Jacinda Ardern

[flockofewes2 216]

I supplied evidence to prove the point I made.

Resorting to ad hominem attacks is always a last resort so I'm...told.

[scooby3051 10,878]

Guys please no personal stuff its been good in here lately.... thanks a lot.

[crustyngrizzly 1,700]

Julie Ann Genter this morning said this morning that if NZX companies don't lift the number of woman on their boards then the Govy has a lot of tools in the tool box to make it happen.This is a sign of things to come and typical of a Labour Govt.

Want i want is the best available on the board,not Govt incentivised members.

While your about it Ms Gender,the education system is full of woman and look at whats coming out of our schools.

[Ohokaman 5,831]

7 minutes ago, crustyngrizzly said:

Julie Ann Genter this morning said this morning that if NZX companies don't lift the number of woman on their boards then the Govy has a lot of tools in the tool box to make it happen.This is a sign of things to come and typical of a Labour Govt.

Want i want is the best available on the board,not Govt incentivised members.

While your about it Ms Gender,the education system is full of woman and look at whats coming out of our schools.

Does anyone really listen to this parking policy expert Yank Crusty..??  Still a US citizenship holder too...in case we throw her back.

Might be good if someone started advocation for more male teachers while they are at it.....but don't hold your breath.....

[crustyngrizzly 1,700]

Sounds like a new door has opened for me.

[The Diceman Cometh 125]

The world is your oyster Crusty.

Go for it.

 

[crustyngrizzly 1,700]

36 minutes ago, The Diceman Cometh said:

The world is your oyster Crusty.

Go for it.

 

Looking at those pictures it seems like i have a lot to look forward to.

[rdytdy 5,341]

2 hours ago, crustyngrizzly said:

Julie Ann Genter this morning said this morning that if NZX companies don't lift the number of woman on their boards then the Govy has a lot of tools in the tool box to make it happen.This is a sign of things to come and typical of a Labour Govt.

Want i want is the best available on the board,not Govt incentivised members.

While your about it Ms Gender,the education system is full of woman and look at whats coming out of our schools.

Here comes the inevitable quota

by Christie 

 

I have never really believed in quotas, and I have been a professional woman for the last 40 years. I left university in 1976 with an arts degree, started to study accountancy part-time (that was hard) and worked my way up the ranks in the industry and later ‘the profession’. I have always been treated with respect and have been promoted appropriately. If I ever missed out on a job, and I did, I was prepared to accept that someone better came along. I’m completely okay with that.

But Julie Ann Genter, Minister for Women has decided that people like me need help to make it in our chosen careers. She doesn’t seem to understand that most women can make decisions for themselves. If company and state sector boards are not 50% women, it could be because not enough women chose to apply. It does not necessarily mean (as is implicit in this policy) that women are not being given these roles because of misogyny.

 

Nothing is going to stop her though. Stuff reports: Quote:

The Government has set a compulsory target that would have women make up half of the directors on all state sector boards and commmittees by 2021.

The Minister for Women Julie Anne Genter said even representation was something the Government wanted to lead by example on.

“By making sure the public sector has equal representation at the top, we hope to inspire the private sector to lift its game.”

More than 2,600 appointments are made to state sector boards every year including state owned enterprises, conservation boards and community trusts.

According to the Government’s the latest stocktake of gender on state sector boards and committees, women’s participation last year reached a record high of 45.7 per cent. End quote.

45.7% is really good. It means that women are being appointed to these roles without interference from the government. But if you thought that, you would be wrong. Quote:

Genter said the Government wanted to “issue a challenge” to the private sector to change their current workplace cultures and support women into leadership roles.

“Not just because that’s the fair thing to do, but also because diversity helps organisations function more effectively.

“Many men I have spoken to acknowledge the importance of diversity and are becoming champions for change. These men are helping to mentor and recruit women for leadership roles. This is essential to achieving more diversity. End quote.

It never seems to enter anyone’s head that the person taking on the role should be the best available? If quotas are introduced, everyone is compromised.

Many women deliberately seek roles that are family friendly. They may not want to be politicians, or on company boards because of the hours involved. Most women in very senior roles around the planet are childless, which is why they can do the jobs they do. But if women choose to have children, they also usually choose to be available for those children. Which means many of these high flying roles are simply out of reach.

Most women accept this though. It is a compromise they are willing to make, for the sake of their families. And of course, some women now have partners who act as caregivers, which can make it easier to pursue a career. But nothing has altered nature so far, and the truth is, if a woman gives birth to a child, she usually wants to be very involved in that child’s upbringing. No matter what compromises have to be reached.

