Public Question for Dr David Cliff (University of Qld) and his presentation at QMIHS Conference on Gold Coast “Beyond TARPS – the need for supporting systems”
I have a couple of simple questions for Professor David Cliff (Professor Of OHS In Mining The University of Queensland) https://smi.uq.edu.au/profile/622/david-cliff
For a man such as yourself this falls right into the topic of the Presentation at the QMIHS conference at he Gold Coast today
Beyond TARPS – the need for supporting systems
https://expertevents.eventsair.com/QuickEventWebsitePortal/qmihsc-2023/qmihsc-program/Agenda/AgendaItemDetail?id=a0fad74a-405b-4c5b-ac0d-0232cc074d7e
My question is
Should the technical and Statutory competence of anyone who proposes putting “ANDS” and “BUTS” in in TARPS be subject to Investigation and the Issuance of a Show cause potentially by the CEO of RSHQ
Professor Cliff you state in your written spiel for the conference
Much emphasis has been placed on the correct use of Trigger Action Response Plans, especially for underground coal mines. However it is clear that TARPS are being used beyond their original purpose.
For TARPS to be effective they must be simple, robust and be capable of being applied at all times without resorting to specialist equipment, techniques or external expertise.
This should be very easy for you Professor Cliff.
After all you at the University of Qld you instruct potential Underground Mine Managers and assess them as competent in the compulsory unit of Risk Management which is a pre-requisite to get the 1st Class Underground Coal Mine Statutory Ticket. No doubt many of the Anglo Management at Grosvenor and Moranbah North have done your courses and you have assessed them as Competent.
You must know who the unnamed person from The University of Qld who acted as one of the “External Technical Expert Consultants” employed by Anglo at Moranbah North.
You cannot be bound by any 30-year confidentiality clauses that Anglo and even RSHQ uses to publicly silence any experts they hire.
After all Dr Cliff ,you would not do something like take a 12 month sabbatical from your no doubt generously paid taxpayer funded full time position at the University to go work as an “External Technical Expert Consultant” for Anglo; surely.
Some of the courses you seem to deliver are
https://smi.uq.edu.au/professional-development/health-safety-risk
G3: GMIRM Risk Management Systems
Incident Investigation and Analysis Management.
While you do not have any Underground Statutory Tickets and do not possess the pre-requisites to have ever sat the Compulsory Mining Law Exams and then an Oral Examination by a panel, you boast about being an independent expert assessor of the intrinsic legal framework of the governing coal mining safety and health in Queensland” in the Report introduced to the Qld Parliament by the Resources Minister Lynham in 2020
https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/tableOffice/TabledPapers/2020/5620T198.pdf
In the Introduction of the Report are these Statements
The Report constitutes an independent expert assessment of the intrinsic adequacy of the legal framework governing coal mining safety and health in Queensland.
It is a pity that the Supreme Court of Qld and a full Appeal to the Qld Supreme Court did not agree that you were an expert when it came to what “Reasonably Foreseeable” in Section 296 of the Regulations in 2004 and 2005.
You gave extensive evidence as to what Reasonably Foreseeable and you were found to be incorrect by Justice McMurdo
https://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2004/QSC04-181.pdf
Then in a decision of a full bench of Justices McPherson JA, Fryberg and Mullins JJ who handed down Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made
https://www.queenslandjudgments.com.au/caselaw/qca/2005/127
But of course such a Coal Mining Legislation expert such as yourself does not take such lying down.
After the original Judge got it wrong and so did the Court of appeal you say in writing in your Expert Legal Report in 2020
https://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/documents/tableOffice/TabledPapers/2020/5620T198.pdf
6.1.35 Section 153, Giving technical directions to a person appointed under s60 (8) or (9) of the Act
The Queensland Court of Appeal found that the meaning of “Reasonably Foreseeable” under the Coal Mining Safety and Health Regulations is
[27] In summary, a reasonably foreseeable event for the purposes of s 296 is one which can be envisaged by a person of imagination and intelligence, but which is not far-fetched or fanciful.
The construction of “reasonably foreseeable event” for the purposes of section 296(1) was considered in CFMEU v Queensland and Anglo Coal [2005] QCA 127.
While the Court provided guidance in this regard, we are of the view that the section itself could usefully be clarified further.
We suggest there would be value in providing the following explanation of the meaning of “reasonably foreseeable event” in s296:
A “reasonably foreseeable event” for the purposes of section 296(1) is an event which a reasonable person in the position of the site senior executive ought to have in contemplation when ensuring that the mine has at least 2 trafficable entrances (escapeways).
I though you were a qualified Industrial Chemist who’s first job at SIMTARS was a gas chromatograph operator when I first met you at the North Goonyella 5 Sth Longwall Spontaneous Combustion Event in late 1999, were you not.
Since that point you have made a whole career as an Academic from publishing Research Papers about Spontaneous Combustion with people such as Martin Watkinson from SIMTARS and Dr Belle who has worked for Anglo for the last 13 or so years.
If you acted as a Service Provider you then have 2 issues.
Firstly you would fall under the full obligations as detailed for a Service Provider Under Section 47 of the CMSHA 1999.
47 Obligations of service providers
(1) A person who provides a service (a service provider) at a coal mine has the following obligations—
a) to g)
(2) In this section— safety and health management plan, of a service provider, means a plan that—
a) and b)
Getting past that if you were a Service Provider you would have to have signed a 30 year Confidentiality Clause which would prohibit you from ever talking about Moranbah North and likely Grosvenor as well.
For a person tied up with all the North Goonyella events since at least 1999 and all the other events culminating in Grosvenor and Moranbah North, this would effectively end your career as a researcher and publisher into Spontaneous Combustion forever and a day.
If you have done so Professor Cliff I hope the 30 pieces of Anglo Silver burn your palm.
Much emphasis has been placed on the correct use of Trigger Action Response Plans, especially for underground coal mines. However it is clear that TARPS are being used beyond their original purpose. TARPS have a place in the management of risk but are not the sole catalyst for reaction to potentially adverse situations
Biography David is professor of OHS in Mining within the Minerals Industry Safety and Health Centre, Sustainable Minerals Institute at the University of Queensland. He has been at UQ for over 22 years. Prior to that he worked in various roles at SIMTARS for over 10 years. He has been involved in research, teaching and consulting in OHS in Mining throughout Australia and Overseas for all this time. He has particularly involved in assisting underground coal mines dealing with spontaneous combustion and fires
