Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Department of Labour’

Hundreds Paid Less Than The Minimum Wage

June 28, 2011 17 comments

Following on from our Migrant Tale: Civil Engineer now cleaning ovens in New Zealand we thought this would be a good time to explore further the exploitation of migrant workers in New Zealand.

It seems that the National Distribution union has had concerns about this issue for some time and that some degree of fault may lay with the Department of Labour for not doing enough to police employment practices.

Hundreds of immigrants and some Kiwis are getting a raw deal from New Zealand employers and are being paid less than the minimum wage. According to the National Distribution union

Thirteen dollars an hour may be too little for New Zealand’s unions but there are some workers in our community who struggle to make even that.

According to National Distribution Union (NDU) secretary Robert Reid there are hundreds of vulnerable workers in New Zealand who are being left with little option other to work for less than minimum wage.

Mr Reid says those affected are mainly migrant workers who are too scared to complain about their situation.

The story was taken-up by 3 News earlier this year, Mr Reid said that some immigrants are being failed by a lack of policing of labour laws

“Just today I received a call from a migrant worker in the Auckland suburb of Northcote who stated that it was very difficult to find a job that was even paying the minimum wage,” he says.

This migrant from an Asian country contacted small shops and restaurants in Auckland which only offered between $7 and $10 per hour, says Mr Reid.

He says this is not uncommon, especially in Auckland.

“With this example they are just blatantly not paying minimum wage. “It is certainly an increasing problem, mainly for migrant workers who are very vulnerable and being exploited.”

He says the increase in cases is mainly due to the Department of Labour doing little to police it.

“The Department of Labour just doesn’t have enough inspectors left. It is now ultimately down to the Unions to police this and the unions only cover 20 percent of the work force.”

He went on to tell 3 News that many are afraid to speak out and that Asian and African workers are the most exploited

many who do not want to speak out are in fear of being sent home and that includes documented workers, who work here legally but are not permanent residents.

Overseas students are just one example of documented workers who are being exploited. Students can work up to 20 hours per week on their study visa.

“It seems to be lesser those from Europe and certainly more Asians and Africans who are being exploited,” says Mr Reid.

He says some of the migrant workers are undocumented but this is not an excuse to exploit them.

“If they are here they should not be exploited.”

Mr Reid says there is also a problem with large companies paying under minimum wage and using different allowances and bonuses to make up the difference.

“Some major New Zealand firms add shift and attendance bonuses to hourly rates below the minimum wage. They say that the Department of Labour has condoned this practice. The NDU believes the practice could be unlawful.” read the full report here

We’re always interested to hear about how migrants are treated in New Zealand, if you have a tale you’d like to tell please leave it in our comments section.

You may also be interested in: Skilled migrants asked to tell their NZ work stories

Categories: New Zealand Tags: , ,

Pike River Mine Would’ve Been Illegal In Australia

June 22, 2011 Leave a comment

Pike River Mine would’ve been illegal in Australia, or in most first world countries for that matter.

Ean Higgins, the old-school Australian journalist vilified in New Zealand for asking “difficult questions” at the Pike River disaster press conferences  and called a “tosspot” and “boorish” by Gerry Brownlee, was one of the journalists who managed yesterday to elicit a **confession from the NZ Prime Minister that conditions at the Pike River Coal Mine would have been illegal in Australia.

The repercussions of that bombshell are still being felt on both sides of the Tasman this morning. In today’s Australian Higgins writes

NEW Zealand Prime Minister John Key yesterday came under attack after admitting the country’s mine safety laws were deficient, with unions and the Labour opposition saying he should have recognised the fact earlier and already acted to correct it.

Mr Key also faced renewed criticisms of having been too close to the Pike River Coal company, defending it since the November explosion which killed 29 men including two Australians.

Since the Pike River disaster, Mr Key and his Energy Minister, Gerry Brownlee, had consistently defended New Zealand’s coalmine regulations as being at least as good as Australia’s.

