Page 1 of 5 1234 ... Last
Results 1 to 25 of 115

  1. Post
    #1

    Pike River re-entered

    Good on Andrew Little for making good on promises to the family, promises made by the current government and the previous*. Although I'm personally disappointed Winnie Peters wasn't the first in like he said he'd be. Probably his cigarette and whiskey in hand would be an explosion risk.

    But seriously, well done.
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/112...-of-work-ahead


    *The first thing is I'm here to give you an absolute reassurance we're committed to get the boys out.

  2. Post
    #2
    Yeah it's a great thing they've managed to achieve with this. Another feel good story for Labour/Jacinda.

  3. Post
    #3
    I disagree, I reckon it's a waste of human endeavour/public funds and puts unnecessary risk on the workers.

    If there was a reason other than body retrieval (say to make the mine safe moving forwards, or determine the cause to make the company more accountable) then maybe, but I reckon they should have just left the mine closed as a shrine to the dead.

    Edit - okay, I guess they're also trying to find out the cause, but I maintain that it's more feel-good than a practical necessity

  4. Post
    #4
    KevinL wrote:
    I disagree, I reckon it's a waste of human endeavour/public funds and puts unnecessary risk on the workers.

    If there was a reason other than body retrieval (say to make the mine safe moving forwards, or determine the cause to make the company more accountable) then maybe, but I reckon they should have just left the mine closed as a shrine to the dead.

    Edit - okay, I guess they're also trying to find out the cause, but I maintain that it's more feel-good than a practical necessity
    Agreed.

  5. Post
    #5
    yea im inclined to agree also. in that line of work (and many others) if something goes wrong, probability is youre not going home, whether they (and their families) wanted to admit it to themselves or not is irrelevant, its absolutely horrible it happened due to someones negligence but its par for the course, i understand their families want some form of closure but i feel whats happening is nothing more than a selfish waste of money

  6. Post
    #6
    I think its more a public pressure decision. So many uninformed people were complaining they wanted it opened, and they need to do what their voters want.

  7. Post
    #7
    KevinL wrote:
    I disagree, I reckon it's a waste of human endeavour/public funds and puts unnecessary risk on the workers.

    If there was a reason other than body retrieval (say to make the mine safe moving forwards, or determine the cause to make the company more accountable) then maybe, but I reckon they should have just left the mine closed as a shrine to the dead.

    Edit - okay, I guess they're also trying to find out the cause, but I maintain that it's more feel-good than a practical necessity
    I don't disagree with any of that really. But it's good for the families of the men who perished. Cost-wise it's small change. Definitely think that a big portion of why Labour is making it happen is for the PR.

  8. Post
    #8
    It's a crime scene. If it can be done safely, which it sounds like it can, then I'm all for it.

  9. Post
    #9
    KevinL wrote:
    I disagree, I reckon it's a waste of human endeavour/public funds and puts unnecessary risk on the workers.

    If there was a reason other than body retrieval (say to make the mine safe moving forwards, or determine the cause to make the company more accountable) then maybe, but I reckon they should have just left the mine closed as a shrine to the dead.

    Edit - okay, I guess they're also trying to find out the cause, but I maintain that it's more feel-good than a practical necessity
    Also agreed.

  10. Post
    #10
    KevinL wrote:
    I disagree, I reckon it's a waste of human endeavour/public funds and puts unnecessary risk on the workers.

    If there was a reason other than body retrieval (say to make the mine safe moving forwards, or determine the cause to make the company more accountable) then maybe, but I reckon they should have just left the mine closed as a shrine to the dead.

    Edit - okay, I guess they're also trying to find out the cause, but I maintain that it's more feel-good than a practical necessity
    The mine blew up in large part due to deregulation and defunding of the Mines Inspectorate. Doing right by the families is the least the Crown can do, it'll be very good for helping them move on, for some reason in my anecdotal experience humans have trouble grieving healthily without a body.

  11. Post
    #11
    Privoxy wrote:
    Also agreed.
    Also agree

  12. Post
    #12
    Edward Diego wrote:
    The mine blew up in large part due to deregulation and defunding of the Mines Inspectorate. Doing right by the families is the least the Crown can do, it'll be very good for helping them move on, for some reason in my anecdotal experience humans have trouble grieving healthily without a body.
    I dunno man, I've never lost a person in such a way but I can't help but think if it was one of my loved ones I'd want to leave them there. Not to disturb and move them for the sake of it.

  13. Post
    #13
    KevinL wrote:
    I disagree, I reckon it's a waste of human endeavour/public funds and puts unnecessary risk on the workers.

    If there was a reason other than body retrieval (say to make the mine safe moving forwards, or determine the cause to make the company more accountable) then maybe, but I reckon they should have just left the mine closed as a shrine to the dead.

