Tougher Rail Safety Regulations needed

An article in today's Star (April 4, 2015) speaks of Toronto's Mayor and 17 councillors writing the federal Transport minister asking for tougher rail safety regulations.  Kudos to them.

Milton Mayor and councillors should also be demanding the same thing. One train length can block three Milton intersections at one time.  I don't recall how many level crossing there are across Milton but there many.  Currently there are two grade separations under construction but with price tags of multi- multimillion dollars it's totally impractical and unreasonable to treat all crossings the same way.

But constructing grade separations won't make the tracks safer.  It's the basic infrastructure, rules and regulations, and training, that need to be addressed, that need the investment. I would personally also question the number of employees on any one train.  There have been considerable cuts to manpower over the years: are we getting by (legally to be sure but is it enough) with too few to take the train from point A to point B?

After Lac-Mégantic  and other rail disasters, we shouldn't have to plead for better rail safety regulations.  It's well past time when funds should have been invested into critical infrastructure - or have the rail companies determined that it's cheaper to pay off lawsuits than to make the repairs, as the automobile industry* has been known to do? 

"CP has stated it is on pace to move 70,000 carloads of crude oil this year (2014) across its North American network, up from 53,500 carloads last year."  For the sake of every life, we need the assurance that that cargo is being moved safely through our towns, cities, villages and farmlands; across rivers and streams; through the mountains and across the plains.

Back to my opening paragraph, it shouldn't be a case of the loudest voices getting the best response- or the squeaky wheel getting the oil.  Our Transport minister and the entire government should be standing up for all Canadians to ensure our collective safety BEFORE there's another Lac-Mégantic . It's the ethical thing to do. Even the loss of one life to negligence is one life too many. 


* from https://hbr.org/2011/04/ethical-breakdowns.

Library Chat

Let ‘s talk about the library.

With shovels already in the ground, the subject of the Bruce Street Library closing has received a lot of press.

There are two aspects to the concerns expressed by the public:
1. The perceived closing of ‘another’ service in the Downtown Milton area; and
2. It is a blow for seniors dependent on the library being in the neighbourhood.
3. I could add, speaking for north rural residents, the new location will be even further away for them.

With respect to “another” service leaving the downtown area, many link the library to Quality Greens’ closing. These are two distinct issues. One private (Quality Greens) and the other public – the library. While I’m on the subject, I would have preferred an A & E Centre/Central Library complex to be closer to the town hall creating a true civic centre, something that would have brought people downtown instead of sending them east.

Regardless, the writing on the wall was writ by the council sitting prior to the 2003 elections. While the disposition of the current library property has yet to be determined, it will be the subject of public consultations, which will begin shortly.

Many people favour, at the very minimum, a library pick up/drop off site in the area. This will entail a cost: will council support that cost? Given there has been no support from this council or previous ones, to even extend the hours of operation, in fact, the library board was forced to cut costs by closing the Beaty Branch at 8pm, it remains to be seen what a new council will do. Using volunteers is not an option as Library staff is unionized.

Justifications for moving out of Bruce Street, are:
• Insufficient parking
• Insufficient room for programs
• Inefficient and costly building maintenance
• too close to the new central library for effective service to the public, over-servicing one area
• Lack of accessibility – a huge consideration and cost given the imposition of new provincial legislation.

Some people have suggested the Bruce Street site be used for a new Seniors’ Centre but with over 800 members, and programs running daily, I doubt very much that there would be sufficient room.

We will have to await the consultant’s findings. In the meantime, let's chat.