-
I see the families have been handed over the road to the mine by the landowner and they won't let anyone through to block it off.
Worksafe say it's too dangerous to go in and they refuse to accept that , there's also a political element to this with leftards supporting the families .
Anyone got any ideas about what's going on there or should happen?
-
Angry emotional people becoming irrational and wanting to punish someone. Anyone.
Getting the bodies out, if there are still remains, does not bring them back.
I have sympathy but do not agree.
And you're right Jeg. Seems some see this as an opportunity to make a political point. Which is beyond distateful.
-
There's any number of political elements starting with John Key guaranteeing that the government would get the bodies out.
Clearly safety has to be the paramount concern, but you don't have to be a "leftard" to have sympathy for the grieving families who just want to have closure.
Those families have assembled a number of overseas mining experts who say that the mine can be re-entered to remove the bodies without endangering lives.
Now I'm no mining expert but it seems to come down to whose experts you believe.
The families clearly think that Solid Energy is hiding behind the safety argument because they're bankrupt and that the government are hiding behind the sorry it's nothing to do with us - it's for Solid Energy to decide - which leads back to Key's original broken promise.
Who the hell knows the reality? but it's certainly not as simple as lazily blaming the leftards
-
-
@dogmeat said in Pike river:
There's any number of political elements starting with John Key guaranteeing that the government would get the bodies out.
Clearly safety has to be the paramount concern, but you don't have to be a "leftard" to have sympathy for the grieving families who just want to have closure.
Those families have assembled a number of overseas mining experts who say that the mine can be re-entered to remove the bodies without endangering lives.
Now I'm no mining expert but it seems to come down to whose experts you believe.
The families clearly think that Solid Energy is hiding behind the safety argument because they're bankrupt and that the government are hiding behind the sorry it's nothing to do with us - it's for Solid Energy to decide - which leads back to Key's original broken promise.
Who the hell knows the reality? but it's certainly not as simple as lazily blaming the leftards
And that's the problem. When the experts can't agree then you have to err on the side of caution. It was already a big enough disaster, let's not risk further lives for the sake of recovering bodies. Sealing it off and creating a memorial that people can visit to show their respect would be bloody powerful IMO.
One question I have is are all the families wanting the bodies recovered? Or just a handful? That's not obvious from the reports I've read.
-
@jegga In the main I avoid all the blogs but I seem to remember him saying something like anyone who says we are not totally committed to getting those bodies out is playing politics.
Obviously circumstances change and he shouldn't be held to account if we later found out it was going to be too dangerous, but I don't think his comments were in the initial aftermath of the explosion i.e. they were made when the dangers of going in were already known.
Absolutely Key's opponents are beating this up as much as they can but that doesn't alter the fact that if my recollection of the timing and substance of Key's comments is accurate (and I accept they may not be) I can understand why the families feel betrayed
-
woulda been pretty dumb to say 'I promise we will get them out' however if it was 'I promise we will do everything we can to try and get them out'
Obviously I am not in the situation, but surely they have closure because they know where the bodies are, can visit the site, well as close as they are allowed to reflect, it isn't like someone that goes missing never to be seen again requiring closure and certainty they are dead.
That's not meant to sound as insensitive as it does....
-
@dogmeat Im 99% sure he said everything possible . He would always give himself the politicians weaselling room in a statement like that.
How safe it is depends on who you listen to but labour and its blogs should stay out of this, I don't think it helps their cause.though.
-
@jegga said in Pike river:
Im 99% sure he said everything possible
Yeah I think that was what he said.. he also made comments off the cuff which some people see as being more definitive
This is the quote that several blogs keep referencing:
The first thing is I’m here to give you absolute reassurance, we’re committed to getting the boys out, and nothing’s going to change that. So – when people try and tell you we’re not, they’re playing, I hate to say it, but they’re playing with your emotionsThere is video at 2min in this report
http://www.newshub.co.nz/tvshows/campbelllive/pike-river-mine-families-feeling-abandoned-by-prime-minster-2012101515Personally I don't see the scandal here? Saying "we're committed" does not mean we'll do it regardless of the risks
-
I maintain. Harsh as it sounds. Bringing the bodies out does not bring them back. It will not bring any greater "closure".
To my mind this is a side issue. It has allowed their families to focus on something other than their loss. And as such it appears to have become all consuming.
-
@booboo I'm reluctant to say what would bring closure - not fortunately having been put into that situation.
