Re: Rail + Safety Records

[mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie Daly)]

In article <3849e3e6@newsserver1.picknowl.com.au> "Robd" <robd74@hotmail.com> writes:
>From: "Robd" <robd74@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: Rail + Safety Records
>Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 14:29:00 +1030

>I ws privy to a meeting of our national rail authorities, where a rather
>important individual noted that, having to fork out comphensation for about
>30 deaths a year was cheaper than investing money into the signalling and
>communication system to make it almost idiot proof.

>Rob


A interesting report covering issues as Rail Safety is 
http://www.dotrs.gov.au/atc/rail/index.htm
This is a report to the Govt on issues relating to the administration and 
regulation of Rail Safety in Australia and the current arrangements vs a 
model based on a single National regulator.

The report comes down in favour of a single National Regulator . and considers
two models for implementation.

The first model is prescribed regulation , ie the method used in the US with 
the FRA as the regulator , and also used by the aviation industry.

The second model is co-regulation , where the National regulator and the 
various Rail operators get together and come up with multiple regulatory 
models which suit themselves , ( I have a few probs with this one.)

Surprisingly , the report does not consider that safeworking systems are 
a safety matter,from the perspective of national safety regulation,but an 
operational matter best left to the infrastructure owners.

Irrespective of what this report recommends,from a jurisdictional perspective,
implementing any of the reforms will be extremely difficult,given the total
reluctance of the States to give up any of their current role in Rail 
Regulation.

It does however , at least indicate that the current problems with rail 
regulation are known ,and need to be addressed.


MD