    Edit - okay, I guess they're also trying to find out the cause, but I maintain that it's more feel-good than a practical necessity
    Agreed... Huge risk (and cost) for a PR exercise that boils down to 'here's your bag of bones'

  14. Post
    #14
    Privoxy wrote:
    I dunno man, I've never lost a person in such a way
    Yeah that's the thing, I didn't understand it either until my former brother-in-law drowned, his body still hasn't been recovered, the river he's in has a reputation for keeping them, and the geology of the riverbed makes it too dangerous for the Police dive squad.

    But yeah, I watched my inlaws struggle for years with the irrational belief that he was still alive, and they're still struggling with the desire to "bring him home".

    @Trackers, you wouldn't believe what my ex-inlaws would give for a bag of bones. Also, how do you know it's a huge risk? The mining experts working on the re-entry seem to think differently.

    And personally, I want a proper investigation to happen, the way no-one was held responsible for 29 deaths shits me to tears.

  15. Post
    #15
    I agree with everyone...

    Frederick James wrote:
    Definitely think that a big portion of why Labour is making it happen is for the PR.
    But mostly with this. It's a smart move politically.

  16. Post
    #16
    Privoxy wrote:
    Also agreed.
    Rebound wrote:
    Also agree
    Also Agree

  17. Post
    #17
    GaR wrote:
    I agree with everyone...



    But mostly with this. It's a smart move politically.
    unless something bad happens and more lives are lost for some difficult to identify pieces of bone and dust.

  18. Post
    #18
    Newsflash to the families: the bodies will be mutilated.

    Nice to see Labour securing like 16 votes of their voter base

  19. Post
    #19
    GaR wrote:
    I agree with everyone...
    But mostly with this. It's a smart move politically.
    It seems to have morphed into a conspiracy/coverup thing that wouldn't go away.

    It fitted right in with the Christchurch building collapse that no one was responsible for.

    I've changed my opinion about it, I used to think it was all a bit emo, but now I think it should be held up as an example that someone needs to be accountable in preventable accidents like these.

    NZ is a shit place for the way it deals with catastrophic loss of life, maybe it's a consequence of our no fault ACC.

  20. Post
    #20
    Edward Diego wrote:
    Yeah that's the thing, I didn't understand it either until my former brother-in-law drowned, his body still hasn't been recovered, the river he's in has a reputation for keeping them, and the geology of the riverbed makes it too dangerous for the Police dive squad.

    But yeah, I watched my inlaws struggle for years with the irrational belief that he was still alive, and they're still struggling with the desire to "bring him home".

    @Trackers, you wouldn't believe what my ex-inlaws would give for a bag of bones. Also, how do you know it's a huge risk? The mining experts working on the re-entry seem to think differently.

    And personally, I want a proper investigation to happen, the way no-one was held responsible for 29 deaths shits me to tears.
    it's quite possible the person, or persons, responsible died along with everyone else.

  21. Post
    #21
    I honestly don't care

  22. Post
    #22
    Edward Diego wrote:
    The mine blew up in large part due to deregulation and defunding of the Mines Inspectorate. Doing right by the families is the least the Crown can do, it'll be very good for helping them move on, for some reason in my anecdotal experience humans have trouble grieving healthily without a body.
    If I was a miner I'd rather the money spent digging me up went to my family. If they're broke, me being recovered is going to satisfy them only briefly.

    Really depends on how much you need to associate someone you love with their physical body.

  23. Post
    #23
    Edward Diego wrote:
    Good on Andrew Little for making good on promises to the family, promises made by the current government and the previous*. Although I'm personally disappointed Winnie Peters wasn't the first in like he said he'd be. Probably his cigarette and whiskey in hand would be an explosion risk.

    But seriously, well done.
    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/112...-of-work-ahead


    *The first thing is I'm here to give you an absolute reassurance we're committed to get the boys out.
    Personally i think its a huge waste of money, they have indicated and open cheque book for this and even on the news last night one of the family were adamant that after the drift they need to go through the entire mine.
    36m just to get into the drift, they will find nothing of interest, only more conclusions to jump to.
    I can see why the families would want their men back but they have been used for political gain by the Labour party, if the Labour party hadnt stirred them all up about getting back in there they would have had more progress in the resolution of their feelings as it wouldnt be getting played out on the news every week.

  24. Post
    #24
    Daynger wrote:
    if the Labour party hadnt stirred them all up about getting back in there they would have had more progress in the resolution of their feelings.
    "The first thing is I'm here to give you an absolute reassurance we're committed to get the boys out."
    - John Key

    Lethargic wrote:
    Newsflash to the families: the bodies will be mutilated.
    No, you're kidding.

  25. Post
    #25
    bradc wrote:
    If I was a miner I'd rather the money spent digging me up went to my family.
    Seems like the families have differing priorities.

    JRS wrote:
    it's quite possible the person, or persons, responsible died along with everyone else.
    The person who initiated the explosion? Definitely possible. The person who led a company with an unsafe culture, the person who designed an unsafe mine? Highly unlikely they were in there.