But in an exclusive interview with The Australian published yesterday, Mr Key said the Pike River mine would have been illegal in Australia, and that after the imminent royal commission into the disaster, changes to mine safety regulations would be made.

Labour leader Phil Goff yesterday seized on Mr Key’s admission, describing it as an “unbelievable about-face”.

“If John Key has new evidence about serious safety issues in our mines, he should take action now to address those concerns,” Mr Goff said. “If he doesn’t, he should wait for the royal commission to make its recommendations.”

The union movement has noted that Mr Brownlee, in particular, went to some lengths to defend Pike River Coal’s safety record in the days after the explosion…read more here

It is astonishing that Key has made this admission, not least because it could prejudice evidence to the Royal Commission of Inquiry. Why the sudden about face, does he know his government will come under criticism during the inquiry and he is attempting to soften impact of that close to an election?

In May John Key rubbished claims by Helen Kelly, that his government was too close to the Pike River company after the disaster.

In her speech to the Labour congress in Wellington…Kelly said Pike River failed in its fundamental duty to provide a safe workplace and Key had then sat next to chief executive Peter Whittall at the memorial service for the 29 dead men.

“The real story of Pike River is that a group of shareholders from around the world including some very big multinational companies recognised the huge value of the coal in Pike River and decided to invest in mining. That’s fine. Whether they did this on the cheap and spent insufficient money on safety is a question on everyone’s lips and a matter for the inquiry.”

Key said her comments were “a bit distasteful”.

No one knew who was at fault yet and blame would be laid when the Royal Commission and Department of Labour reported back, he told Newstalk ZB…more here

Let us not forget the regulatory environment that allows companies to ‘operate on the cheap and spend insufficient money on safety’ existed on the present government’s watch. The Mines inspectorate may’ve been hacked away by the previous administation but the present one did nothing to improve the situation before approving surgical mining techniques at Pike River mine.

Serious shortage of mining inspectors and other safety concerns

In November last year we blogged that the company which owned the Pike River coal mine raised concerns about mine safety in New Zealand, according to documents obtained by One News.

A submission by the Pike River Coal company, as part of a review of New Zealand’s mine legislation, said there was a serious shortage of mining inspectors and raised other safety concerns.

According to TVNZ the report

“called for an increase in the coverage and the number of mine inspectors through realistic resourcing of the Department of Labour.

The submission says the number of qualified mine inspectors has dramatically dropped over the past decade.

(Kate) Wilkinson said New Zealand has two mine inspectors plus an expert.

Asked if that is enough, she said: “Well I have got no advice to suggest that it is inappropriate.”

But when asked to name the biggest safety concerns in the industry the Pike River Coal company said: “Levels of competence and experience of workers and contractors working underground is of concern. The inspectorate is seriously under-manned and under-resourced…”read the full news report here

A copy of the document’s executive summary may be found on the TVNZ site by clicking here, the text of which appears below,  a TV report about the Pike River submission may be watched here

Government Rejected Call to Bring Back Mine Inspectors

At the same time Radio NZ was reporting that the NZ government had rejected calls to re-instate a system of on-site  mine safety inspectors.

Their report said that the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union called for the system to be re-introduced after it was scrapped in the the early 1990s, saying it provided vital protection for mine workers.

An international mine safety adviser, David Feickert, said the system is still in place  in Australia and Britain, where they have a lower level of incidents.

Health and Safety Enforcement in NZ

Laat year this comment was left on Gordon Campbell’s blog on Scoop, the author indicated that NZ’s governmental Health and Safety  inspectorate needed to be improved:

“NZ’s distinctive ‘self regulating’ HSE regime results in one of the highest workplace death and accident rates in the developed world – not just in mining. There is virtually no official monitoring of technical or safety compliance in any of the ‘low frequency, high risk’ fields, let alone routine workplace inspections. These types of event are what produce the headline grabbing ‘disasters’, as opposed to the scandalous and little publicised ‘attrition’ seen daily in our workplaces.

