2006-2007 Echo Issue Outline ... to return to the page you "clicked" from, simply close this window



Related issue outlines:
No related issue outlines
Dictionary: Double-click on any word in the text to bring up a dictionary definition of that word in a new window (IE only).
Analysing the language of the news media: Click here to read a useful document on media language analysis
Age, Herald-Sun and Australian items: Click this icon ...

... to search the Echo newspaper index and enter the following word(s), with just a space in between them.
level
crossings

Sydney Morning Herald index: Click here to use the State Library of NSW's online index to the Sydney Morning Herald
Search for listed newspaper items online - see end of this page

2007/15: The Kerang level crossing collision: Should governments do more to prevent level crossing accidents?<BR>

2007/15: The Kerang level crossing collision: Should governments do more to prevent level crossing accidents?


What they said ...
'It was unlikely any crossing modifications could have prevented [the Kerang] carnage'
Mr Steve Bracks, the premier of Victoria

'The real tragedy in this matter is ... that in this day and age ... we still have a 19th-century approach to level crossings'
A remark made by the New South Wales coroner in 2001

The issue at a glance
On 5 June 2007 at 1.40 pm about 6 km out of Kerang in northwest Victoria a southbound V/Line passenger train and a northbound semi-trailer truck collided at a level crossing where the Swan Hill railway line crosses the Murray Valley Highway. Victoria Police confirmed that 11 people were killed and 23 injured in the crash.
The rail accident, one of the worst in the states history, has led to accusations from the Victorian Opposition that insufficient was being done to ensure safety at the state's level crossings. Indeed the crash appears to have caused concerns across the nation, with the New South Wale's government indicating it will look again at level crossing safeguards.
The Victorian government has indicated that it will await the findings of the three different inquiries to be held into the crash. It has, however, defended its record of upgrading level crossings across the state.
The driver of the semi-trailer truck, who though injured survived the accident, has since been charged with culpable driving.

Background
The term level crossing is applied when a light rail line with separate right-of-way crosses a road. Both transport avenue, that is, the railway line and the road, are on the one level and there is no bridge or underpass. This necessitates that the automobiles give way to the train.
Early level crossings had a flagman to wave a red flag or lantern to stop all traffic and clear the tracks when a train approached.
Manual or electrical closable gates that barricaded the roadway were later introduced. The gates were intended to be a complete barrier against any road traffic coming onto the railway. When opened to allow road users to cross the line, the gates were swung across the width of the railway, preventing any pedestrians or animals getting onto the line.
With the emergence motor vehicles, this barrier became less effective and the need for a barrier to livestock disappeared. Many countries replaced gated crossings with less strong but highly visible barriers and relied on road users following warning signals to stop.
The worldwide consensus is that level crossings represent a significant hazard to rail and road users. There is, however no agreement on a cost-efficient means of removing the risk.

Internet sources
In June 2004, the Standing Committee for Transport and Regional Services tabled in federal Parliament background information to a report into some measures proposed to reduce level crossing accidents. The background information gives details about the types of level crossing to be found in Australia and the risks associated with them. This information can be found at http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/trs/trains/report/chap1.pdf

In February 2006, Associate Professor Jeremy Davey et al, from the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety, Queensland University of Technology, released a paper titled, 'Human Factors at Railway Level Crossings: Key Issues and Target Road User Groups'
The paper investigates the attitudes of at-risk groups regarding their perceptions of level crossing hazards and makes some recommendations regarding how its findings might be used to alter drivers' behaviour and increase their safety.
The full text of this paper can be found at http://www.carrsq.qut.edu.au/documents/publication_089.pdf

The Victorian Department of Infrastructure's overview of completed and proposed level crossing upgrades can be found at http://www.doi.vic.gov.au/doi/internet/transport.nsf/AllDocs/331363D32B5953BECA256F5400010314?OpenDocument

