Trespass incident at Manchester Piccadilly (11/03)

[Domh245]

A lot of people will just remember the images of irresponsible adults with children trespassing on the railway.

To be honest, I think that view is mostly confined to the Railway - most other people probably weren't that bothered by the fact that parents had taken children onto the tracks, maybe they were bothered about children being taken to a protest, but by and large I don't think the general public are particularly aware of, or care about, the dangers of a live railway.

 

[IanXC]

I think it was a very well-planned protest, getting the maximum publicity for the minimum risk. The platform ends of a major terminus are going to be monitored ensuring that all trains will be stopped as soon as the trespass starts (and there was no 3rd rail electrocution risk for anyone), so many people were involved that it would have taken ages to find enough police and other staff to round them up - thus causing a long stoppage, 3 trains an hour to London and lots to other important cities to guarantee coverage in the national press... Very cleverly planned.
I'm not saying I support what was done, or minimising or forgiving its effects on the rest of us (luckily I narrowly missed being affected) but you can't say it didn't achieve its aims.

I think you're over stating the amount of planning that likely went into these protests. When you look at some of the other locations this protest has attempted then the same level of situational assessment doesn't seem to be there - which suggests to me that the characteristics of the Piccadilly event happen to give this impression rather than being a specific choice.

 

[AndrewE]

I think you're over stating the amount of planning that likely went into these protests. When you look at some of the other locations this protest has attempted then the same level of situational assessment doesn't seem to be there - which suggests to me that the characteristics of the Piccadilly event happen to give this impression rather than being a specific choice.

all the same you have to admit it was minimal risk and maximum publicity...

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Probably mentioned but since there's enough evidence for these goons who have tresspassed and climbed on to the overheads or on to the rails - Network Rail should do the protesters and publicly humilliate them by naming and shaming.

As someone else has said that these protesters have also brought their kids along - in my view the protesters should have their kids removed and placed into a new loving home, miles away from their narrow minded parents who are setting a dreadful example to their own kids. If you could still smack your own child as a disiplinary measure wen they're younger it would soon put them on the straight and narrow and we woudn't be having this debate.

 

[Antman]

all the same you have to admit it was minimal risk and maximum publicity...

Exactly, they must have known that any trains approaching a termini would be going at low speed.

 

[Antman]

Probably mentioned but since there's enough evidence for these goons who have tresspassed and climbed on to the overheads or on to the rails - Network Rail should do the protesters and publicly humilliate them by naming and shaming.

As someone else has said that these protesters have also brought their kids along - in my view the protesters should have their kids removed and placed into a new loving home, miles away from their narrow minded parents who are setting a dreadful example to their own kids. If you could still smack your own child as a disiplinary measure wen they're younger it would soon put them on the straight and narrow and we woudn't be having this debate.

I don't disagree with you in principal but I think you've got to do a lot more than that nowadays to have kids taken away.

 

[AndrewE]

Probably mentioned but since there's enough evidence for these goons who have tresspassed and climbed on to the overheads or on to the rails...

Sorry, I didn't know they had climbed up the OLE. That does introduce a big step-up in risk, but they might still have been savvy enough to realise that the power would probably be turned off before any one got fried.
I was also thinking that even if the platform ends aren't under video surveillance there will be enough trains at Piccadilly that a driver will have reported the trespass almost immediately.

 

[the sniper]

all the same you have to admit it was minimal risk and maximum publicity...

While people say 'all publicity is good publicity', I can't see that they've done their cause any good at all. In Brexit Britain, not only will these Kurds (British citizens or not) have 'taken our benefits/drained our health care system/taken our housing/stolen our wives', but they'll now be able to be said to have had 'blocked our roads/railways' too. I can imagine many people who never knew about the plight of the Kurds now being aware, but knowingly disinterested in woe...

If you're looking for sympathy and help from Little Englanders, 'coming over here', delaying their trains and blocking their roads ain't the way to go about it.

 

[185143]

I can imagine many people who never knew about the plight of the Kurds now being aware, but knowingly disinterested in woe...

+1

I'm a rail passenger. I have not caused, nor have any control over their (seemingly very justified) problems.