DOL’s cultural commitment to laissez faire HSE and the sinking lid on its monitoring and enforcement resources mean that further ‘disasters’ are inevitable, and meanwhile the slow carnage will also continue. The silent assent of each Government and the union movement since 1992 doesn’t bode well for addressing this central issue.”

One thing’s for  sure – there are a lot of very frustrated miners, mining experts, technical crews and rescuers out there who feel very aggrieved about the way the Pike River mine incident was handled, who will forever be asking themselves what could have been done better.

It’s a disgrace that the government has take so long to admit that the legislation was at fault. But more than a change in the law is required – the mines inspectorate must be expanded and upskilled, mine monitoring must be improved, on site inspectors reintroduced and the competence and experience of people working in the mining industry must be on a par with other developed countries.

You may also be interested in

You’re not in Australia now (An article in “The Australian”)

AN Australian who quit work at New Zealand’s Pike River mine four months before it exploded says he could not continue to work in such shocking and unsafe conditions.

Seven months after the disaster that killed 29 men, including two Australians, miner Peter Sattler has spoken out about his concerns for safety at the South Island coalmine, revealing he repeatedly complained about what he saw as poor practices.

“I left there primarily because of my concerns at safety of the place,” he told Television New Zealand. The respected mining supervisor, who has 35 years experience, worked at Pike River for a year, describing the processes and regulations there as backward compared with Australia.

“It was like going back in time, really,” he said. “There were quite a few things I saw there that sort of shocked me.”

Mr Sattler complained to management but was told: “You’re not in Australia, you’re in New Zealand.” He left last July… more here

** Death mine would’ve been illegal here (An article in “The Australian)

NEW Zealand Prime Minister John Key has for the first time acknowledged serious deficiencies in his country’s mining safety regulations, saying the Pike River coalmine where 29 men died “would be illegal in Australia”.

Faced with mounting allegations that New Zealand coalmines lack equipment and procedures that are compulsory in Australia, Mr Key vowed yesterday that there would be changes to mining safety laws.

In an exclusive interview with The Australian, Mr Key said his government wasn’t in a position to “give a full response” on mining safety until the conclusion of the royal commission into the methane gas explosion that ripped through the Pike River mine in November, but he said “we do have to ask the question” about safety standards.

He said the Pike River mine, which was a single-entry uphill mine, “couldn’t have been constructed in Australia” because it would have been “illegal”.

“There will be changes in New Zealand,” he said.

Mr Key’s admissions mark a reversal of the staunch defence of New Zealand’s mining regulations that he and Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee mounted immediately after the disaster… more here

Other posts tagged Pike River Mine in date order, most recent first:

Key Passing The Buck On Pike River

Pike River Mine – Recovery Operation To Quit

Pike River Migrants Face Deportation From New Zealand, Happy Christmas?

NZ A “Few Bricks Short Of A Wall” – Pike River Mine Rescue

Pike River Miners “Shouldn’t Have Died” – Updated

Family Of Willy Joynson Wants Answers, Pike River Mine Explosion

Pike River Mine – What went wrong?

Pike River Mine Management Raised Concerns About NZ Coal Mining Legislation, Calls for On Site Mine Inspectors

Lawrie Drew Wanted Truth To Be Told From The Start

Pike River Mine – Technical Questions Answered

Miners Still Missing At Pike River Mine, Atarau

Pike River Coal Mine Explosion

Categories: New Zealand Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pike River Miners “Shouldn’t Have Died” – Updated

November 26, 2010 Leave a comment

The Sydney Morning Herald published today a startling  interview with historian Gerry Morris, who grew up in a Greymouth mining family and who lost his grandfather in a mining accident near Greymouth in 1940. (For more about Mr Morris’ background read the article here.)

Mr Morris was critical of the way the in which the police “dragged out the information flows” which resulted in more anguish for the families, until Peter Whittall broke the news after the second explosion that all the men had likely perished.

He said he couldn’t see why families hadn’t been given more information and that the mining community was knowledgeable enough to be able to process it.

