The seventh day of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Pike River mine tragedy has wrapped up, with former boss Peter Whittall due to give evidence tomorrow morning.
LIVE STREAM: Pike River Royal Commission of Inquiry*
3news.co.nz reporter Angela Beswick is following the inquiry and will provide detailed updates throughout the day
---
5:14pm – The inquiry has adjourned for the day and will resume tomorrow morning, when Pike River chief executive Peter Whittall will give evidence.
---
5:10pm – Mr Firmin has finished giving evidence.
---
5:08pm - Commissioner Bell asks about the recent appointment of an electrical engineer to DoL, with no underground coal mining experience, and whether it isn't a problem? Firmin agrees that it is, and that it will take him four-five years to get up to speed on mines.
---
5:02pm – Commissioner Henry asks about Mr Firmin's earlier of recounting of the DoL statement; "Why should we train you when the responsibility lies with the employer?" Mr Firmin says that was his individual opinion, not the DoL policy.
Mr Firmin says there was no yearly plan for training in ordinary staff assessment and there was no standard form to apply for further training.
---
4:53pm – Ms Shortall, counsel for Pike River is now questioning Mr Firmin. She produces a statement from him, in which he outlines the way in which Pike River management assessed and controlled for safety hazards, which gave confidence that management were effectively controlling safety issues at the mine.
Mr Firmin says he agrees with this statement, and that "the feeling was that Pike River were the type of people who took safely seriously". He agrees to the notion that Pike River were responsive to safety issues raised by himself.
---
4:42pm – Asked whether he lacks some expertise when dealing with some issues within the mine, Mr Firmin says he doesn’t think so, and believes you can keep yourself up with the current state of knowledge.
---
4:41pm – Mr Davidson asks whether Mr Firmin has ever written to a mine saying he will not endorse a certain feature. He says work plans are not submitted and he is not aware that work plans previously were submitted to inspectors.
---
4:39pm – Lawyer for Pike River families Nicholas Davison QC is questioning Mr Firmin about his statements earlier today; “Nothing beats inspections” and “Inspections are core business”.
He points to Mr Firmin’s review in a report which says inspections were generally shorter than he would have liked. He says that is still his view.
---
4:38pm – Mr Hampton questions Mr Firmin about cable flashes, of which Mr Firmin has given the opinion they’re not notifiable events. Mr Hampton asks whether the flashes are considered fires? Mr Firmin reads a technical definition of a fire which he says he Googled. He says it's ambiguous whether to say that all cable flashes are fires.
Mr Firmin says he would like to be notified of cable flashes - however he says the industry generally does not consider these to be fires so does not notify of them.
---
4:32pm – Mr Firmin is unsure how many improvement notices have been issued for underground coal mines.
---
4:28pm – A mine activity plan for the 2010/2011 period suggests a proactive approach for mine inspections.
Mr Hampton asks whether Mr Firmin agrees that underground coal mines – with all their hazards – should be visited ideally more than once every three months.
---
4:23pm – Mr Hampton references the recent Gunningham report, which Mr Firmin was questioned on earlier today. He is shown a diagram which outlines the company structure and asked which of the roles are occupied by people with mining experience. Mr Hampton points out there are few people in that hierarchy with mining experience.
Only two inspectors on the Mine Steering Group have mining experience.
“From what you’ve been telling Mr Wilding… those with mining experience are in the minority; their voice is drowned out,” says Mr Hampton.
Mr Firmin points out that structure changed following the Gunningham Neil review.
---
4:22pm – Mr Firmin is questioned about his recent trip to NSW. He is asked whether he met with check inspectors while in Australia, he says no. Mr Hampton asks whether he has ever had experience with check inspectors, Mr Firmin says yes, he has accompanied some on their inspections in the past.
---
4:19pm – Commissioner Panckhurst says the Commissioners are conscious of the fact that Mr Firmin has already been questioned extensively. Leave is granted for Mr Hampton to question him further, on all topics except for one which the Commissioners feel has already been answered in his evidence. Leave is also granted to Ms Shortall and Mr Davidson.
---
4:13pm – The Commissioners have retired for a few moments to have a private discussion.