These protesters have actively targeted the rail network with no respect whatsoever for rail passengers (including myself travelling between Newton le Willows and Liverpool) trying to go about their business. I therefore now-and going by the feeling at the station am by no means alone, actively couldn't give a sh*t about the protesters after having most of my Sunday afternoon wasted, both from having to wait for a long time for a train-to then have to go on a massive detour via half of Cheshire. I am now actively ignoring any news on this.

 

[farleigh]

The cause may seem to them more important than people's commutes.

 

[fowler9]

Whilst I completely agree with the cause of the people protesting I think they scored a massive own goal since, as I think I mentioned elsewhere, most people I came across trying to travel by train just put it down to the railways messing up again. As regards putting people's kids in to care because they took their kids on the tracks, you are talking about people who have had nerve gas used on their relatives. What are you going to tell them about what is dangerous.

 

[skyhigh]

Sorry, I didn't know they had climbed up the OLE. That does introduce a big step-up in risk, but they might still have been savvy enough to realise that the power would probably be turned off before any one got fried.

Don't forget the residual current - there can be an emergency switch off, but still enough left in the wires to give someone a good shock.

 

[DarloRich]

Probably mentioned but since there's enough evidence for these goons who have tresspassed and climbed on to the overheads or on to the rails - Network Rail should do the protesters and publicly humilliate them by naming and shaming.

As someone else has said that these protesters have also brought their kids along - in my view the protesters should have their kids removed and placed into a new loving home, miles away from their narrow minded parents who are setting a dreadful example to their own kids. If you could still smack your own child as a disiplinary measure wen they're younger it would soon put them on the straight and narrow and we woudn't be having this debate.

What an odd post. You can still smack you child as long as it is reasonable punishment. It is illegal to hit a child as it should be. It should be illegal to cause wounding, actual bodily harm, grievous bodily harm or child cruelty. In the case of wounding and GBH that has been illegal since 1861. Perhaps you should investigate matters before posting.

You are, of course, welcome to hold a view about putting kids into care however in my opinion it shows a complete lack of understanding of the issues facing local authority social services teams. But then you don't want to know about reality.

Whilst this was a particularly stupid thing to to do is the level of harm greater than, say, parents who chain smoke? Perhaps we should place all of those children into a new loving home, miles away from their narrow minded parents who are setting a dreadful example to their own kids

 

[Bromley boy]

Don't forget the residual current - there can be an emergency switch off, but still enough left in the wires to give someone a good shock.

Yes absolutely. Climbing OHLE is orders of magnitude more stupid than trespassing in the first place.

Although it’s possible the people doing it wouldn’t have been aware of what it was, such is the general ignorance in much of the population.

There’s usually an assumption on these forums, which also came out in the Lewisham drainment thread, that people know what electrified third rail/OHLE is. They very often don’t, and many people don’t even stop to consider (and don’t really care) whether trains are electric or diesel.

 

[Antman]

What an odd post. You can still smack you child as long as it is reasonable punishment. It is illegal to hit a child as it should be. It should be illegal to cause wounding, actual bodily harm, grievous bodily harm or child cruelty. In the case of wounding and GBH that has been illegal since 1861. Perhaps you should investigate matters before posting.

You are, of course, welcome to hold a view about putting kids into care however in my opinion it shows a complete lack of understanding of the issues facing local authority social services teams. But then you don't want to know about reality.

Whilst this was a particularly stupid thing to to do is the level of harm greater than, say, parents who chain smoke? Perhaps we should place all of those children into a new loving home, miles away from their narrow minded parents who are setting a dreadful example to their own kids

Whether smacking children should or shouldn't be allowed is subjective and probably a subject for another thread? It could be said that the parents in this 'protest' have acted in a highly irresponsible way by taking children onto railway lines and should face some sort of sanctions for doing so, removing the children from their care would seem unlikely though.

The danger is that this incident will give others the idea of taking their protest onto the railway lines for maximum publicity.

 

[shredder1]

Yes sadly direct action is sometimes the only way forward, it certainly worked for the mass trespass of Kinder Scout, 1932, the leaders, Benny Rothman, (a Jewish Romanian), were subsequently sent to prison for a spell, but opened up the countryside for us mere mortal ramblers. Not many trains on Kinder Scout though, just irate game keepers and landowners.