In one section of the interview he gave an indication that a change in both  mining regulations and the H&S enforcement regime in mines may lie at the root of why the disaster could have happened:

“Simply, it goes right back when mining regulations changed. Mining regulations were very, very prescriptive, the managing of coal mining changed to an OSH (occupational safety and health) regime where the responsibility for safety became a lot more blurred and a lot more generalised.”

The Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 introduced changes to mining safety laws and did away with the Mines Department, and regulation fell under the auspices of the OSH service of the Department of Labour, he said.

Pike had an “almost impossible” commercial imperative to get a return on the money poured into the mine, and were working under regulations less prescriptive than they once were, he said.

“If they had had people like the old regime of inspectors on the West Coast, and I think there’s only two mining inspectors left in New Zealand … you wouldn’t think the mine would be allowed to operate with these sort of gas issues.”

Greymouth was “just devastated”, he said.

“Everyone has got some connection with that mine.”

A lack of  on-site of mining inspectors was something that Pike River Coal  raised concerns about and it must surely form part of the terms of reference of the commission of inquiry

Read Pike River Mine Management Raised Concerns About NZ Coal Mining Legislation, Calls for On Site Mine Inspectors:- A 2008 submission by the Pike River Coal company, as part of a review of New Zealand’s mine legislation, said there was a serious shortage of mining inspectors and raises other safety concerns…

Also read : Pike River mine – what went wrong :- levels of methane in the mine reached dangerous levels above which miners should have been evacuated – suggesting that ” either the warning system was inadequate or it wasn’t properly monitored.”…

Update 27 November 2010

Two possible causes for the blast

Two possible causes for the initial blast have been postulated by NZ mine safety expert David Feickert, interviewed in The Australian

Feickert noted that the electrical system had broken down prior to the first explosion.

This would have stopped the main electric ventilators from working, Feickert said, and despite the mine’s natural ventilation system, methane was likely to have started building up.

Then there would have been a source of ignition, which could have been connected with the electrical problem, he said.

Feickert said another possibility was a gas outburst, where a pocket of methane in a seam developed such pressure behind it that it broke out and found its way to oxygen, which is required to ignite it.

Rescue Effort Flawed

Feickert also said that he thought the decision-making structure of the rescue effort “was deeply flawed and was inferior to that in Australia, where mining emergencies are handled by company management supported by mine inspectors and union-appointed safety officers.”

Management Struggled to Maintain Methane Levels

Former Pike River employee Brent Forrester, whose close friend Ricki Keane was among those killed in the explosion, told today’s Timaru Herald that “management struggled to maintain the methane levels, and safety concerns he and his crew raised were often ignored.” He said the mine “always had ventilation issues” and his gas detector would frequently go “off the charts”. The paper reported that “he said many of the methane sensors did not work or were not calibrated and the mine’s phone system needed to be upgraded”. Forrester explained that “the reason I didn’t push it too far [with management] was the fear of losing my job. The pressure is always on, they’re losing a lot of money, so they’re making you cut a lot of short-cuts”.  Source

Department of Labour Inquiry “Planned”
An inquiry into the Pike River Coal disaster is also being planned by the Department of Labour but they declined to reveal any key details about inspections at this mine, in an request written about by the NZPA on 22 November 2010. Again the issue of gas sensors has been raised:

A department spokesman declined to say whether key equipment — Waratah continuous miners and a Sandvik ABM20 bolter-miner — were fitted with detectors to shut down the machinery when methane levels became dangerous, or whether there were any automatic sensors in the mine to warn if methane was at potentially explosive levels.

“Information of this nature will form part of the department’s investigation and will not therefore be released until after the investigation,” he said.

The spokesman also declined to talk about an “outburst” of potentially inflammable gas in the mine last month, or problems with inflammable gas in the mine following the commissioning of the first one of the company’s two main underground fans.

