Opinion: Miners’ deaths deserve explanation

Print

Wed, 15 Dec 2010 5:34p.m.

Talking about the Pike River mine disaster was a courageous act for many

Talking about the Pike River mine disaster was a courageous act for many

By Eugene Bingham - 60 Minutes producer

In the formation of coal, a crucial element is pressure. Plant remains, squeezed by the earth, harden and chemically alter into the black lumps we humans have used as an energy source for thousands of years.

Without that pressure, there would be no coal. And when you look around the West Coast, you realise that the communities would not be what they are without coal.

Pressure, pressure, pressure. It was something we constantly had to be aware of as we put together our story, Blood on the Coal, about the Pike River mining disaster.

The West Coast is a community under extraordinary pressure. The loss of 29 men is a catastrophic blow. And the financial collapse of the company is a further torpedo.

If there’s one thing they have on the coast, it’s solidarity, bound by overwhelming adversity and grief, and the determination to get through this together.

So it was no wonder people found it hard to talk to us – on camera - about what had gone on down the mine prior to November 19.  

It’s not that they had nothing to say.

You’ll have seen in the programme the allegations we aired – questions about procedures to contain explosive coal dust; ignitions underground; tracking devices that didn’t work; complaints about the escape route; a gas evacuation three weeks before the explosion.

A member of the mines rescue team spoke out too, poignantly asking, “Why is there blood on the coal again?”

We were grateful to all the people who talked to us, even those who felt under such pressure they had to pull out of on-camera interviews.

One such miner had been on the day shift and left hours before the explosion. Over the phone, he told us that there was nothing out of the ordinary that day. There were gas issues at the mine, he said, but they were managed. And if there were safety concerns, they weren’t enough to stop anyone going to work.

Another man who pulled out of an interview was a deputy – a senior mining supervisor position – with more than 30 years experience around the world. He told us that at one point he shut the mine down because inexperienced operators were doing work they shouldn’t have. He’d received a message from a fellow former deputy saying, “We knew this was only a matter of time”.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, and no one wants a witch hunt. But there are questions that need answering.

In a chilling portent Pike River CEO Peter Whittall said in 2008: “We all have 20:20 vision after an event, but very few people generally intend to harm anyone."

In our interview for 60 Minutes reporter Paula Penfold asked him if that was what it felt like now.

“It’s the same question as: Are all accidents preventable?” Whittall told Penfold. “If they are, no one would ever stub their toe because after you’ve had the accident or incident, you go back and look at all the chain of events and you would not do one of the things in that chain of events and you would prevent the accident. Does that mean that every accident is foreseeable and can you completely risk assess out human interaction or human behaviour? That’s pretty hard.”

As to what could possibly have happened, he alluded to a raft of possible human errors underground that day, but agreed in an interesting exchange with Penfold during our interview that it could have been a failure of the ventilation or monitoring or other systems. You can see that part of the interview in this link.

In our story you’ll have seen two former Pike River miners who left for jobs working in Australia within the last few months.

They came under extraordinary pressure not to speak to us, but in the end decided they would because they wanted to talk to us about the camaraderie and brotherhood of mining.

They also wanted to impress upon us how much they believed Pike River had been committed to training.

“They really emphasised on the safety aspect of the mine at Pike, they really drilled that into us, eh,” said one of the men. “We had the right training – that’s the one thing Pike River did, they trained us very well. And we had good men behind us.”

Theirs were voices which needed to be heard in the story, so we were grateful they agreed to be interviewed.

As much as anything, meeting them gave us a sense of the men underground that day: hard-working, straight-up, good blokes.

Blokes whose deaths deserve an explanation.

 

 

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

18 Dec 2010 11:48p.m.

eugene wrote:

this story is missing the national party had an official mining report concerning safety and showed their anti union anti labour attitude ,used it as fodder in the house.
the greymouth miner on the cover said he can't believe how these MP,S are now grandstanding. national in their arogance
ignored the safety concerns the union raised at greymouth.
28 men died here , national look very bad here . no words can desribe the incompetence of the gov't. eugene

18 Dec 2010 08:32p.m.

Jack wrote:

There is most certainly wyas that this could have been prevented Adele.

Portable Gas chromotograph machines could be used by mining inspectors, inspectors could also form part of the essential mining staff.

This was all detailed in the report that National abandoned and shelved from the mining disaster in the Roa Mine that cost greymouth another two lives in 2006.

It was instituted under labour, and the public submissions process finished three months before labour lost the 2008 General Election which meant they had no chance to push through a law change and have it go through the select comittee process.

However National had this report available to them, but out of sheer laziness they decided not even to read it.... and why? because the process was started by the labour party and should have ended with National pushing through legislative changes when they came into power.

29 deaths later and we still arent any closer to a resolution of the Roa mining disaster and now have to deal with the Pike River Mine disaster.

if anyone is to blame here, it would the National party Minister in charge of Energy and Mining, for being too lazy to read over a report he knew existed... how did he know it existed? well the Roa disaster was advertised on National news programmes as was the inquiry and as was the Public submission process.

National have no excuse for the 29 deaths they caused as a result of brownlies sheer laziness.

16 Dec 2010 08:33a.m.

Concerned wrote:

The story above by Eugene Bingham bears little resemblance factually to the actual way it was portrayed by "60 minutes". It would have been easy to interpret emphases was placed firmly on the incompetence of mine management and design rather than any one or more naturally occurring and perhaps escalating circumstance.
One may never completely know or understand the exact course of events leading to this misfortune as most likely any physical evidence would now be long erased by consecutive happenings .

16 Dec 2010 08:32a.m.

Sceptic wrote:

I would have expected a producer to be better informed. Geoscience has produced high grade coal in laboratory conditions in a matter of days and has shown that coal is not necessarily a 'fossil' fuel and in fact is more likely to be formed from a similar geochemical process that creates oil. The systematically preached 'fossil fuel' the green crowd constantly screams from their trees ignores scientific fact.

16 Dec 2010 08:11a.m.

penny wrote:

It will have to be studied for lessons to be learned, and it is unbearable for the communities to lose such a number in one incident, but mining is not the only dangerous activity where disasters happen. Think about this: It was the same number of deaths as we had for just 2 weekends of road toll, labour weekend and the following weekend- we dont seem to be able to learn and prevent road deaths either. Surely they were forseeable and preventable?

15 Dec 2010 06:41p.m.

Adele Etheridge wrote:

It is unbelievable after 150 years and many of these disasters that there has been nothing learnt from the tragedies...I can not accept that this disaster was not foreseeable or preventable.