Ms New said her two children – Jake, three, and Ella, 10 – miss their uncle, adding: “There is talk about making train fares cheaper but I would rather see the money spent on fencing to save lives.
Well, I’m sure it must be hard for little Jake & Ella to grow up knowing their uncle died due to drink and carelessness (but they won't be
the only ones), but frankly, the idea that Network Rail fence off
every single track in the country (and maintain that track forever after) is utterly ludicrous.
“Something needs to happen now. This petition is not going to bring him back but it could save lives.
“Ten thousand signatures is achievable.
“If everyone on Facebook shares it with their friends list, and they share it around, I think it would take around a month to get to that amount.”
I sometimes think the number of social media-fed petition signatures collected is inversely proportionate to the notice we should take of them…
6 comments:
Bunny
Come on its Darwin, look there's a train track, someone with a modicum of intelligence, I will avoid it, or if it is a crossing, I will look for a train. In other countries train tracks aren't fenced off and there doesn't seen to be a massive amount of people getting killed on a regular basis.
Tis sad for the family, I know. But being pissed around rail tracks is against most health and safety codes. I should know as I'm the Health and Safety Officer in my Lab. Angel of Death, take me now...... Anyway, when I'm pissed, I tend to stay at home. I consider this sound and prudent advice.
You could always follow the example of TAZARA in Africa and not maintain the line at all (only joking)
Why can't people take responsibility for themselves? Railway lines are dangerous. Leave them completely unprotected and the public might actually think about the dangers and act accordingly. The PC brigade and do gooders are stopping people thinking for themselves...
The railways act requires the railway to be fenced off (modernised level crossings have their own parliamentary orders exempting them from this fence requirement). Herrington v British Railways Board (1972) places a common law duty of care on the railways. Network Rail are already on a loser here...
When the Thameslink line was privatised new spiked fences appeared. Only for two hundred yards either side of station platforms. That was all about revenue protection rather than public safety. A local branch line has a footpath crossing, roughly every five to ten years there is a fatality, or close call there. On each occasion 'more' is done to no avail.
"But being pissed around rail tracks is against most health and safety codes. "
Spot on!
"Why can't people take responsibility for themselves?"
Because 'where there's blame, there's a claim'..?
"The railways act requires the railway to be fenced off ... Herrington v British Railways Board (1972) places a common law duty of care on the railways. "
And, in theory, public places should be accessible under the Disability Acts, but public transport gets a pass.
Why? Cost! And the impossibility of the task of making it so.
Fencing off all railway lines is never, ever going to happen in my lifetime.
Post a Comment