---
4:05pm – EPMU lawyer Nigel Hampton QC has sought leave to cross-examine Mr Firmin. Lawyer for the Pike River families Nicholas Davidson QC has also sought leave to further question Mr Firmin, as has Pike River lawyer Stacey Shortall.
---
4:00pm – MSG were given two days to provide feedback in relation to a 2006/2009 review (discussed yesterday in the evidence of Mr Murphy). The group felt that they were unable to provide quality feedback due to the limited timeframe.
---
3:58pm - Mr Firmin says that the idea of a chief inspector of mines had been discussed by himself and other inspectors. This was not adopted by the Mine Steering Group. He believes the idea is now being considered.
---
3:55pm - Another document says there are "Significant political, reputational and service standard/delivery risks to the DoL", this in relation to the inspections of mines. It says later on, "It is impossible to provide a full service to each of these sites with current inspectorate numbers." There were at this time two inspectors. Document was to secure funding for an additional inspector - this was unsuccessful, Mr Firmin agrees.
---
3:49pm – Work at the moment that was previously carried out by two mines inspectors is now the sole responsibility of Mr Firmin.
He is questioned on replacing the inspector who retired. Document shown as evidence says, "[N]o funds available, and may require trade with other staff."
---
3:45pm – Inquiry resumes. Mr Wilding continues questioning of Mr Firmin.
He asks about the role of a mines inspector; responsible for inspecting underground coal mines, above ground mines including quarries and tunnels, a role under the hazardous substances legislation, have to complete a number of notes and reports in relation to those two roles, they also conduct duties with a number of mine operators – Mr Firmin says he “may have underrated them” when questioned on them earlier – they also have to conduct investigations in relation to breaches of the Act and if enforcement action is taken they are involved in the preparation for court proceedings. Inspectors must consider accident notifications and where fatalities occur, they must appear before a coroner.
In an educational sense, they must keep themselves upskilled, Mr Firmin says.
Conduct information visits, of which there is a target of 60 per year, internal meetings and office meetings.
---
3:30pm – The inquiry has adjourned for 15 minutes.
---
3:28pm – Asked whether he personally has been consulted about the development of standards or codes, Mr Firmin says yes – for a mine in NSW. When their senior advisor left, he was put on the Australian Standards Committee.
---
3:27pm – The MSG would like a “senior person” to make things move along faster in terms of policy development, Mr Firmin says. He says it would “make things a bit easier”.
---
3:24pm – Mr Firmin is questioned about a lack of information on mining on the DoL website. He says he is not aware whether this has been updated recently.
---
3:16pm – Asked if he is familiar with regulations which set out requirements in relation to egress, and whether it is his opinion that it means an underground mine must have two egresses, Mr Firmin agrees.
The inquiry is shown a paragraph from minutes of a managers meeting, which reads:
“Kevin had a problem with mine access at [blanked out], and advised that in the meantime he had allowed the small mine to operate without a second means of egress as it wasn’t practicable for the company to install second access. He asked for the groups view of his decision.”
Mr Firmin is asked to clarify that the mine name which is blanked out is not Pike River.
“It’s not Pike River,” he says.
Mr Firmin says it was discussed in detail, an approvement notice was written and the company told to get a second egress.
The initial meeting was held March 2010, and the notice written six months later in September.
---
3:14pm – Mr Firmin is questioned on Harry Bell’s evidence that communication by email or phone is not an adequate substitute for a mine inspection.
“There’s nothing better than an underground inspection but yes you can do a lot of good work by email and phone, I think.
“…Nothing beats an inspection though.”
---
3:13pm – The new mining plan aims to complete six underground coal mine inspections a year, but that hasn’t been put into action yet.
---
3:12pm – An example of a risk check sheet is being shown to the inquiry. The idea was to justify frequency of visits to some mines over others.
---
3:05pm – The frequency of inspections is being discussed. Mr Firmin says there are limited resources, so it was felt the department would need to justify why they were visiting some places more than others. The idea was to visit underground coal mines at least three to four times a year.