However when you factor in that Worksafe came out and see retrieving the bodies was possible you can see why the families are dubious about the reasons for the sealing.
The final sad irony in al this is Andrew Little trying to make political capital out of the tragedy given that he was the head of the EPMU at the time and was heavily criticized for not doing more to ensure safety in the industry
-
Sonya Rockhouse has been one of the most prominent protesters. As far as numbers go 20 people were there protesting while a new entry plan was announced today
Pike River families reveal 'ultra-careful' re-entry plan
A group of Pike River families and their supporters have unveiled a new re-entry plan for the mine.
-
-
New Zealand First leader Winston Peters has offered himself to be the first to re-enter the Pike River mine where 29 miners perished in 2010.
If he goes in alone, that will only make people want it to cave in again?
-
@taniwharugby Yes.
Anyone know what happens when methane and alcohol fumes mix?
-
@jegga said in Pike river:
Did Key guarantee it or say they would do everything possible?
It turns out that on 25 Nov 2010 he said that he understood the anger that some families had shown about the decision not to enter the mine. But he said the reason was clear, that it was unsafe to enter the mine, and he was entirely confident that the operation had been run properly. The incident had already claimed 29 lives, and no more lives should be lost, he said. However, recovery of the miners' bodies would remain "an absolute priority" as an important part of giving closure to their families.
On 6 Dec 2012 following the Royal Commission, in terms of body recovery, he said exploring the main tunnel (drift) was a realistic goal.
“If a safe, technically feasibly and financially credible plan for exploration of the drift can be developed the Government would be willing to contribute funds, provided the plan has been prepared by, or has the support of Solid Energy, and provided it satisfies the requirements of the High Hazards Unit.”
On 13 Dec 2012 he followed up by committing up to $10m to help fund efforts to reenter the mine, but again "any proposed re-entry plan had to be safe and credible plus needed approval from mining officials." He also said ''I told them absolutely in plain English that all of the advice I've ever had in my office has always been that it will not be possible to get in to the mine's workings itself.''
Human nature being what it is the families seem to have forgotten the caveats he put around re-entry. Very sad, but they don't seem to understand that governments can't "order" civilians to put themselves in harms way, and that even allowing someone to go in voluntarily is probably fraught with legal problems. Given that there are existing official recommendations not to enter the government can't just "un-know" about them. If something goes wrong it doesn't matter if there are reports saying it's probably safe because by then everyone will be using their 20/20 hindsight to tell the government that since their own reports said it was dangerous they should have known it would go wrong.
The government can't win on this. But sticking to their guns means angry families and grandstanding Opposition parties, whereas giving in could mean additional angry families, grandstanding Opposition parties and some more dead people, I reckon they're right to stick to their guns.
-
@dogmeat said in Pike river:
There's any number of political elements starting with John Key guaranteeing that the government would get the bodies out.
Clearly safety has to be the paramount concern, but you don't have to be a "leftard" to have sympathy for the grieving families who just want to have closure.
Those families have assembled a number of overseas mining experts who say that the mine can be re-entered to remove the bodies without endangering lives.
Now I'm no mining expert but it seems to come down to whose experts you believe.
The families clearly think that Solid Energy is hiding behind the safety argument because they're bankrupt and that the government are hiding behind the sorry it's nothing to do with us - it's for Solid Energy to decide - which leads back to Key's original broken promise.
Who the hell knows the reality? but it's certainly not as simple as lazily blaming the leftards
Your first sentence is typical of the narrative and disinformation that has built up about this. At no point did Key guarantee that the govt would get the bodies out. Just didnt happen, yet the narrative grew as people spread it.
Key did not break any promise.
You can easily have closure without needing a body, happens all the time. You have to have sympathy with the families, but because they lost loved ones, not because they want to get buried bodies out to rebury them, I dont think it is worth the risk no matter how small to retrieve the bodies.Edit- I should have read the rest of the posts which have already debunked dogmeats recollection. It is still illustrative of easily a false narrative gains traction though.
-
David Farrar just tweeted
"Solid Energy Directors face up to five years imprisonment and/or $600,000 fines if someone got harmed in Pike, if opened against advice"
-
@Baron-Silas-Greenback pfft, they probably earn that in a week, just open it, let people in...it is for a good cause, it doesnt matter if more people die.
Still saying in the Beehive that Key promised to get them out...
Pike river
