Pike River Commission of Inquiry
Counsel for Families
6 APRIL 2011

In the past few days the Families of the men who died in the Pike River Mine have had to face up to two potential impediments to learning the truth about what caused their deaths in an expeditious way.

The first came in the submission by Pike River that while committed to assisting the Royal Commission the company (and its officers) was unlikely to have the financial resources to engage “in any sustained or substantial way” in the Inquiry, unless funding was provided. That funding, if available, would allow the company to “voluntarily provide evidence for use at the Phase One hearings”. This is the scene setting part of the Inquiry.

The clear implication, in respect of the company, and seemingly left open as to individuals, is that without funding crucial evidence of the processes by which the mine was consented, permitted and developed up to 19 November, will be that much more difficult to place before the Commission.

The Families are astonished at this stance. First, the company and its stakeholders including officers, should recognise an obligation to assist irrespective of funding. The reference to “voluntary” assistance indicates the expressed commitment is subject to financial support and the Families do not consider that to be any basis for not assisting in the fullest way.

Secondly, the Families expect the Receivers would want answers to the cause of the explosion before the sale of the mine is concluded. Otherwise the mine in which 29 men died would be sold without the Commission’s vital conclusion relevant to future mining operations, and safety.

DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR AND POLICE

The consequences of the Department of Labour and Police investigations are now alive before the Commission.

The Families are conscious that the Department of Labour and the Police have carried out an essentially joint investigation, for different purposes. The Department of Labour is addressing health and safety breaches, and the Police a Crimes Act charge.

The Department of Labour is seeking a six month extension to the time within which it may lay charges. The Families have not settled their legal position as yet but their initial reaction, as advised to the Royal Commission, is that Health and Safety Act breaches must be secondary to a Royal Commission of Inquiry which is charged with determining as a core issue the cause of the explosion on 19 November 2010, with identification of measures to avoid a recurrence.

That is a live issue of such relevance to the Families, the mining community on the West Coast and beyond, that it should take precedence.

The investigation and prosecution processes raise the prospect of the Royal Commission being held up, particularly in the suggested Phase Three “What happened at Pike River?”,

First, while the investigation continues the Department will not want to reveal its position derived from interviews. Secondly, witnesses who may be suspects will have to be cautioned as to their rights against self-incrimination, and may exercise those rights. Then, if a prosecution is commenced, there is an issue as to the hearing of evidence before a Public Inquiry, pending a prosecution hearing. All this will fall away if no charges are laid, but all these factors will have an influence and may result in lengthy delay in getting crucial evidence before the Royal Commission.

Hence the Families have a legitimate interest in balancing the outcomes of the Royal Commission, and the Department of Labour application to extend the time within which to lay charges.

THE POLICE

A similar but not identical position applies with the Police. There is no time limit for a Police prosecution. A decision by the Police to prosecute or not may be taken within the sort of timeframes the Department of Labour indicates.

This is the factual position for the Families, and others who are concerned that the Royal Commission complete its work expeditiously as is its intent, clearly expressed by his Honour Justice Panckhurst. The Royal Commission has powers to proceed with other elements of the Terms of Reference, and can compel evidence, notwithstanding a funding issue for the witness.

RECOVERY OF THE DECEASED

The Families over many weeks have learned of the successive failures of the robots being used in the mine stabilisation phase. They know about the sale process being undertaken. The drilling of borehole 45 has been completed, which they have always understood was a crucial part of determining the feasibility of re-entry, and they await the Scans which can now be taken from that site.

They look most closely at Mines Rescue Trust for a clear indication of the feasibility of re-entry. The Families have been patient in waiting for a clear statement of position from Mines Rescue. They are the organisation established, funded and equipped to respond to such circumstances. The Families have been told from several sources, that Mines Rescue can “go in”. The Families want Mines Rescue to come forward and articulate their position, and provide the Families and the public with a clear answer.

NICHOLAS DAVIDSON QC

RICHARD RAYMOND

COLIN SMITH

JESSICA MILLS

ENDS

© Scoop Media