---
3:04pm – To his knowledge, no mines inspector has ever told an operator that a particular employee has not been adequately trained for the job. Enforcement action as such as never been carried out.
However, an accident investigation might highlight a lack of training, Mr Firmin says.
---
3:03pm – Is the ratio of inexperienced to experienced workers considered when mine inspections are carried out?
“No, it’s a good point though,” Mr Firmin says. Although he says the companies themselves consider it.
“You could do it informally of course… just have a chat about their experience.
“If they’ve got any issues they’ll raise them with you.”
---
3:02pm - Asked whether it concerns him that safety concerns aren’t raised with DoL more frequently, Mr Firmin says whenever he talks to staff, they say if they have concerns they “raise them with the boss”.
---
2:59pm – Workplace culture is an important part of health and safety, Mr Firmin agrees. A document with a questionnaire recently came out, “which could be quite useful to use … if you could take it round the mine, maybe”. There is currently no plan to utilise it in underground coal mining.
---
2:58pm – DoL receives and retains ACC information and can check it in relation to a particular mine, Mr Firmin says.
---
2:54pm – Mr Firmin is questioned on accident information in relation to mines. Looking at information on the company accident register, is it possible to identify trends? Mr Firmin says he hasn’t looked, but when the notifications come through every six months you probably could – although you need someone “with more time to go through it than we have”.
---
2:48pm – Mr Firmin is asked what he sets out to do when he inspects a mine.
“I guess the amount of time you’ve got is important. If you live locally and you can go to the mine quite regularly, then you might be looking at different aspects.”
He says he generally checks the ventilation and roof support at each face.
---
2:46pm – Mr Firmin is now answering questions around the complexity of large, modern underground mines. Asked whether he thinks DoL would need specialist expertise to evaluate the design of a mine from plans, Mr Firmin agrees.
“All the underground factors – the geology etc – you can’t see a heck of a lot from a mine plan. You’d need the whole proposal to figure out what was going on in terms of the design.”
---
2:46pm – Mine plans are updated every six months, Mr Firmin says.
---
2:43pm – Asked what the purpose is of the DoL receiving mine plans if they don’t have to approve them, Mr Firmin says it gives the department “some idea of what is happening, or the ventilation circuit” as well as things like tunnel width. If there is a concern, it can be raised with the employer.
The mines inspector will look at the plan to see if there are any safety aspects he is concerned about, which will be discussed with the manager and any required action be taken.
Mr Firmin is not aware of this having happened with any mine plans in the past.
“Generally the mine has already been built, so you know the area pretty well. The area where they’re going to mine will be dotted on that plan.
“Generally a mine plan is not enough information.”
---
2:34pm – The appropriateness of the design of the mine is not considered by any other regulatory agency, Mr Firmin says.
“I guess that’s basically us… from a health and safety point of view.”
---
2:33pm – There are a wider range of hazards present in an underground mine compared to an open cast mine and presumably a wider range of things that need to be mitigated, Mr Wilding says. Mr Firmin agrees.
These include proper drainage of methane, proper ventilation system, proper gas monitoring system, proper communication systems, properly placed emergency equipment, sufficient number of ingresses and egresses.
These need to be incorporated into the design of the mine, therefore health and safety aspects are not able to be separated from the design of a mine, Mr Wilding says. Mr Firmin agrees.
---
2:31pm – A visit to an underground coal mine can take up to six hours, Mr Firmin testified. When questioned on whether this means it is more complex than an open cast mine, Mr Firmin says “I think there is more hazards”.
“The fact that … the atmosphere is limited, the movement around the mine – you’re in tunnels – the air you’re breathing is the air you take down, all that sort of stuff.”
Asked whether there is more to check, Mr Firmin says when it’s an open-cast mine “you can just drive up, see the manager and go for a walk around the mine.
“The underground mine there is mine plans, you start in the office, get your gear and getting underground all takes time.”
---
2:28pm – Mr Firmin is questioned on his statement, where he refers to “proactivism”.
He is asked to define a reactive visit. “I guess that would be a complaint or an accident investigation,” he says.
Visits were organised in advance. Mr Firmin says mines inspectors do not normally carry out inspections without notifying the mine in advance. As far as he is aware, there have been no unannounced visits to underground coal mines.