On March 12, 2007, the Australasian Railway Association, a lobby group for the Australasian rail industry, issued a press release outlining the risks associated with level crossings and suggesting some actions which might be taken to reduce these. The full text of this media release can be found at http://www.ara.net.au/dbdoc/07-03-12%20Enough%20is%20enough%20-%20Level%20Crossing%20Fatalities%20Must%20Stop.pdf

Rail Mates is an online publication of the Australasian Railway Association. It has a section of its website titled 'Rail safety'. Among the issues discussed is safety at level crossings. The full text of this material can be found at http://www.railmates.com.au/UserFiles/File/Safety.pdf

On March 22, 2002, The Age published an extended opinion piece by columnist Kenneth Davidson, analysing aspects of Victoria's rail system and suggesting a number of reforms. The title of the article is 'Make the rail network safe and save lives'. The full text of the article can be found at http://www.theage.com.au/news/kenneth-davidson/make-the-rail-network-safe-and-save-lives/2005/09/21/1126982118443.html

On July 25, 2006, the Victorian Minister for Public Transport issued a media release outlining the Victorian Government's education campaign to increase driver and pedestrian awareness of the risks associated with level crossings. The full text of this media release can be found at http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/newmedia.nsf/955cbeae7df9460dca256c8c00152d2b/219afadb3c9207dbca2571b700025757!OpenDocument

On May 28, 2007, the Victorian Minister for Public Transport issued a media release reminding Victorians of the dangers associated with level crossings and referring to the Government's expenditure on level crossing upgrades and its public education campaign of level crossing safety. The full text of those media release can be found at http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/newmedia.nsf/8fc6e140ef55837cca256c8c00183cdc/1849ffca9a5fd1cbca2572ea000226c6!OpenDocument&Click=

Arguments supporting what governments have done to prevent level crossing accidents
1. Many measures have already been taken to reduce the number of level crossing accidents
All state governments point to a significant record of measures taken to improve road and rail safety and the safety of level crossings.
In a media release issued on May 28, 2007, the Victorian Government noted, 'The Bracks Government upgraded 96 level crossings last financial year, the most upgrades ever achieved by any State in any year. In this year [2007] 50 further upgrades have been achieved.'
The Bracks Government has also funded an extensive education campaign to increase public awareness of the dangers associated with level crossings. The Don't Risk It! television, radio and print advertising campaign last ran in May 2006 and will resume again for the month of June this year at a cost of $500,000.
Victorian Public Transport Minister Lynne Kosky told Parliament that V/Line had already taken steps to improve safety at the level crossing at Kerang in the state's north before the recent fatal collision.
Ms Kosky stated, 'Less than a year ago ...V/Line did raise concerns about the behaviour of motorists at this very crossing. As a result of these concerns that were raised by V/Line, the police had made extra efforts to step up activity in that area and to run a campaign through the local paper at that time.'
Similarly actions are being taken in other states to alter pedestrian behaviour at crossings and stations. Pedestrians will be videotaped at some of Adelaide's level crossings as part of a study aimed at preventing fatalities. TransAdelaide is installing alarms at 24 rail crossings to warn pedestrians when a more than one train is approaching.
In New South Wales, the Rail Infrastructure Corporation (RIC) is proactively upgrading level crossings. In [2002], RIC upgraded 124 level crossings at a cost of nearly five million dollars. Another 300 further level crossings are in the process of being upgraded to having remote monitoring across the state.

2. Governments have plans to introduce further safety measures at level crossings
The Victorian Public Transport Minister, Lyn Kosky, has said, 'In Meeting Our Transport Challenges, [a long-range Victorian Government plan for improving public transport] this Government has made a $208.7 million commitment to extend and accelerate the upgrade of level crossings across Victoria over the next 10 years.'
Additionally the Victorian government spends S9 million a year to upgrade level crossings.
Ms Kosky has noted of the Government's planned expenditure, 'This will allow additional level crossings to be upgraded each year from passive crossings with signage only to active crossings with flashing lights and in many cases boom barriers to reduce the potential for train and road vehicle collisions.' The government also intends grade separations to be made where this appears to be desirable.
The minister has indicated that priority for upgrading level crossings was determined on a risk management basis.
'Factors such as the volume of road and rail traffic, pedestrian use, proximity to schools, kindergartens, elderly citizens villages, visibility for motorists and train drivers and the number of rail tracks at the crossing are all closely examined,' Ms Kosky has indicated.

3. Level crossing accidents do not result in a significant number of fatalities
It has been argued that, without discounting the tragedy represented by any lose of life, level crossing accidents actually contribute very little to the national road toll.
In June 2004, the Standing Committee for Transport and Regional Services tabled in federal parliament a report on its inquiry into some measures proposed to reduce level crossing accidents. The report indicated that over the six years from 1997 to 2002 Australia had had on average 37 fatalities per year resulting from level crossing accidents. This figure included both vehicle-related and pedestrian fatalities.
Such figures indicate that fatalities at railway level crossings are equivalent to less than one per cent of the national road toll.
Railway accident fatalities are recorded internationally by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Australian fatalities annually for railway accidents are 0.2 per 100,000 of population, which is also the OECD average.
Australia has fewer fatalities at railway level crossings than New Zealand, the United States or Finland (per 100,000 of population). Typically, the majority of fatalities at level crossing accidents are pedestrians (64%) followed by car occupants (29%) with the remainder (7%) trucks, buses, cyclists and motorcyclists. These figures indicate that collisions between road vehicles and trains cause very few deaths in this country.

4. Some of the causes of level crossing accidents are beyond governments to eradicate
It has been suggested that many level crossing accidents occur for reasons peculiar to the driver of the vehicle and involve factors which it would be very difficult for any government to adopt policies to counter.
In June 2004, the Standing Committee for Transport and Regional Services tabled in federal parliament a report on its inquiry into some measures proposed to reduce level crossing accidents. The report indicated that 'Strangely, most fatalities occur in daylight hours, excluding dawn and dusk. A review of data from various sources led one expert, Dr Peter Cairney, to conclude that approximately 70 per cent of vehicle/train collisions in Australia occur during daylight hours10. Another study suggested that eighty-five percent of accidents occurred in fine weather, eighty-four percent on a dry road, and the road was straight in eighty-nine percent of cases and level in seventy-seven percent of cases.'
It was further noted, 'most crashes occur where the driver has 'local understanding of the railway level crossing' and that 'the National Railway Level Crossing Safety Strategy reported that 32 per cent of crashes occurred at passive crossings and that 50 per cent occurred at active controlled crossings.'
One conclusion that could be drawn from the above is that a significant number of level crossing accidents occur not because of poor visibility or difficult local conditions, but because of what the report refers to as 'unintended vehicle driver error'.
Referring specifically to the Kerang level crossing accident, Police Assistant Commissioner Noel Ashby said police had targeted the intersection, but he questioned whether anything could have prevented the tragedy.
'We could have had the Great Wall of China in front of the intersection there and I don't believe it would have prevented this crash," Assistant Commissioner Ashby has said.
Mr Ashby blamed Victoria's 'culture' of risky driver behaviour. He said, 'There is a culture of some people, a small percentage of people ... that is simply prepared to take a risk.'
A similar point has been made by the Victorian premier, Steve Bracks, in relation to the Kerang level crossing collision. Mr Bracks has stated, 'It was unlikely any crossing modifications could have prevented [the Kerang] carnage.
What needs to be determined is if any treatment at all would have prevented that accident. I think anyone who was there would probably say it is very unlikely that any treatment at all would have prevented it.'