Quotas reduce quality. Let’s say a role on a company board has come up, and the ideal candidate has applied. Unfortunately, he is a white male. The quota requires that a woman has to be appointed to that role. So, the next best person (possibly not even the next best person, but the most suitable woman)  gets the job. In what world is that sound employment policy?

Everyone knows when a quota applies. Even if you, as a woman, were the best candidate by a country mile, everyone else on the board will be looking at you sideways, believing you only got the job because you are a woman. That destroys women’s power in the workplace. It doesn’t enhance it at all.

I will buy into all this diversity claptrap once it is applied across the board. So, the accounting institute (CAANZ) must reduce the number of women accepted into the profession because there are now more women than men. Ditto the legal profession. And Julie Ann Genter must take up the battle to ensure that 50% of drainlayers and sewage workers are women and that 50% of nurses, aged care workers and primary school teachers are men. If we are going to have quotas, let’s do it properly. Let us not just cherry pick at professions that make us all look good.

[Ohokaman 5,831]

9 hours ago, crustyngrizzly said:

Looking at those pictures it seems like i have a lot to look forward to.

Look forward to, or live up to.....?? 

[rdytdy 5,341]

Alex Davis: Research shows no benefit from women on company boards

10 Jul, 2018 5:00am

In the past five years a drumbeat has echoed through business, a mantra if you like, that companies perform better when women sit at the board table.

It intuitively appeals to our sense of fairmindedness and equality. It has become accepted wisdom, organisations as august as McKinsey, Harvard and, locally, the Institute of Directors have led the charge in promoting gender diversity.

Unfortunately, it's also incorrect. There is no empirical evidence that supports this thesis at all.

In 2015 two separate meta studies of board gender diversity have been published*. Together they synthesised more than 140 separate studies with a combined sample of more than 90,000 firms from more than 30 countries. They found that: "The relationship between board gender diversity and company performance is either non-existent (effectively zero) or very weakly positive."

The conclusion is simple: "There is no evidence available to suggest the addition, or presence, of women on the board causes a change in company performance."

The "very weak" positive correlation observed was tiny: about two-tenths of 1 per cent (0.2 per cent) of the variance in company performance and only in respect of accounting performance. There was no statistically significant correlation with market performance (such as stock performance or shareholder returns).

Meta-analyses are important because the statistical averaging of results of prior studies means such findings are significantly more credible than any one individual study. The fact that the two meta-analyses are independent and used different techniques but still reached an effectively identical conclusion reinforces the findings.

Further it is important to note that even if the meta-analyses had revealed a stronger relationship between gender diversity on boards and company performance (which they did not), this would be a correlative not causative effect. Board diversity proponents have fallen for the fallacy cum hoc ergo propter hoc (they mistake correlation for cause).

It is simply not possible to conclude board gender diversity causes firm performance. To establish a causal relationship between women on boards and company performance it would be necessary to undertake a randomised control trial of companies in real world markets with differing genders on their boards.

Such a study is impossible, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that it would require companies to accept randomly assigned board members.

The results of these 140 studies are troubling given that in recent years there has been a substantial push to get more women on to boards. Companies such as Spark, Air New Zealand and GSK NZ have loudly trumpeted board gender diversity. The Institute of Directors has publicly berated organisations for their lack of gender diversity.

Felicity Caird, manager of the Institute's governance leadership centre, proclaimed companies should "aim to achieve a 30 to 50 per cent mix of female directors" and lamented the relative lack of progress among NZX listed companies.

The Government has (predictably) gone further. It has a stated target to reach gender equality on public boards. Forty-three per cent of board positions are now occupied by women – the product of several years of intense focus on promoting female candidates.

There have been numerous reports of otherwise qualified male candidates being "passed over" for public board roles due to a preference for female candidates. Casual comments from the chair of one board to a male candidate that, "You don't have a chance, you don't have breasts", reflect what is in effect, state sanctioned gender discrimination.

Opposition to such discrimination has inevitably been met with the "better performance" rationale. Unfortunately, as we have seen, this justification is completely without empirical support. For the Government and society at large to promote discriminatory policies for which there is no empirical foundation is deeply concerning.

It follows then, that in the absence of any evidence that promoting women to boards improves company performance gender activists frequently resort to a related argument: that teams (and boards) that include both men and women somehow make better decisions than boards that include only one gender.

Caird again: "The dividend that diversity pays is bringing different perspectives and more robust decision-making, effective risk management and (of course) better company performance."

The argument is that women differ from men in their knowledge, experiences and values and thus bring novel information and perspectives to the board. They increase the board's "cognitive variety".

The greater a board's cognitive variety, the theory goes, the more options it is likely to consider and the more deeply it is likely to debate those options. It sounds great in theory, but regrettably again it is incorrect.

First, we would expect the benefit of "board cognitive variety" to ultimately show up in company performance, which it does not. Second, even at a micro (team) level the cognitive variety thesis does not stack up empirically. Despite wishful thinking that teams with gender diversity outperform those composed only of men (or women), rigorous research does not support this conclusion.

Meta-analyses linking team gender diversity to team performance reach much the same conclusion as meta-analyses linking board gender diversity to company performance — that is, the relationship between gender diversity and team performance is tiny and again it is correlative not causative.

Encouraging a diversity of opinions and skills on a board is good for a company, assuming such diversity occurs because of the directors' gender isn't.

Where does this leave us? It is quite simple: neither the Government nor any other institution should be promoting one board candidate over another due to their gender other than capability (as defined by their ability to add value to the company they serve). There is no scientific or moral justification for doing so.

Taking any other position is contrary to the interest of shareholders and lacks any scientific foundation.

[crustyngrizzly 1,700]

On ‎8‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 9:29 PM, Ohokaman said:

Look forward to, or live up to.....?? 

Both.

[rdytdy 5,341]

Government brakes on the economy

by Christie 

 

On ‘selection’ night Winston warned us of the dark clouds on the horizon and how the good times were coming to an end. He then added the disclaimer that no one should blame his new government for it. But nine months in, the dark clouds are most definitely on the horizon, but as the rest of the world seems mostly fine, and there is no global financial crisis or equivalent to it at this point in time, it is hard to know where else to look. Because, as Mike Hosking says, in 9 short months, the government has found the brake pedal for a successful economy, and is pressing down it with all its might. Newstalk ZB reports: Quote:

The latest services sector numbers as put out by the BNZ show the two worlds are colliding.

The services sector is what makes this country tick. It is us spending money, it accounts for two thirds of the New Zealand economy.

And when you see that number in trouble, we all have trouble.

That number as of this week is a reason to worry.

It’s 52.8, what that means is the sector is still expanding. That’s the good news, but not by much.

50 is treading water, below 50 and you’re contracting. The 52.8 is 4.3 down on last month, that’s your worry. End quote.

 

This means that people are battening down the hatches, in fear of an economic correction. It means people are not spending as much as usual. Spending is good. It keeps people employed, and it keeps businesses working. Stop spending on all but the essentials, and businesses start to suffer. At the moment, they are suffering needlessly. Quote:

The expansion is stopping. We are putting the brakes on. And that’s not sentiment, it’s real.

It’s real dollars, in real shops, that is no longer being spent. It’s orders that aren’t being placed. And in one of the sub-indices it’s jobs that aren’t being created or filled.

All five sub-indices are down, the employment index is down three points.

It has not been this slow since the middle of 2010. And in 2010 we were scrambling out of the GFC. End quote.

There is no Global Financial Crisis this time to use as an excuse. Confidence is plummeting everywhere because of government policy. Quote:

So, given these numbers, can we at last start to harden up a bit, and have a real chat about this government driving our country into a hole?

Can we start to acknowledge that the wage demands, the industrial action, the taxes, the spending and yet to be revealed workplace reform,is not good for the economy?

People don’t like it and they’re starting to react in a very tangible sort of way.

At some point the theory becomes reality, and it might be right here right now, and the reality is ugly.

We cannot blame the world, the world is okay. There is no GFC this time.

Returns for our exports are good, our trading partners are doing fine.

It’s us, in isolation, that is taking a remarkable economic record and throwing it in the bin. End quote.

This is the part that makes me so angry, I could scream. 9 months ago, our economy was the envy of most of the world. This is all needless. We could be still doing well, and feeling prosperous. While I accept that not everyone was benefiting from the ‘rock star economy’, the best way to help the downtrodden is to keep the tax take high. Because if the government is flush with cash, it can expand its social programmes. When there is no money, it cannot. Quote:

The services sector is driven at least in part and often a large part on sentiment. Spending is about feeling good, the moment you don’t feel good you close your wallet.

52.8 is a lot of wallets closing.

52.8 is bad enough, certainly bad enough to start asking a few hard questions of a government that only nine months in, has managed to find the economic brake pedal and slam its inept foot hard down on it. End quote.

