“It is not often a company steps back and holds its hands up and says ‘I have nothing’. Even a company in a fragile state usually comes forward and offers reparation, but here nothing has been forthcoming.
“I am satisfied the company has the means to pay either by existing shareholders or a combination of the shareholders and directors.
I note that the directors have significant insurance.”
But the Judge’s very strong statements did not embarrass the relevant parties into coughing up although it has been said that at least one shareholder has had the decency to make a pro rata offer of cash from his share of the insurance payout.
So how did John Key respond to suggestions that the
shareholders of the parent company NZ Oil and Gas should stump up with the cash? After all these included
ACC and the Cullen Fund and favourable noises from him would have no doubt persuaded these entities to at least pay their share of the compensation ordered. Between them they own about
7% of NZOG’s shares have a 7% direct or indirect stake in Pike River so on a pro rata basis a miserly $238,000 would have to be paid.
Their share of the insurance payout of $80 million that NZOG received would be $5.6 million so the Government could have paid its share of the compensation from this amount and barely missed it.
But Key ruled this out on the basis that he would be creating a precedent
https://thestandard.org.nz/key-refus...or-pike-river/
“
the royal commission into the tragedy found the then Labour Department should have issued a prohibition notice when Pike started hydro extraction of coal in September 2010 because the mine lacked a second emergency exit.” The commission finding said that “[t]he Department of Labour did not have the focus, capacity or strategies to ensure that Pike was meeting its legal responsibilities under health and safety laws. The department assumed that Pike was complying with the law, even though there was ample evidence to the contrary.”
“[t]he royal commission’s report also highlighted that the Government’s mining inspectorate had substantially declined since new health and safety laws were introduced in 1992. It had ignored warnings that the changes could be disastrous for mining” lawyer Nick Davidson QC said.
Bookmarks