5. Making level crossings completely safe would be prohibitively expensive
It has been noted that the only way to make level crossings completely safe is to effectively remove them, that is, to grade-separate road and rail with the use of either over- or underpasses.
The problem with this as a strategy is that is extremely expensive - some would argue, prohibitively so.
Dr Eric Wigglesworth, an honorary senior research fellow with the Monash University Accident Research Centre, has argued, 'To grade-separate all 6000 passive and 3000 active crossings [across Australia] could cost up to $45 billion. Given the conflicting demands from hospitals, schools, pensions for our ageing population and defence against terrorist threats, that can legitimately be deemed unrealistic.'
The Victorian Government has estimated that it would cost $6 to $10 million dollars per crossing to grade separate all Victorian level crossings.

Arguments suggesting governments should be doing more to prevent level crossing accidents
1. The cost of level crossing accidents is very high
It has been argued that the cost of level crossing accidents is extremely high and that most estimates are likely to be conservative as it is difficult to factor in adequately the social cost of lost lives and disrupted families and communities.
In June 2004, the Standing Committee for Transport and Regional Services tabled in federal parliament a report on its inquiry into some measures proposed to reduce level crossing accidents. The report included the following statement referring to the financial and social costs associated with level crossing accidents: 'Accidents at level crossings are a major problem for Australia's railway networks. The financial costs to individuals, government and industry are high. The Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics reported that "the total cost of level crossing accidents was estimated to be $32 million in 1999" ... There is also a serious social cost associated with the deaths and serious injuries arising from these accidents."'

2. Current measures to reduce the number of level crossing accidents are insufficient
It has been claimed that the measures currently taken to protect level crossings and reduce the number of level crossing accidents are simply insufficient.
Dr Eric Wigglesworth, an honorary senior research fellow with the Monash University Accident Research Centre, has argued that Australia's level crossing system predates the general use of cars for transport and so has crossings that are inadequately protected. Those designing the crossings at a time when horse drawn vehicles were the most common form of alternative transport would have seen no need for substantially fortified crossings.
Dr Wigglesworth has further indicated that the mismatch between the protection offered at level crossings and the risk they represent is growing. This is because of a trend toward the use of larger, faster trains. Dr Wigglesworth states, 'We are certainly going to see heavier and faster trains in the future and, on the evidence of history, this is likely to result in an increased death toll at railway level crossings in Australia. There needs to be a major review to identify possible solutions and ensure that new strategies are implemented.'
Dr Wigglesworth notes that of Australia's approximately 9000 level crossings, some 6000 are passive, that is, they have no lights, no gates, no booms and no bells.
Those who believe that further measures need to be taken argue that before we look at the effectiveness of current safety measures at level crossings, we need to note that two-thirds of Australia's level crossings have no protection at all beyond signage.
Referring specifically to Victoria, much of the rail network relies on primitive precautions. Only 356 have automatic boom gates and 456 have bells and flashing lights. The remaining 1400 or so have unlit signs. Of the 100 crossings on the line between Swan Hill and Bendigo, 71 have neither, although many of these include quiet country lanes and thoroughfares between private paddocks.

3. There are a range of technological measures that could reduce level crossing accidents
After a major level crossing accident resulting in loss of life in New South Wales in 2001, the coroner stated, 'The real tragedy in this matter is ... that in this day and age when we all strive to reap the benefits of new technology such as computers, advances in medicine, trains that travel at 160km/h and even faster, we still have a 19th-century approach to level crossings on the basis that they are traversed by horse and cart.'
Critics of the current measures being taken to prevent level crossing accidents argue that they are hopelessly outmoded and that there are many other more advanced measures that could be employed to address the problem.
Professor Raphael Grzebieta, president of the Australasian College of Road Safety, has stated, 'It's time we started putting some money behind this and coming up with a smart system, one that's smarter than last century's technology.'
Professor Grzebieta's suggestions include flashing early warning lights 100 and 200 metres before a crossing, 60km a hour speed limits over the crossing itself even on open highways and small speed humps in the form of ripple strips on the approaches.
Professor Grzebieta has proposed that modern wireless technology could be used to trigger flashing yellow warning lights before a crossing to give drivers time to prepare and slow down. The lights would be triggered by an approach train using wireless technology.
'It's not hard to do,' the professor has claimed. 'We already do it for children's pedestrian crossings. It's possible to start using some of this modern technology to provide warnings to drivers early and prior to them approaching the intersection.'
Among other proposals that have been suggested are proposals to eliminate some crossings located within 150 metres or so from each other (as at Lismore); the installation of flashing lights on locomotives as well as front-end air-bags; the sealing of gravel roads for a distance before crossings, as well as speed humps; and, warning signals long before reaching a crossing. In addition, the rail industry has called for red light cameras at level crossings to reduce crashes between vehicles and trains.