• Nurses strike.
• Teachers strike.
• IRD and MBIE on strike.
• The end of the oil and gas industry.
• The end of mining on conservation land.
• No cochlear implants.
• No mental health assistance at crime scenes.
• Tertiary students from middle class families being given free fees for their first year of study.
• Baby bonuses.

Welfare without any responsibility. I spoke to a client today that earns over $200,000 a year. His wife is expecting soon, and once her paid parental leave is over, she will receive $60 per week as a baby bonus. He agreed it is madness. As is the Acting Prime Minister receiving a winter heating allowance.

How did we end up with a government full of clowns? Why did Winston set out to destroy our economy? He said it on ‘selection’ night. He knew what he was doing.

But why?

 

[Ohokaman 5,831]

15 hours ago, rdytdy said:

Government brakes on the economy

by Christie 

 

On ‘selection’ night Winston warned us of the dark clouds on the horizon and how the good times were coming to an end. He then added the disclaimer that no one should blame his new government for it. But nine months in, the dark clouds are most definitely on the horizon, but as the rest of the world seems mostly fine, and there is no global financial crisis or equivalent to it at this point in time, it is hard to know where else to look. Because, as Mike Hosking says, in 9 short months, the government has found the brake pedal for a successful economy, and is pressing down it with all its might. Newstalk ZB reports: Quote:

The latest services sector numbers as put out by the BNZ show the two worlds are colliding.

The services sector is what makes this country tick. It is us spending money, it accounts for two thirds of the New Zealand economy.

And when you see that number in trouble, we all have trouble.

That number as of this week is a reason to worry.

It’s 52.8, what that means is the sector is still expanding. That’s the good news, but not by much.

50 is treading water, below 50 and you’re contracting. The 52.8 is 4.3 down on last month, that’s your worry. End quote.

 

This means that people are battening down the hatches, in fear of an economic correction. It means people are not spending as much as usual. Spending is good. It keeps people employed, and it keeps businesses working. Stop spending on all but the essentials, and businesses start to suffer. At the moment, they are suffering needlessly. Quote:

The expansion is stopping. We are putting the brakes on. And that’s not sentiment, it’s real.

It’s real dollars, in real shops, that is no longer being spent. It’s orders that aren’t being placed. And in one of the sub-indices it’s jobs that aren’t being created or filled.

All five sub-indices are down, the employment index is down three points.

It has not been this slow since the middle of 2010. And in 2010 we were scrambling out of the GFC. End quote.

There is no Global Financial Crisis this time to use as an excuse. Confidence is plummeting everywhere because of government policy. Quote:

So, given these numbers, can we at last start to harden up a bit, and have a real chat about this government driving our country into a hole?

Can we start to acknowledge that the wage demands, the industrial action, the taxes, the spending and yet to be revealed workplace reform,is not good for the economy?

People don’t like it and they’re starting to react in a very tangible sort of way.

At some point the theory becomes reality, and it might be right here right now, and the reality is ugly.

We cannot blame the world, the world is okay. There is no GFC this time.

Returns for our exports are good, our trading partners are doing fine.

It’s us, in isolation, that is taking a remarkable economic record and throwing it in the bin. End quote.

This is the part that makes me so angry, I could scream. 9 months ago, our economy was the envy of most of the world. This is all needless. We could be still doing well, and feeling prosperous. While I accept that not everyone was benefiting from the ‘rock star economy’, the best way to help the downtrodden is to keep the tax take high. Because if the government is flush with cash, it can expand its social programmes. When there is no money, it cannot. Quote:

The services sector is driven at least in part and often a large part on sentiment. Spending is about feeling good, the moment you don’t feel good you close your wallet.

52.8 is a lot of wallets closing.

52.8 is bad enough, certainly bad enough to start asking a few hard questions of a government that only nine months in, has managed to find the economic brake pedal and slam its inept foot hard down on it. End quote.

• Nurses strike.
• Teachers strike.
• IRD and MBIE on strike.
• The end of the oil and gas industry.
• The end of mining on conservation land.
• No cochlear implants.
• No mental health assistance at crime scenes.
• Tertiary students from middle class families being given free fees for their first year of study.
• Baby bonuses.

Welfare without any responsibility. I spoke to a client today that earns over $200,000 a year. His wife is expecting soon, and once her paid parental leave is over, she will receive $60 per week as a baby bonus. He agreed it is madness. As is the Acting Prime Minister receiving a winter heating allowance.

How did we end up with a government full of clowns? Why did Winston set out to destroy our economy? He said it on ‘selection’ night. He knew what he was doing.

But why?

 

Because he is a bitter and twisted individual, whose personal vendettas came before anything else. At the end of his time, he'll wander off into the sunset, whisky in hand, and wonder what to do with that lovely super and free travel......the rest can eat cake.....

[jack 431]

On 6/29/2018 at 9:01 AM, The Diceman Cometh said:

Jack, are you kidding?

The guy is a lawyer with the same West Coast firm for 28 years. A good fella apparantly in all respects in the community, with National awards to prove it.

BUT JACK?...........HE ALSO JUST HAPPENS TO BE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PIKE RIVER FAMILIES GROUP.

Impartial ...........????????????????????

Are you a member of that group Jack ?In racing terms you seem ...blinkered.

Try again

Justice Will Prevail .....  https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/105641512/editorial-bringing-truth-to-light

Editorial: Bringing truth to light

05:00, Jul 21 2018

• 

JOANNE CARROLL/STUFF

Minister Andrew Little, with Pike River family members Anna Osbourne and Sonya Rockhouse, is set to sign off the concept plan to re-enter the mine drift.

EDITORIAL: We are one step closer to re-entering the Pike River mine. Not everyone will be happy about that.

Minister Andrew Little has signed off the Pike River Recovery Agency's Concept Plan for the dangerous campaign, outlining three re-entry options.

The options themselves are not important at this stage, although one of them might mean another $12 million is needed, on top of the $23m already budgeted.

What is important is that the families of 29 men, who headed off to work on November 19, 2010, and never returned, are one step closer to potentially bringing their sons, brothers, husbands and fathers back into the light and the arms of people who miss them daily.

READ MORE:
* Pike River families take 'massive step forward'
* Technical advisers appointed to consider re-entry
* Prime minister launches Pike River Recovery Agency

Many of them will no doubt be overjoyed and relieved that this coalition Government appears to be making good on its word, after the previous administration huffed and puffed in painful political procrastination.

We, too, are hoping that all of these men can be reunited with their loved ones.

Money will have been well spent if that is achieved.

But just as important will be any light shed on what happened and what went wrong on that tragic day.

For that reason, Little's one, significant step towards re-entry will not have been welcome news for all.

In corporate buildings, offices and boardrooms around this country, in Australia - where former Pike River boss Peter Whittall now works in rest home management - and around the world, some will be sitting a little uneasy in their comfortable seats.

Their interests are not served if any light is cast deep into a mine that claimed the lives of 29 employees, 29 souls in their charge.

They may have escaped prosecution - even the ignominy of charges being brought - for their alleged lack of care, but they now face the prospect of further scrutiny, further discomfort in the glare of public examination.

And possibly, maybe, criminal proceedings.

But it will not be just in the private sector that such pain is felt and many a conscience pricked.

The previous National government displayed a reluctance for re-entry that sometimes bordered on the cruel. It appeared to be a willing partner in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy in easing the families' pain, then dragged its feet over concerns of safety and through a mire of red tape and bureaucracy.

It left some with the belief that it was making a political and legal calculation; that maybe its interests were best served by leaving any evidence of possible wrongdoing and negligence entombed in the dark, with 29 men, hundreds of metres from prying eyes.

There were numerous inquiries but they remained investigations without a body, or even access to a crime scene.

There may be little left down there. Maybe nothing at all, any evidence pulverised by the explosion that thundered through the mine and tore so many lives apart. Below ground and above.

But we owe it to the families and ourselves to search not only for the bodies but also a body of evidence that takes us another step towards solving the mystery of what happened on November 19, 2010. What went wrong and maybe who was to blame.

The Dominion Post

.

[The Diceman Cometh 125]

That's a piss weak effort Jack, and you know it.

They said $20 million initially. Now it's $32 million and the reality is it will be closer to $200 million when and if it ever happens, according to those in the industry who are experts.

You welfare folk are great spending other hard working people's money Jack. If you and I stood on a street in 50 New Zealand cities or towns I guarantee you the majority would not be in favour of spending any more on Pike River. Enough is enough.

It's time to stop the charade. 

Pike River was a horrible tragedy but MOVE ON FOR FARKS SAKE.

[jack 431]

3 hours ago, The Diceman Cometh said:

That's a piss weak effort Jack, and you know it.

They said $20 million initially. Now it's $32 million and the reality is it will be closer to $200 million when and if it ever happens, according to those in the industry who are experts.

You welfare folk are great spending other hard working people's money Jack. If you and I stood on a street in 50 New Zealand cities or towns I guarantee you the majority would not be in favour of spending any more on Pike River. Enough is enough.

It's time to stop the charade. 

Pike River was a horrible tragedy but MOVE ON FOR FARKS SAKE.

 " What is important is that the families of 29 men, who headed off to work on November 19, 2010, and never returned, are one step closer to potentially bringing their sons, brothers, husbands and fathers back into the light and the arms of people who miss them daily. "

Amen.

[rdytdy 5,341]

Here you go Jack. Make sure you click on the link in the first line "last week" 

Pike River: Why are we going back in?

by Deb 

 

Andrew Little either does not read  or he is ignoring the reasoning and logic in my post last week regarding the futility of going back into the Pike River Mine because he has gone ahead and signed off on a plan outlining three possible re-entry options.  Quote:

One of the options would include building a new two-metre by two-metre tunnel, about 200 metres long, to the Pit Bottom in Stone area.
The remaining two options include drilling a large diameter borehole and re-entering the main drift as it is with no secondary exit.
The Agency will continue to develop the three proposals.  End of quote.

Fabulous, he is pushing ahead with this foolhardy body recovery mission. We know already that costs are expected to reach $35 million dollars which is an increase of $12 million, more than 50%, of the cost of the initial estimate of $23 million just 8 months ago.

Like death by a thousand cuts, we can expect that costs will continue to balloon. If we were told up-front that the total recovery effort would cost $200 million dollars, I suspect that would cause outrage and people would be demanding an immediate end to this nonsense.  But as it is, the cost is bumped up incrementally, $23 million here, another $12 million there, and before we know it, the total cost will be horrific and completely disproportionate to the original $23 million we all reluctantly swallowed.  For clarity, the $200 million is just a number I plucked out of the air, to make my point that we need to consider the total cost.

So what can we realistically expect to pay? Well according to our Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, Quote:

“[…] cost shouldn’t be an issue.  “Of course we’re going to act responsibly. Safety is top of mind. But you cannot put a price on someone’s life and their family member’s ability to have closure. […]”  End of quote.

She is effectively committing this current government to a bottomless pit of funding.

And here’s why.  Bernie Monk, who has been a vocal agitant for the body recovery effort had this to say back in 2012 on the first anniversary of the disaster.  Quote:

[…] they would continue to grieve in limbo until the bodies still trapped behind a rock fall in Pike River were returned to them, he said. […]  End of quote.

And here’s Carol Rose, who lost her son Stuart Mudge at Pike River.  Quote:

[…] she cannot get any closure until a body is returned to her family.[…]  End of quote.

Based on those three statements above, I don’t see an end to this folly, which may yet result in further death or injury.

So why are we in this position of going back into the mine at all? Call me cynical if you like, but this is nothing more than a political stunt.

Back in April 2017, in the lead up to the general election, footage was leaked to the families and to media. It was sensationalised, claiming it was dramatic new footage that showed men working inside the mine.  You can view the story here.

As was quite rightly pointed out at the time by Audrey Young, it was indeed, recklessly misleading.  Quote:

The Sunday night airing of footage of a robot in the Piker River Mine drift along with two Mines Rescue personnel was recklessly misleading.

It has almost certainly led to further distress for Pike River families who may have believed something had happened in the drift that had never happened before.

The sequence of footage and commentary left the clear impression that rescuers had gone deep into the drift safely.

It showed a robot going 1.57km into the tunnel, passing a couple of obstacles at least 800m in, breaking down and then being fixed by Mines Rescue personnel deep inside the mine until it came upon a loader and could go no further.

It is possible those running the footage on Newshub didn’t know what they were looking at, and either made assumptions or decided to create an impression.

That worked very well. It left a false impression that Mines Rescue had been far deeper into the mine than anybody had ever known. […]

[…] The police fuelled the cock-up theory by confusing the footage and the robot (there have been five robots and more than 30 hours of video), leaving the impression valuable images had been deliberately withheld from the families and the Royal Commission of inquiry.  End of quote.

It didn’t stop there.  In June 2017, more footage was obtained by Newshub that was taken from borehole number 44 back in January 2011, which showed that wooden pallets and rubber hoses were intact in the mine.  This was supposed to call a lie to claims of a raging inferno within the mine.  Quote:

“The video clearly confirms absence of fire damage. The stability of the mine at that location also does not appear to have been compromised,” he told Newshub.

Mr Rockhouse’s mother Sonya says it proves what officials told the families in 2010 was wrong.  End of quote.