Mr Wilding points out the assumption is that if the mine inspection is announced, the operators will ensure everything is running smoothly that day. Mr Firmin agrees.
---
2:27pm – Asked whether the MSG had done anything to improve the consistency of the approach by mines inspectors, Mr Firmin says “no, not really”.
---
2:25pm – Discussion on the process surrounding inspecting mines. The current process is not specific to underground coal mining, which is not an issue that has been considered, Mr Firmin says.
---
2:24pm – Mr Firmin is not aware of any mines inspectors who worked underground without a first class certificate of competence. There was the exception of one inspector who “didn’t have a New Zealand one, but he had a British one”.
---
2:18pm – The minutes of an MSG meeting from June 2009 detail training that was to be recommended in rock mechanics, risk assessment in mining, tunnel boring machine and explosives. Funding and the appropriate courses to assess inspectors’ development was to be sought “ASAP”. There is currently not a budget for training of mines inspectors within the department.
---
2:17pm – Aside from post-Pike River, a review as to the adequacy of the inspections carried out by the mines inspectors has not been carried out, Mr Firmin says. There is no peer review of an inspector’s performance either.
---
2:16pm – In terms of competence testing and critiquing, Mr Firmin is asked whether inspectors have to have their competence reviewed.
Mines inspectors have a six monthly review and a yearly review, he says.
There are factors they look at to see if you’ve achieved or not achieved. It is not a review of the adequacy of inspections carried out by the inspector, Mr Firmin admits.
---
2:15pm – Mr Firmin says he was quite frustrated at times as he wanted structured professional development in regards to training. Sometimes the approach was “well, it’s the employer’s responsibility – not yours – to identify hazards etc. You just go and audit them”.
---
2:12pm –In the last MSG meeting it was discussed that Mr Firmin and two other MSG members go and carry out inspections themselves. They sought funding for more inspections and were looking to put it in the action plan for next year, he says.
---
2:11pm – Audits were carried out by several inspectors at the same time after the Pike River explosion. Mr Firmin says this gives you the tools to audit, inspect, look at culture surveys at once.
---
2:10pm - If you had a choice you should check the mine first, rather than systems, Mr Firmin says.
---
2:08pm – The DoL does not require that inspectors have training overseas. Although, “if you push for it, you can get it,” Mr Firmin.
“I’ve just had two days… which took a while to get. Ten years to get.”
Mr Firmin says he found the experience valuable, especially when carrying out audits.
---
2:07pm – The training covers three core modules, Mr Firmin says. Health and Safety Act and the interpretation of that, machine guarding and health and hazardous substances, Mr Firmin says.
---
2:06pm – Training of mines inspectors is being discussed. Mr Firmin is asked whether there is any initial training required by the DoL when an underground mines inspector first joins. For coal mining you’re basically deemed qualified or sufficiently trained for that, but in terms of a health and safety inspectorate role, training takes abut 12 to 18 months. It is up to the service manager or team leader to see whether the inspector does any inspections during that period.
---
2:06pm – The department is not currently developing a check sheet for use in underground coal mining.
“Not that I’m aware of, no,” says Mr Firmin.
---
2:02pm – An extract of minutes from a Mines Steering Group meeting on September 13, 2010 is being discussed, involving the proposed introduction of real time check sheets. Inspectors would go through different parts of the mine and check off relevant parts as they inspected them. One member of the MSG trialled such a check sheet – usually used for quarries – on an open cast mine and said it was “quite good”, Mr Firmin says.
---
2:00pm – Inquiry resumes. Assisting counsel James Wilding will continue questioning Mr Firmin.
---
SUMMARY: Tuesday morning, Day 7 of Pike River inquiry
The Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Pike River Coal mine disaster has heard evidence that mine inspectors are under-resourced.
The inquiry was given details from an Australian report into underground mining.
Nicholas Davidson, the lawyer for the families of the 29 men who died in explosions, questioned how much funding from the Department of Labour went directly into mine safety.