 

[Ambient Sheep]

Can anybody link to a reliable report that protestors climbed the OHLE, please?

It's just that that the only mention of it I've seen was in NorthernSpirit's post on page 12 here:

Probably mentioned but since there's enough evidence for these goons who have tresspassed and climbed on to the overheads or on to the rails - Network Rail should do the protesters and publicly humilliate them by naming and shaming.

...which several people seem to have picked up the ball and run with. I've not seen it myself in any news reports but of course it's entirely possible I've missed some.

If they did then yes that would have been INCREDIBLY stupid, but none of the reports or photos I've seen show anything of the kind.

As I understand it the traction current would have been turned off due to them holding placards, not because anybody climbed it.

 

[Domh245]

Can anybody link to a reliable report that protestors climbed the OHLE, please?

It's just that that the only mention of it I've seen was in NorthernSpirit's post on page 12 here:




...which several people seem to have picked up the ball and run with. I've not seen it myself in any news reports but of course it's entirely possible I've missed some.

If they did then yes that would have been INCREDIBLY stupid, but none of the reports or photos I've seen show anything of the kind.

As I understand it the traction current would have been turned off due to them holding placards, not because anybody climbed it.

It was mentioned in post 10, from an MEN report.

 

[6Gman]

Exactly, they must have known that any trains approaching a termini would be going at low speed.

Except that the intermodals through 13/14 ain't normally stopping ...

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Except that the intermodals through 13/14 ain't normally stopping ...

... and rarely run on Sundays!

 

[Ambient Sheep]

It was mentioned in post 10, from an MEN report.

Indeed it was, my mistake. I did read that at the time but promptly forgot about it. I've just searched on the MEN website and found their live update page containing at 14:07 a tweet from National Rail saying

National Rail
@nationalrailenq

#ManchesterPiccadilly - The station has been closed due to a protest gathering. Protesters are on the tracks at the station and attempting to climb overhead line equipment.
1:47 pm · 11 Mar 2018

Fair enough, then.

Idiots.

Mind you I once visited a UK station with a lady from railway-starved Northern Ireland who is far from stupid (she has a First from Queens') who had no idea what the OLE was until she asked me and I told her.

 

[Chris M]

A child that young shouldn’t be at any protest of that kind in my opinion.

Was childcare available to the parents? Was it affordable for them? Did they know when they set out that the protest would involve going on to tracks? If so did they understand the risks?
I've been on protests that involved walking along roads that, in normal circumstances, would be suicidal to step on. It's entirely possible that the parents thought that something similar was the case here. Children can understand "normally not safe but safe this time because...".

I'm not defending the actions taken, but we don't know what the parents did and dindn't know in advance.

 

[farleigh]

Was childcare available to the parents? Was it affordable for them? Did they know when they set out that the protest would involve going on to tracks? If so did they understand the risks?
I've been on protests that involved walking along roads that, in normal circumstances, would be suicidal to step on. It's entirely possible that the parents thought that something similar was the case here. Children can understand "normally not safe but safe this time because...".

I'm not defending the actions taken, but we don't know what the parents did and dindn't know in advance.

Am I right in thinking that you are advocating free childcare for people that cannot afford childcare but would like to protest on a railway track?
I don't mean to be obtuse but I am not sure what point you are making.

 

[takno]

Am I right in thinking that you are advocating free childcare for people that cannot afford childcare but would like to protest on a railway track?
I don't mean to be obtuse but I am not sure what point you are making.

It's perfectly clear that the original post doesn't advocate any such thing.

 

[Clip]

Am I right in thinking that you are advocating free childcare for people that cannot afford childcare but would like to protest on a railway track?
I don't mean to be obtuse but I am not sure what point you are making.

He isnt advocating that at all - hes saying there could be a childcare issue as to why the kids were taken there.

 

[al78]

+1

I'm a rail passenger. I have not caused, nor have any control over their (seemingly very justified) problems.

