gas Limited over the last eight years, and how much has it made or lost in total on its investment in each company, taking into account share purchases, subscriptions and sales, dividends, and current share prices?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister for ACC) : I am advised that the shares currently held by ACC in New Zealand Oil and Gas cost $22.4 million and have an unrealised loss of $3.9 million. Over the last 8 years it has made a realised gain, including dividend and trading income, of $8.9 million. The shares currently held by ACC in Pike River Coal Ltd cost $20.5 million and have an unrealised loss of $20.5 million. During the last year it has made a realised loss, including dividend income, of approximately $1 million. In total the net loss of the investment to date has been $16 million.

Hon David Parker: Of ACC’s $2 billion profit on investments last year, how much did ACC pay towards the court-ordered compensation that Pike River Coal, a company that ACC partly owned, has not honoured?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Of course, ACC had no obligation or requirement to pay that, and it was not ordered by the court to do so.

Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. My question was not that; my question was how much has ACC, from its—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I invite the member to ask that question again.

Hon David Parker: Of ACC’s $2 billion profit on investments last year, how much did ACC pay towards the court-ordered compensation that Pike River Coal, a company that ACC partly owned, has not honoured?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Exactly the same amount that the court ordered ACC to pay, which was none.

Hon David Parker: Why did ACC vote against the New Zealand Oil and Gas resolution of shareholders at the company’s recent AGM instead of voting otherwise, or online or via its proxy, to contribute money to Pike River families, which would have assisted in paying the compensation awarded by the courts?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think I should correct the member in relation to the actual motion, which was “That the Company investigates and reports to shareholders on paying the reparation order of $3,410,000 handed down …”. ACC voted against it, I am advised, because it did not believe as a shareholder that it was sufficiently informed on all of the considerations to make a judgment as to what was the right stance for New Zealand Oil and Gas to take on that issue.

Hon David Parker: Why has ACC made no claim against the directors of Pike River Coal Ltd for ACC’s losses following the misleading statements in the Pike River prospectuses, which could have also been used by ACC to pay for compensation?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Could you ask the member to repeat his question, please?

Mr SPEAKER: I will certainly ask the member to repeat his question.

Hon David Parker: Why has ACC made no claim against the directors of Pike River Coal Ltd for ACC’s losses, which the Minister said is $20 million, following the clearly misleading statements in the Pike River prospectuses, which, again, could be used by ACC to pay the compensation that the miners’ families have not received?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: That question is extremely speculative and it would be a matter for the board of ACC, not for the Minister.

Hon David Parker: Does the Minister agree that it is repugnant that ACC has done nothing to enforce its right to hold the errant directors of Pike River Coal to account, has not contributed to the court-awarded compensation, and, as one of the largest shareholders in New Zealand Oil and Gas, it voted to block that company from doing so too?

Hon JUDITH COLLINS: No, I would not call it repugnant; what I would call it is in accordance with the law, and I would also point out to that member that ACC will have, in fact, by the end of next year paid almost $5 million to the families of those who were tragically killed at Pike River. There will be, in fact, around $16 million to $20 million extra paid, and that is in addition to the massive $16 million loss in the investment, which, by the way, was commenced under a Labour Government. Ruth Dyson was the Minister.

[Winston001]

Who cares. This is NZ where you don't bother recovering bodies if there's no economic benefit.

Jim that is just silly.

Any accidental death is tragic and naturally a family will want the body so a burial can take place. Burying (or cremation) is an act of respect for the dead person and at the same time a closure for the family. It confirms the reality of death and allows people to continue on.

Sometimes a burial is not possible. People disappear and are never seen again. Trampers. Hunters. Fishermen. Sailors. That's worse than what the Pike families face: they at least know where their dads and brothers are.

Ships and aeroplanes sink into the seas. The wreckage might be found but impossible to reach. The bodies are left in peace.

It is utterly wrong to expect body rescuers to risk their own lives to enter a deep mine, somehow respectfully gather up 29 bodies, and return each of them to the surface.

After which the same 29 bodies are put back into a hole in the earth.

The boys are buried already. Let them rest.

[bluninja]

Having been brought up in a coal mining area and married into a welsh mining family I can appreciate some of the families feelings (though all my family came out with just blue scars and a wheelchair). However IMHO dead is dead...do they want to get the bones and put them on display in an open coffin before burning them? or burying them in a shallower grave than they are now in? If there was the possibility of life then no expense spared...and let heroes step forward. But to just disinter them from one grave to put them in another is not (to me) worth the risk to life and limb.

To all you conspiracy theorists, it's National that killed them...and I have them as a client so I know everything about mining and safety ...... Fuck you hard sideways for trying to make this party politics. Coal mining (all mining) is a dangerous business, period. Take a look at the loss of life in mining worldwide if you want a reality check.

[Ocean1]

It does not stick its pretty simple they were running the place

They were not running the place, like I said if you have evidence they were directing safety policy on site lets see it. Otherwise....

[willytheekid]

To all you conspiracy theorists, it's National that killed them...and I have them as a client so I know everything about mining and safety ...... Fuck you hard sideways for trying to make this party politics

...so sorry for sharing some FACTS! from the people who actually worked there! (who I talk with daily, and it comes up...cos there still upset and angry)


And now...they have me monitoring ALL emails from ALL there sites due to concern over information leaks after yesterdays announcement...funny that aye!

Tad less attitude tho mate...this is a forum, we talk about shit, to clarify shit...dont like it, sweet as!, no need to threaten & insult people...with rough bum sex!...thats just wrong!! (Unless your Nodrog!...then its normal...ish)

ps...you actualy make a very good point regarding the bodies ...but fucking a miners daughter sure as shit doesn't make you an expert either!...were all clutching at straws and seeking the truth behind this sad event.

[husaberg]

They were not running the place, like I said if you have evidence they were directing safety policy on site lets see it. Otherwise....

They were running the place, they were applying the pressure both indirectly and directly by withdraws and offers of bonus's huge levels of pressure were being applied to perform ........
Pressure is applied with words not with emails or is minuted at meetings.......
Do you know anyone who worked there or died there Ocean. I know plenty in both camps.
Knowing stuff and proving stuff in a court of law are very different.