He says inspectors only visited sporadically:
“It would have been exceptionally difficult for the inspectors to address issues of safety culture because the inspectors visited the mine only occasionally – and so only obtained snapshots of what was going on then.”
Nicholas Davidson says the report is in stark contrast to the evidence given by two former mines inspectors, who said that under a previous regime mines were visited weekly.
---
1:00pm – The inquiry has adjourned and will resume at 2pm
---
12:55pm – Mr Firmin says he doesn’t know if the DoL has a process with reviewing the mines inspector function. Since he joined DoL in 1998, there has been one review, he says. There is currently no formal process for reviewing the mines inspectorate’s performance when there has been a serious accident or fatality in a mine.
---
12:53pm – There are usually not enough accidents to develop a pattern at a mine. But if there were quite a few accidents coming through form a particular mine, the inspector would probably pick that up Mr Firmin says.
---
12:52pm - The process for reporting accidents in mines is being challenged. Mines are now required to call an 0800 phone number to report any incidents, just like any other industries. In the past mines were able to speak directly to specialist staff in the Department of Labour. Minutes from a Mines Steering Group meeting show there has been concern about accident reports getting lost, or a call handler not appreciating the seriousness of a problem. However, Mr Firmin says in practice, mines often called the 0800 number and the specialist mines staff as well.
---
12:47pm – Asked whether any underground coal mine employees have ever complained to the DoL with regards to Health and Safety, Mr Firmin says no.
No Health and Safety representatives from an underground coal mine have complained with concerns to Health and Safety either.
---
12:46pm – Before the Pike River explosion, the DoL had identified it needed to develop closer links with Mines Rescue and develop a strategy in case of emergency. Currently the DoL does not have an agreement with Mines Rescue as to how the process they follow in the event of an emergency.
---
12:44pm – Mr Firmin is asked whether DoL has a working relationship with the Mines Rescue Trust.
“Not as such. As inspectors, I try to go to Mines Rescue to talk to them and keep in with them because they’re a good source of knowledge.”
Asked how often he would have communication with the trust of the mines rescue office, Mr Firmin says at least once a year.
“But there’s been so much pressure and that’s one of the ones I tend to leave off.”
---
12:39pm – Mr Firmin says he takes a “common sense approach” with other regulatory agencies – “If there’s something that you think would be relevant to them, you bring it up”.
---
12:38pm – Asked whether any other regulatory agency has raised any concern with underground mining with the DoL, Mr Firmin says he believes they have worked with DOC on issues in the past, but to the best of his knowledge no other organisations had been in touch with his department about health and safety concerns arising from mines
---
12:37pm – Anything that might not comply with codes has to be raised with the relevant authority, Mr Firmin says. He himself has never raised any concerns.
Mr Firmin believes there is a written policy that deals with the notification of conerns.
---
12:31pm – The Mine Steering Group does not have a budget. However Mr Firmin says its expenses extend only so far as getting to the meetings.
---
12:29pm – A document outlining the role of the Mine Steering Group has been shown to the inquiry. Mr Firmin explains the Mine Steering Group meets every three months. Minutes are taken of the meeting of which every member has a copy. Mr Firmin says any issues raised during the meeting will be taken on and raised with the appropriate people. Mr Firmin is unsure who else the minutes are circulated to.
---
12:27pm - There was no time or budget for DoL to form a joint response to the Minex industry guidelines which are currently being used by mines. This is an area Mr Firmin says he would have liked to have addressed.
---
12:22pm – Workplace fatigue has never been investigated as an issue in relation to an underground coal mine, Mr Firmin says.
---
12:19pm – A new electrical inspector has been appointed in the last few months who will inspect electrical systems in coal mines as part of his job. The Electrical Safety Service had been used in the past to help inspect mines.
---
12:13pm - $50,000-$76,000 is the salary expectation of a mines inspector.
---
12:09pm – Mr Firmin is answering qquestions about the general inspection of mines and quarries, and says there wasn't anyone inspecting the thousand or so quarries in New Zealand "for ages". But the Mines Steering Group has talked about the issue and he says that is being fixed.
---
12:04pm – Mr Firmin is currently the only mines inspector in the Department of Labour, following the resignation of one of his colleagues about two weeks ago. The DoL is in the process of finding a replacement.
---
12:02pm – Mr Firmin says he was not the inspector for the Pike River mine at the time of the explosion. He last inspected Pike River in 2008.
---
11:57am – There are several tools to manage mines if problems are discovered. A prohibition notice would prevent work continuing until a problem was fixed while an improvement notice would set a timeline for repairs to be made.
---
11:51am – Mr Firmin says he would usually arrange a visit to a mine ahead of time, so people were on hand to speak to him. He says he would look at the mine’s work plan and his priority was to go underground to check the mine was safe. Mr Firmin says he would try to get to as many parts of the mine as possible and check areas where hazards had been reported.
---
11:41am – Mr Firmin is explaining his qualifications and experience in coal mining; including 15 years mining experience before working as a mines inspector. He also holds a gas testing certificate, which qualifies him to test gas in underground mines.
---
11:39am – Michael Firmin, Health and Safety inspector with the Department of Labour, will now give evidence.
---
11:15am – The inquiry has adjourned and will resume in 15 minutes.
---
11:14am – Mr Murphy has finished giving evidence.
---
11:13am – Commissioner David Henry is questioning Mr Murphy about comments that employers should seek their own advice about safety. Mr Murphy says this is because the employer is ultimately responsible for safety on their site.
Commissioner Henry asks if it is necessarily true that a front line job would have to go in order to fund a new mines inspector. Mr Muprhy said the money to pay for the position would have to come from the $38 million the department has set aside for its health and safety budget.
---
11:08am – In his evidence, Mr Murphy says it is an offence for an employer to fail to take all practicable steps to ensure that the person appointed as manager of an underground coal mine holds a certificate of confidence. Commissioner Bell questions what happens if the mine operator does take all practicable steps, but still can’t find someone.
Mr Murphy says the mine would have to be shut down as that would be a breach of the regulations. The mine could not operate.
---
11:07am – Commissioner Stewart Bell asks Mr Murphy how many prosecutions have been launched against the mining industry under current legislation. Mr Murphy says he doesn’t have that information, but will endeavour to find out.
Commissioner Bell asks about the reasonable practicality of the legislation and whether there is any weighting on either of those things. Mr Murphy says each part is equally as important.
He asks whether there may be scenario where a mine may not be legally bound to include gas monitoring systems, e.g. if it was only a small mine. Mr Murphy says there is not.
---
11:01am – Mr Murphy is asked to elaborate on the responsibilities of the mines inspectors – of which there is currently one, and one job vacancy.
---
10:56am – Ms McDonald asks Mr Murphy to read out a comment from an inspector who said their dealing with Pike River led them to believe they were working with an employer who was "voluntarily compliant."
---
10:54am – Pike River Coal provided employees with a three week induction course before they were allowed underground, Mr Murphy says.
---
10:53am – Mr Murphy is now being questioned by Department of Labour lawyer Kristy McDonald QC.
---
10:52am – Mr Murphy says there are still gaps in the regulatory system and more work needs to be done.
---
10:51am – Mr Murphy is questioned on the employee participation in the development of workplace health and safety policy.
---
10:44am – Mine inspections were generally shorter than what inspectors would have liked, according to the report. There is a resource issue and a manning issue in terms of expertise, as well as a function issue in terms of how the inspection is carried out, Mr Davidson says. Mr Murphy agrees, but points to where the report states the current inspection rate is not that different to the two coal mining states in Australia; NSW and Queensland.
---
10:43am – Mr Murphy says he is saddened that in order for there to be more mines inspectors, and more regular inspections, resources would have to be denied to another area of the DoL. He said the department has a finite resource and this is the reality of the situation.
---
10:37am – Two of the three sets of guidance material should be ready within the next two months. The more technical material will probably not be available until 2012, Mr Murphy says.
---
10:36am – Asked whether he was aware of that disjunct prior to the Pike River explosion on November 19 last year, Mr Murphy says;
“I was aware from the review that we did in 2006, 2008/09 that there were issues around the number and quality of the guidance material and hence the recommendations that were supported by the DoL and the Minister with regards to strengthening the guidance material.”