These protesters have actively targeted the rail network with no respect whatsoever for rail passengers (including myself travelling between Newton le Willows and Liverpool) trying to go about their business. I therefore now-and going by the feeling at the station am by no means alone, actively couldn't give a sh*t about the protesters after having most of my Sunday afternoon wasted, both from having to wait for a long time for a train-to then have to go on a massive detour via half of Cheshire. I am now actively ignoring any news on this.

Perhaps we should all take the same attitude with all the strike action on the rail network that has been going on fr the best part of two years, and has caused orders of magnitude more disruption and inconvenience to passengers that one very localised protest.

A logical intelligent thing to do would be to learn more about what they were protesting about, and see if they really do have a valid point, rather than just dismissing them just because you personally were inconvenienced for a bit*. If they do have a good reason for protesting, why not consider taking some action to further their cause, action that is not directly disruptive to others if you like. The standard one that comes to mind is contacting your local MP.

*Unfortunately this is a big problem with people generally. A group protests against a wrong, others get inconvenienced by the protest and then turn against the protestors instead of turning against the wrong, which is ultimately what incited the protest. If people learnt to come together and fight the wrong, and not the reaction to the wrong, we'd make far more progress in righting wrongs. Instead we insist on turning against those trying to at least do something. Classic human irrationality again.

 

[philthetube]

So even though they are exercising their right to free speech, albeit on the railway, your reckoning is still 'Zero sympathy, no f***s given, let them, toast'?

Bit more than free speech

It is not the police's job to escalate matters. Their primary objective should be to contain and dissolve peacefully where possible in these situations, both for everyone's safety (including both the protesters and the general public) and to allow services to return to normal as quickly as possible. That would make everyone's life easier.

The evidence gathering can take place while this is all going on, and prosecutions, if necessary, brought about later.

I am surprised that as railway staff you would want anything else than services being restored as quickly as possible for everyone's benefit.

Do you have any idea how much it will cost the industry (and you and me as tax-payers) if this unnecessarily turned violent and dragged on?

Indeed it would be expensive but if it is seen as a good idea how much will that cost the industry if these disputes become common

Like in India...

People need to learn self-responsibility.
If you tresspass on the tracks and get hurt, no doubt the person will try and find someone else to blame.

It would only take a couple of people to be knocked out of the way by a slower moving train for many to start leaving.

Totally agree, if trains carried on while trespassers were about, it would probably save lives long term as after a couple of deaths the news would get around and it would happen less. However I cannot advocate this, primarily because of the effect it would have on rail staff.

 

[GB]

Totally agree, if trains carried on while trespassers were about, it would probably save lives long term as after a couple of deaths the news would get around and it would happen less.

I'm not sure its that simple. People do things all the time knowing there might not be a favorable outcome (smoking, drinking to excess, speeding, running red lights, weaving round barriers etc etc). I think its the it won't happen to me mentality thats a big problem and I'm not sure how you combat that.

 

[greyman42]

Was childcare available to the parents? Was it affordable for them? Did they know when they set out that the protest would involve going on to tracks? If so did they understand the risks?
I've been on protests that involved walking along roads that, in normal circumstances, would be suicidal to step on. It's entirely possible that the parents thought that something similar was the case here. Children can understand "normally not safe but safe this time because...".

I'm not defending the actions taken, but we don't know what the parents did and dindn't know in advance.

One of the parents could have stopped at home to look after the child. If a single parent, then just don't go. Simple.

 

[Chris M]

Am I right in thinking that you are advocating free childcare for people that cannot afford childcare but would like to protest on a railway track?

No.
While the wider availability of affordable (not necessarily free) childcare generally would be a Good Thing, that is entirely independent of what these people did and was not something I even alluded to in my post. My post was not advocating for anything other than learning all the facts before passing judgement.

I don't mean to be obtuse but I am not sure what point you are making.

Simply that there might be many good reasons for parents to bring children to a protest, and that these should be examined before passing judgement on their aptitude as parents.

One of the parents could have stopped at home to look after the child. If a single parent, then just don't go. Simple.

So you are saying that people with children must give up their right to democratic protest unless they are married and/or rich?
Even if you disagree with the form this protest took (which I do), the fact that they were protesting is perfectly legal. And we still don't know whether the parents knew there would be illegal activities involved before they happened.