“Our investigation of the incident at the mine will review all interactions with the (Pike River Coal) company, and until that is complete, we can not release any detailed information about them,” the spokesman said”…more on Yahoo News

Categories: New Zealand Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Pike River Mine Management Raised Concerns About NZ Coal Mining Legislation, Calls for On Site Mine Inspectors

November 24, 2010 1 comment

One News reported yesterday that the company that owns the Pike River coal mine itself raised concerns about mine safety in New Zealand, according to documents they obtained.

A submission by the Pike River Coal company, as part of a review of New Zealand’s mine legislation, said there was a serious shortage of mining inspectors and raises other safety concerns.

According to  TVNZ the report

“called for an increase in the coverage and the number of mine inspectors through realistic resourcing of the Department of Labour.

The submission says the number of qualified mine inspectors has dramatically dropped over the past decade.

(Kate) Wilkinson said New Zealand has two mine inspectors plus an expert.

Asked if that is enough, she said: “Well I have got no advice to suggest that it is inappropriate.”

But when asked to name the biggest safety concerns in the industry the Pike River Coal company said: “Levels of competence and experience of workers and contractors working underground is of concern. The inspectorate is seriously under-manned and under-resourced…”read the full news report here

A copy of the document’s executive summary may be found on the TVNZ site by clicking HERE, the text of which appears below, or a TV report about the Pike River submission may be watched HERE

Response Form: Improving Hazard Management Within the Underground Mining Industry

Submission by: Pike River Coal Ltd

Contact: Peter Whittall

General Manager, Mines

Date Friday 6 June 2008

Pike River Coal consent to this document being made publicly available under the Official Information Act

Executive Summary

Pike River Coal Ltd (PRCL )believes that the current New Zealand coal mining legislation (Predominantly the regulations) is inadequate in some critical areas. Review is  needed to appropriately address the current and future needs of the industry and the communities within which the mines operate and draw their labour. Any case for change should be approached in a consultative manner that fully involves all industry stakeholders. Once consensus is reached staged implementation should follow.

Unfortunately, several of the options put forward in the DOL discussion paper have the potential to plunge the industry in an unproductive quagmire of bureaucratic administration.

PRCL’S view of the draft document is that it ignores, or at least does not seek to address, some of the basic principles of health & safety and hazard management, which are:

  • Deal with human attitude to improve behaviour to achieve desired outcomes
  • Be fully consultative in the approach
  • Ensure commitment through active and full participation
  • Be supportive
  • Be educative
  • Have an effective tie risk based approach toward safety management
  • Keep it simple

It is the mew of PRCL that the principal Act needs to be amended to include a requirement for competent or qualified persons. The current mining regulations need to be reviewed to support a more critical risk or hazard review approach with a consequent critical risk management plan system to address the identified risks. A means of then demonstrating compliance needs to be created via the use of detailed codes of practice or detailed guidelines that deal to the real issues as opposed to being politically correct.

The short term strategy should consider and include:

  • A planned staged consultative approach;
  • Promote a culture of evaluation, consultation and education with the DOL and its inspectorate. The DOL have a role as inspector and compliance auditor but also one of support within the industry to assist transfer and awareness of best practice within health and safety and ensuring that smaller or less resourced operators are not ignorant either of their responsibilities or strategies for providing a safe work environment;
  • Increase the coverage and number of mines inspectors via realistic resourcing of DOL;
  • Increase education levels by involving stakeholders such as training providers;
  • Promote the use of Critical Risk review at each site and the development of a Management Plan System and supporting Standard Operating Procedures to support each Management Plan;
  • Start specific health & safety and hazard management mining campaigns and/or awards:

http://images.tvnz.co.nz/tvnz_images/news2010/business-generic/mine_response.pdf
Government Rejects Call to Bring Back Mine Inspectors

Radio NZ today reported that the NZ government has rejected calls to re-instate a system of on-site  mine safety inspectors.

The report said that the Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union called for the system to be re-introduced after it was scrapped in the the early 1990s, saying it provided vital protection for mine workers.

An international mine safety adviser, David Feickert, said the system is still in place  in Australia and Britain, where they have a lower level of incidents.