---
10:35am – Discussion of approved codes of practice. The report found that the most important thing is the availability of good quality guidance material.
The report identifies a major gap between safety regulations recommended by the Government and what is actually done by mines companies, Mr Davidson says. Mr Murphy agrees.
---
10:32am – Mr Murphy says he is not familiar with anything operationally within the DoL.
---
10:31am – There is a tension between the company’s aspirations and health and safety issues, Mr Murphy agrees.
---
10:26am – The report found that “specialist inspectors play a crucial role. However, the current structure does not full recognise and utilise that expertise. Under the Mining Steering Group structure, coordination takes precedence over expertise, that priority should be reversed.”
Asked if that is a matter of concern, Mr Murphy agrees.
“That’s a matter of concern to the department overall, yes.”
---
10:24am - If that is true, it is in stark contrast to what the inquiry heard from Mr Hughes and Mr Bell, Mr Davidson says.
“Previous regime was heavily weighted in favour of regular inspection visits and with inspectors taking a very hands-on role in terms of hazards and risks in the industry.
The change was made with a view to establishing a greater degree of independence of the inspectors from the mines, and for mines to take more ownership of their own health and safety issues and manage them with their own health and safety managers, with consultants – if there was a need – and for the inspectorate to take a more enforcement and advisory role and less of a daily or weekly hands on role, Mr Murphy says.
---
10:22am – There may have been a gap between Pike River Coal’s paper systems and the operations underground, the report says.
It would have been exceptionally difficult for the inspectors to address issues of safety culture, because the inspectors visited the mine only occasionally and so only obtained snapshots of what was going on there.
Mr Murphy says he is not in a position to answer for the inspectorate, as to whether that is an accurate description of what the inspectors are able to do.
---
10:20am – Questioning continues.
---
10:19am – Commissioner Panckhurst questions what profit there is in asking Mr Murphy such questions when he has made it clear it is not part of his role.
---
10:18am – Mr Murphy says it is his belief that the mine plans are considered by someone at the DoL – as is required.
---
10:17am – He says he knows nothing of how mine plans are processed by his department. “It’s not in my role,” he says.
---
10:16am – Mr Murphy has not had any extensive involvement with mine plans, or work programmes in the mining sector, he admits. He has been briefed on the implications of what mine plans are and why they are provided by companies such as Pike River. However, it is not critical to his role, Mr Murphy says.
---
10:13am – In its initial version, the Health and Safety and Employment Act was stripped of some of its key measures; including worker participation. It was regarded as a “necessary evil” when the goal was to enhance business competitiveness, says Mr Davidson.
According to Prof Gunningham and Dr Neil’s report, from an operational perspective the Department of Labour would engage with a company when an issue arises. This includes such things as a methane leak.
---
10:09am – Mr Murphy is again being questioned on the report prepared by Professor Gunningham and Dr Neil.
“I had a brief interview with the authors of the report,” Mr Murphy says.
He read a draft of the report and was asked to make comment.
Mr Murphy agrees he voiced his concern when he read the report.
Operationally – quite apart from what happened at Pike River - there are significant operational issues with which to contend, Mr Davidson says. Mr Murphy agrees.
---
10:05am – Where do you look to for you prime advice regarding mining?
“I look to the advisors in the national office who are in contact with the mine inspectors,” Mr Murphy says.
---
10:04am – Mr Murphy is asked whether his role with Child Youth and Family was a Health and Safety role – he answers no. Prior to that he worked as a social worker.
Asked if he is a Health and Safety expert, and how he approached a role he has no background in, Mr Murphy responds “because of my background in policy and operational policy”.
---
10:00am – Cross-examination of James Murphy, Workplace Health and Safety manager for the Department of Labour, will continue this morning, starting with lawyer for the Pike River families Nicholas Davidson QC.
---
PIKE RIVER INQUIRY: Week one wrap
*There is a 10 minute delay on the live stream to meet the Inquiry’s broadcasting rules. The stream will be interrupted if the Inquiry goes into private session or if there is suppressed evidence.
Find all our 3 News Pike River coverage here
3 News