Actually, it does nothing of the sort.  Nick Smith addresses Sonya’s claim.  Quote:

[…] Dr Nick Smith, acting Conservation Minister for Pike River issues, said the expert reports never claimed the entire mine was an inferno.

“There is nothing in the film released that changes anything in the technical reports. None of them claimed that every corner of the mine was burnt to a cinder,” he said.

“It would only be possible for there to be fire where there was both the presence of methane, oxygen and a source of ignition.”[…]  End of quote.

This map shows the location of borehole 44.  It is at the furthest reaches of the mine

Location of borehole 44

Even more emotive was the suggestion that the video may have revealed a pair of glasses on the floor of the mine. Ben Rockhouse, who was thought to be working in the area of the borehole 44 footage wore glasses, and his mother is convinced these belong to her son.

The following comparison was made between a photo of Ben with glasses, and a still from the video footage as below:

UK Mines Rescue consultant Mr Robinson said it’s possible the glasses belong to Ben.

Then there was the footage where Mines Rescue workers discussed whether or not they could see movement, when they lowered a camera into the slimline ventilation shaft, which is at the mine end of the drift.  This footage is important because it was taken just four days after the 1st explosion, and immediately before the 2nd explosion, which effectively ended any hope of rescue.

The lead in to the news story says “the picture quality is poor but the sound is clear.”  You would think from that introduction that the sound would be of what was supposedly heard moving, but actually, the sound they are referring to is the voices of the Mines Rescue workers speculating about whether or not they could see movement.  Within the same video, it was admitted that the movement they may or may not have seen, might have just been water.

What I have concluded from everything I have seen and read about the new information that came to light last year, is that it actually concludes nothing, and does not make a compelling case for re-entry. It is also clear that the Royal Commission also had all of this information available to them whilst conducting their Inquiry.

But 2017 was an election year, and on 15th August, Labour, the Greens, the Maori Party and United Future signed a pledge to set up an agency to take over and re-enter Pike River Mine. New Zealand First had already committed to re-entry.  National called it out for the political stunt that it was at the time.

When the coalition government was formed, re-entry to Pike River Mine was agreed, and this foolhardy promise became a reality. On 20th November 2017, Jacinda Ardern announced the establishment of the Pike River Recovery Agency to work towards the manned re-entry of the Pike River drift. The budget was initially set at $7.6 million dollars per year for three years, or $23 million in total.  That has since been revised to $35 million.

Do you remember the fuss about the flag referendum and the $26 million dollar price tag? I do. Voters bitched and moaned, and then complained some more about the cost of the referendum. Whatever your personal views on the flag referendum, it had a finite cost, which allowed every voter a democratic choice in something that affected us all as a nation. And still, they moaned.

Yet here we are, preparing to spend at least $35 million dollars to re-enter the grave of 29 men.

This is expressly against the wishes of some of the family members, as acknowledged by Bernie Monk.

It is expressly against the wishes of Marion Curtin, the mother of Richard Holling, who was killed in the disaster.  Quote:

[…] Marion Curtin said she felt compelled to speak out as the protest escalated against the sealing of the Pike River mine.

Not all families shared the views or condoned the actions of those who were the most vocal, she said.

“I’m appalled and embarrassed.” […]

[…] “I want my son to remain undisturbed,” she said. “We have never wanted re-entry into the mine for reasons of safety and cost, let alone sacrilege and futility. His remains are there, his spirit is not.”[…]

[…] The relentless push and strident talk by some families and supporters for re-entry into the drift only compounded the grief and distress for others.[…]  End of quote.

Why are we doing this?  It needs to stop now.

[The Diceman Cometh 125]

1 hour ago, jack said:

 " What is important is that the families of 29 men, who headed off to work on November 19, 2010, and never returned, are one step closer to potentially bringing their sons, brothers, husbands and fathers back into the light and the arms of people who miss them daily. "

Amen.

Jack, Amen to you too. 

All the best.

[Ohokaman 5,831]

Anyone missing the daily media circus around the toothy one and her entourage...?? No...? Me neither......

[chevy86 2,704]

Well she's supposed to be back in 2 weeks so prepare for it to all ramp up again. Hope "fishboy" has perfected his breastfeeding technique!

[jack 431]

14 hours ago, rdytdy said:

Here you go Jack. Make sure you click on the link in the first line "last week" 

Pike River: Why are we going back in?

by Deb 

 

... Anything from  "The Whale Oil " site is National Party Propaganda Ted!! ... And by the way ,  who`s DEB ?