Read the full report HERE

Another proved practice, adopted abroad, that doesn’t work in New Zealand.

Categories: New Zealand Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Safety Gaps Found In Adventure Tourism Review

August 24, 2010 Leave a comment

Emily Jordan died riverboarding in New Zealand

British tourist Emily Jordan drowned whilst riverboarding in 2008

Media outlets are reporting on the  long awaited release of New Zealand’s Adventure Tourism safety review. The review was instigated after the father of drowned river boarding tourist, Emily Jordan, wrote to John Key calling safety regulation in New Zealand “third world.”

The two main outcomes are that there are recommendations that adventure tourism Operators be registered (which stops short of a licensing system) and that  “most” be audited in order to remain on the register.

But even that is by no means a done deal because the report’s recommendations offer up a get-out-of- jail-card :-  a “quality mark” as an alternative to a full-blown and regulated registration scheme.

John Hartevelt wrote for Fairfax (emphasis ours):

A review of adventure tourism operators has found gaps in safety that risk more accidents and damage to New Zealand’s $3 billion adventure tourism industry.

The Government has announced it will set up a compulsory register and demand safety checks for operators to stay on the register…is no fundamental issue stopping operators from developing safety systems…

(the review) found there were gaps that allowed some to operate with less than acceptable safety standards. “While these gaps remain there is insufficient assurance that preventable accidents will not occur,” the review says.

“This situation could result in harm to individuals and their families and damage to New Zealand’s reputation as an international visitor destination.” Safety systems were “still developing” because the sector had grown quickly to a significant size.”

The report goes on to state that

The scheme should require “up-front and ongoing” external safety audits.

“This would go a considerable way towards providing assurance that activities are being managed safely,” the review said.

Labour Minister Kate Wilkinson said the Government had accepted the recommendation and a registration scheme would be set up. Most operators would become subject to safety audits once the scheme was in place…read the full report here

It may come as a surprise to some to hear that operators weren’t being subject to safety audits before the review took place. Perhaps if they had been a number of tragic deaths, including that of Emily Jordan, may have been avoided.

The Herald put a figure on the cost of auditing, which is risk weighted, that is going to come as a shock to many small operators. In our opinion this is likely to cause most operators to protest against the recommendations and put pressure on the government to adopt a quality mark for the industry:

The cost of an initial audit would depend on the risk. Medium risk would be $1000, and high risk would be $2200. The audits would be repeated periodically, and subsequent ones would be half the price of the initial audit.

There are no costings for repeating a failed audit and there are some recommendations that have not been reported on by the press.

The report made a number of recommendations to the Minister of Labour. Those included:

  • Note that the adventure and outdoor commercial sector has grown quickly to a significant size, is innovative and dynamic, and its safety management systems reflect that quick growth and are still developing
  • Note that the review found assurance and information gaps in the safety management framework that applies to the sectors.
  • Addressing assurance gaps -  Agree to introduce a registration scheme for the adventure and outdoor commercial sectors with a requirement for up-front and ongoing external safety audits of operators’ safety management provisions (to a level commensurate with the risk) and an obligation on operators to keep their registration up-to-date
  • Agree to partner with an industry-led entity to strengthen the safety management framework for the sectors
  • Agree to the development of a practice guide for the sector
  • Agree to an evaluation of the voluntary safety auditing schemes for adventure and outdoor commercial sector operations to ensure they are fit for purpose
  • Agree to investigate the development of a register of government-accredited adventure tourism-related safety auditing schemes
  • Note that agencies will clarify which government agency is responsible for which activities in the adventure and outdoor commercial sector
  • Note that the Department of Labour will ensure that when the review of the Machinery Act and Amusement Devices Regulations occurs, that it carefully considers the adequacy of the Act and Regulations for the adventure and outdoor commercial sectors
  • Agree to better inform operators about their current responsibilities
  • Agree to further work being undertaken to determine whether instructors and guides should be required to hold qualifications and work only within the scope of their qualifications for some activities
  • Addressing information gaps – Agree to work being undertaken to collect better and more consistent information on the sector and to improve its collation
  • Further worthwhile initiatives – Note that if the proposed registration scheme is not approved, the Department of Labour will undertake further work to consider the value of educating consumers to look for a safety mark from an accredited safety auditing scheme when selecting an adventure or outdoor commercial sector provider
  • Agree to further work being undertaken regarding a requirement for operators to have a satisfactory safety audit in order to receive any taxpayer-funded promotional benefits, (such as inclusion through i-Site stands, Tourism New Zealand)
  • Direct the Department of Labour to undertake further work with other agencies as applicable in order to consider the appropriateness of the following initiatives:
  • A. Expanding the rules-based approach taken under the Maritime Transport Act and the Civil Aviation Act for possible application to other adventure based activities
  • B. Linking ACC payments to evidence of audited safety management plans
  • C. Increasing the level of inspection under the HSE Act
  • Agree to investigate if New Zealand should be represented on the International Organisation for Standardisation’s TC 228 Working Group for Adventure Tourism*
  • Agree to the Department of Labour scoping the development of guidance on land owners’ and land managers’ safety-related responsibilities when they grant permission for adventure and outdoor commercial sector activities to operate on land that they own or manage
  • General – Note that Cabinet has approved the development of aviation rules for commercial adventure aviation and new maritime rules for commercial jet boating and rafting to improve the safety regulatory framework for these activities, and that this work is well advanced
  • Note that the proposed rules for adventure aviation activities and commercial jet boating and rafting being developed for the Minister of Transport will adequately address the current deficiencies in the safety regulatory framework applicable to those parts of the adventure and outdoor commercial sector
  • Agree to the Department of Labour undertaking further work on the funding and institutional arrangements to deliver the key recommendations in this paper, with a particular focus on the appropriateness of industry-government shared models
  • Note that the Department of Labour will assist, coordinate or initiate any further implementation issues arising from this report.

* The ISO TC 228 working group - exists to ensure the “Standardization of the terminology and specifications of the services offered by tourism service providers, including related activities, touristic destinations and the requirements of facilities and equipment used by them, to provide tourism buyers, providers and consumers with criteria for making informed decisions.”

53 countries participate in that group including Australia, Cuba, India, Germany Thailand and the UK. 17 other countries observe it. New Zealand, along with El Salavdor and Zimbabwe, is only an observer. Click here for a list of the TC 228 standards for tourism and related services.

How many of the recommendations will be acted upon remains to be seen but any deaths or serious injuries that occur in the meantime, and which can be attributed to not following these recommendations, will be on the heads of those who tarry.

Meanwhile, the family of Emily Jordan awaits the start of an inquest into her death.

In an interview with Scene, “The free voice of Queenstown”  Chris Jordan said he will push for an inquest into his daughter’s death to be held in the UK if one isn’t held in NZ. He said that he was disappointed to still be waiting to hear if one will be held and that the situation was “bizarre”.

Mr. Jordan wrote in a letter to Mr Key that he had spent 16 months investigating the way that extreme sports firms are regulated in New Zealand and was “appalled” at what he had found, he called for safety regulation of the industry, saying:

“It is vital that more young people do not die in this way. It is a tragic, unnecessary waste and they leave many grieving people behind for whom life is forever changed. This situation is damaging New Zealand’s reputation worldwide...”

“The laws in place at the moment aren’t the right vehicle to be regulating this sort of activity and they are not being regulated in any case,” he said. “People are going to New Zealand and expecting that it will be regulated like a western country but that really isn’t the case.

“There needs to be high quality and up-front checks on firms like this, but instead authorities only react when there is an incident.”

Adventure Tourism in New Zealand

See also:

NZ Facts and Stats, Adventure tourism and safety

UK families form group to push for tougher extreme sports standards in New Zealand – families call for licensing system in New Zealand.

Posts tagged Emily Jordan

Categories: New Zealand Tags: , , , , ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 182 other followers

%d bloggers like this: