Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
ChrisJBrady

Peel Holding and CRT Refuses To Put Barriers Up In Manchester

Featured Posts

2 hours ago, Athy said:

I suppose that the people, especially the men, of the North, have the reputation of being big beer drinkers - but we don't often hear of such accidents on the Yorkshire waterways. 

Oi! Mr Mike. That's edging on the brink of racism. Being a Lancashire lad, I were brung up to respect ale. I still have a high respect for t'stuff. And as I said, only been int Canal once having not taken ale. And this was in a county other than Lancashire. Nantwichshire in fact. Aye  it woz cold. February time if me memory serves reetly.

 

(I'm so rubbish at this northern accent stuff.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I respect people's wish to make suggestions, on this occasion they appear to be made against a background of misunderstanding with an apparent desire to blame someone else, rather than the Young man, who had spent all evening in a pub drinking, and was reported to have "fallen off his bar stool" at some stage during the evening.

 

Edited by David Schweizer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, mayalld said:

Casper Blackburn didn't die because of a lack of CCTV and railings.

 

He died because he failed to take responsibility for his own safety.

 

We can't keep on making the world ever safer just so that people can abdicate personal responsibility.

 

Or perhaps he was a victim of the notorious Manchester Pusher?..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, cuthound said:

 

Or perhaps he was a victim of the notorious Manchester Pusher?..

Ah yes, the Pusher, best mate of Nessie, Black Shuck, the Beast of Bodmin and Spring-heeled Jack 🙄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

Ah yes, the Pusher, best mate of Nessie, Black Shuck, the Beast of Bodmin and Spring-heeled Jack 🙄

Just leave Shuck out of this,😸

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hudds Lad said:

Ah yes, the Pusher, best mate of Nessie, Black Shuck, the Beast of Bodmin and Spring-heeled Jack 🙄

 

That's the one, I didn't realise the others were also frequent visitors to Manchester 😆

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, ChrisJBrady said:
Yesterday evening BBC Inside Out did a feature on the canal safety around Manchester.  It was really interesting to see the lack of comments made by the Canal and River Trust and Manchester City Council. It was very disappointing to see the comments made by Peel Holding who REFUSED to implement ANY safety measures along the stretch of the Bridgewater Canal where Casper Blackburn died despite the inquest suggesting if safety measures such as CCTV, lighting etc were put into place that the death could have been prevented. Nick Pope (Charlie’s dad) is also interviewed discussing the campaign so it’s really worth watching. The link is below.
 
 
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION AT
 
 
====
 

Another BBC article

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-45173888

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pearley said:

Over the 2 years we spent on the North East Waterways there were a number of drowning in Leeds, mostly in the river, despite it having railings along most of its length. 

There have also been a number of drownings in the River Weir Durham. The proximity of clubs and pubs to the riverside plays a factor there in the same way as the proximity of them to canals in Manchester.

 

Normally young people 'under the influence' too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MJG said:

There have also been a number of drownings in the River Weir Durham. The proximity of clubs and pubs to the riverside plays a factor there in the same way as the proximity of them to canals in Manchester.

 

Normally young people 'under the influence' too.

And plenty in York.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Naval Dockyard Ports were  quite used to Jack being fished out of the water on the way back after a run ashore.  I suppose that these days Jenny is probably involved too.  The difference was that Jack (and Jenny) and their oppos were and still are expected to look out for each other.  Didn't/doesn't  always work sadly but then booze and water have never really gone together.

 

I am also reminded that in the nadir of canals in the 60's it was popular to fence off the canal system behind high fences and locked gates.  In Birmingham the official access points were so rare they were marked in the guide books.  Most of the Ashton and the Rochdale were hard to access.  Children  (to whom unofficial access was easy) playing by the canal fell in and drowned because adults could not get through the gates.  The argument then became one between "fill them all in" (soon shown to be expensive and hard to do if you didn't want a muddy bog instead) and "open them up" so that there are other users who might help the kids when they fall in.  Opening them up won, and the number of child in canal  drownings reduced.

 

Now we have individuals who often appear to have imbibed well, but not always wisely, no culture of looking out for your mates when they are steaming and an absence of understanding of personal responsibility.    The combination is lethal and will stay so, however many fences are built or CCTV cameras installed to record the events for the Coroner.

 

N

 

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest I'd sooner sign a petition opposing fencing off the canals and CCTV installation than sign one supporting it (I did put one up on the Change.org site a while ago but haven't really followed its fortunes).

 

As I see it the danger becomes where do you stop once you've started installing all these 'safety' measures? If Manchester installs them and someone drowns under identical circumstances in Birmingham are CRT to be held responsible for not installing the same 'safety' equipment that has been installed in Manchester. Then finding themselves being sued for failing in their 'duty of care'. In the current situation they can realistically argue that a person's safety is their responsibility, once you've started fitting safety rails, etc. CRT would then be taking responsibility which isn't going to be in anyone's interests.

 

The idea of CCTV is all very well but who is going to man it? Where lies the point in just recording CCTV so that you can review someone drowning 12 hours after the event, but if you are going to try to save drunken people's lives you are going to need 24/7 staff to man the operation. For those who press for such action they need to be told that the responsibility is going to be thrust on their local council to finance it, possibly by the closure of a library or two, or perhaps a day centre, or cut back on elderly home care, then we will find out just how 'important' they then consider it to be.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe if they had CTV then the videos could be put on You Tube  as definitely would not be saving anyone unless there was a super hero watching.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's hope the same doesn't occur as happened in Stourport.  A youth was showing off and rode his bike over a narrow footbridge despite the "no cycling" signs.  He fell off and drowned.  As a result, a whole load of footbridges over the S&W at locks were smothered in scaffold poles until, at great expense, CRT built handrails on the footbridges.

 

It was considered at the time that as the coroner had expressed surprise that the footbridges weren't better protected, if it happened again and CRT hadn't built handrails they would be deemed partly responsible and open to prosecution.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the thread title "refuse to put up barriers" is rather biassed. I suspect CaRT have a lot of office bods who concern themselves with health and safety so the proper title is "After careful consideration CaRT decide not to put up barriers".

 

I suspect in the old days it was mostly boater who fell in, but as walkers, runners and cyclists are all encouraged to use the towpath then there will be more non-boater accidents.

 

Manchester does have some special additional risks but the best approach would be to remove public access from some parts of the towpath. I suspect there would be serious objections if CaRT tried to do this.

 

.................Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dmr said:

I think the thread title "refuse to put up barriers" is rather biassed. I suspect CaRT have a lot of office bods who concern themselves with health and safety so the proper title is "After careful consideration CaRT decide not to put up barriers".

 

I suspect in the old days it was mostly boater who fell in, but as walkers, runners and cyclists are all encouraged to use the towpath then there will be more non-boater accidents.

 

Manchester does have some special additional risks but the best approach would be to remove public access from some parts of the towpath. I suspect there would be serious objections if CaRT tried to do this. 

 

.................Dave

CART , by the terms of the Transfer Act and the agreement with DfT over funding, cannot close or restrict long-term public access to the towpaths.  Obvs there are exceptions for repairs and maintenance but not because some one who is not entirely sober falls in and drowns.

N

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, BEngo said:

CART , by the terms of the Transfer Act and the agreement with DfT over funding, cannot close or restrict long-term public access to the towpaths.  Obvs there are exceptions for repairs and maintenance but not because some one who is not entirely sober falls in and drowns.

N

I think they do now close the "subterranean" lock near the top of the Rochdale 9 at night so it can be done. It would be viable, though difficult, to close the entire Rochdale 9 at night as there are generally well defined access points, though the bridge crossing would be awkward. I think this was the site of the most recent accident.  Trouble is the accidents actually happen over quite a large area.

 

One issue is that if parts of the system are fenced off or closed and somebody dies just outside the "safe" area then CaRT might be in even more trouble.

Some of the Rochdale 9 towpath is very narrow so any fence would have to be right at the canal edge so if somebody gets over the fence and falls in, or if a boater falls in, then getting out might be much more difficult.

 

As we are currently on the Rochdale we have been socialising with some Manchester boaters and our general conclusion is that the canals in Manchester are generally bleak nasty dark places, and compared with Liverpool/Birmingham/Bristol etc Manchester just makes no effort at all to utilise its waterways, its 20 years behind the times on this one..

 

..............Dave

 

 

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, dmr said:

Manchester does have some special additional risks but the best approach would be to remove public access from some parts of the towpath. I suspect there would be serious objections if CaRT tried to do this.

They certainly seem to have removed access to those who maintain things or clean up!  ;)  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.