This is how The  National Party Govt. treat hard working , tax paying citizens  by refusing to take that steps to recover their bodies!! .... $$$ shouldn`t  have been an issue!

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/07/pike-river-why-are-we-going-back-in/

[Uriah Heap 481]

14 hours ago, Ohokaman said:

Anyone missing the daily media circus around the toothy one and her entourage...?? No...? Me neither......

Haven't been; but now that you've brought it back to my attention..............................I'm kinda missing that wee baby

[Blue 1,095]

21 minutes ago, Uriah Heap said:

Haven't been; but now that you've brought it back to my attention..............................I'm kinda missing that wee baby

Not paying attention Heap. We see Winston on a daily basis.!!!

[rdytdy 5,341]

2 hours ago, jack said:

... Anything from  "The Whale Oil " site is National Party Propaganda Ted!! ... And by the way ,  who`s DEB ?

This is how The  National Party Govt. treat hard working , tax paying citizens  by refusing to take that steps to recover their bodies!! .... $$$ shouldn`t  have been an issue!

https://www.whaleoil.co.nz/2018/07/pike-river-why-are-we-going-back-in/

Shows how much you know Jack

I gather you don't mind how many millions will spent to attempt to bring out any remains, if they can find any, instead of using that money for doing something positive for the living. Leave them where they are and put a memorial at the mine.   

[rdytdy 5,341]

Labour do not care about babies

by Christie 

 

The NZ Herald reports that planning delays may cause Ray Avery’s charity concert to be abandoned because he has a deadline in August to confirm the headline act. Quote:

LifePod incubator inventor Sir Ray Avery says planning delays could scuttle his planned charity concert at Eden Park because he has been given a “drop-dead” August deadline to confirm the headline star.

He said the unnamed international star’s promoter needs to confirm the venue by the end of August, but the Environment Court is not expected to rule until October on objections to a resource consent to allow the night-time event at Eden Park on Waitangi Day next year.

National MP Paul Goldsmith has urged the Government to “knock some heads together” to avoid the need to go to the Environment Court. end quote.

In a country like New Zealand, if we cannot organise a charity concert to raise money for incubator pods for babies, then we should be completely ashamed of ourselves. Particularly as the vast majority of Aucklanders, including many who live close to Eden Park, are in favour of it.

 

But not all Aucklanders are in favour of it, as we know. Here is one who has thrown all of her toys out of the cot because she doesn’t want the concert to go ahead.

Digital image credit: Pixy

Unfortunately, she has been backed up by her protegee and new mother, the current prime minister. Quote:

But a spokeswoman for Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern suggested Avery should look at other possible venues.

“The Prime Minister is really supportive of the cause and what the concert is trying to achieve,” she said.

“While it isn’t a Government issue, she does note there are other local concert venues and is sure a solution could be found.” End quote.

In other words, don’t upset Aunty Helen.

If she was “really supportive of the cause and what the concert is trying to achieve,” then she would respect the fact that a lot of time, effort and money have already gone into organising this concert, and that is money down the drain if they have to relocate. Or, put it another way, that is money that could have been used to fund pods for premature babies and won’t be available if the concert has to be relocated.

But, don’t upset Aunty Helen. Quote:

Avery said the international star would probably still come to New Zealand if the Eden Park event collapsed, but his charity would not get any of the proceeds if the star’s concert moved to Mt Smart Stadium where concerts are permitted.

Mt Smart’s capacity of 30,000 fans is only half Eden Park’s 60,000. End quote.

In other words, moving the concert will only raise half of the money.

This is a disgrace. Jacinda Ardern has just given birth, with the help of the best medical treatment available in the country. Once you have been through the process, you think about how many things could have gone wrong, and you thank your lucky stars that everything was okay.

When it was me, I was thankful mainly for two things. The first was that I was not living even 50 years ago, or more. The other was that I don’t live in a third-world country.

I’m sure some of these things went through Jacinda’s mind as well, but she must have had amnesia fairly quickly, as those pods will help babies in third-world countries, and yet she has not come out and said so, which is a surprise.

It is because she doesn’t want to upset Aunty Helen?

Of course, it is worth pointing out that, as head of the United Nations Development Programme and doing work in third world countries, Helen Clark will have seen for herself the problems with infant mortality and the huge difference these pods will make to premature babies.

So neither Helen Clark nor Jacinda Ardern has any excuse for not doing everything in their power to make sure this concert goes ahead with as few problems as possible.

But what is it they say? Scratch a socialist, find a hypocrite.