4. Education campaigns can alter driver behaviour
It has been argued that given that human error is a major factor in a high percentage of level crossing accidents, education campaigns should be used to alter vehicle drivers' behaviour.
Jeremy Davey, associate professor and deputy director at the Queensland University of Technology's Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety, has argued that human behaviour must be addressed.
Professor Davey has stated, 'There is research that we need technical engineering, but we still need to go back to behavioural issues. People still go through crossings. They know they're there but they don't think trains are coming.
We need to educate people in those communities. People in rural communities think it's the city people, but the people who are actually having those crashes are people who regularly commute those roads...
You can blame truck drivers but it's what general motorists do that's an important point to remember. It's not just a subgroup. It's a characteristic of rural drivers, not just truck drivers, that they are not prepared to stop at level crossings.
There are a lot of just vehicle accidents at level crossings in rural areas. That's where a disproportionate number happen and it's because a lot of people in rural areas don't stop and don't expect trains.'
Professor Davey has argued that governments should support an intelligent educating campaign directed at the whole community, with key components of it targeting particular at-risk groups. He has suggested that this is an important part of bringing about the change in driver behaviour that is necessary.
Chief executive of the Australasian Rail Association, Bryan Nye, claims the trucking industry's call for more lights, bells and boom gates ignores the reality that most crashes and near-misses occur when drivers ignore warning signals.
'The clear fact is that part of the problem is illegal driver behaviour where they just ignore the stop sign and ignore the flashing lights - they just keep going through and the fact is driver education is just as key [an] element to solve the issue,' Mr Nye has argued.
Supporters of such a driver education program point to the success of general road safety education campaigns designed to discourage speeding and drink driving.

5. The cost of reducing level crossing accidents need not be prohibitively expensive
It has been suggested that the effective application of modern technology could improve safety at level crossings without the enormous cost generally claimed.
Dr Eric Wigglesworth, an honorary senior research fellow with the Monash University Accident Research Centre, has argued that solar powered lights and bells would be cheaper than the current mains powered ones, and this means more level crossings could be protected.
'The harnessing of today's technology to this 20th century problem is overdue,' Dr Wigglesworth has said.
It currently costs around $300,000 to $400,000 to install flashing lights and bells, which are activated when a train is coming, Dr Wigglesworth has said. Dr Wigglesworth has been reported as claiming in an ABC news report that 'a solar powered system would cost around $40,000 to $50,000 per crossing'.
It has further been claimed that not proceeding with grade separation at least within greater Melbourne was a policy decision rather than one based on cost alone. According to this argument it was decided in the 1970s that a larger share of government transport funding would be devoted to developing freeways and this was done at the expense of the state's grade separation program for level crossings. In an article written by Kenneth Davidson and published in The Age on September 22, 2005, the following claims were made: 'It is scandalous that there are 177 level crossings in greater Melbourne. Why, you may ask, when there are none in greater Sydney?
The answer is that when the battle over building the Eastern Freeway was decided in favour of the road lobby in the 1970s, the remaining question for VicRoads (which runs transport policy in Victoria) was how to finance it. It decided that some of the savings could be generated by abandoning the long-term program of grade separation.'

Further implications
The findings of the three different investigations into the Kerang accident, including the coroner's findings, may well influence what the Victorian government does to minimise the likelihood of a recurrence of such collisions.
The only way of absolutely removing the chances of such an accident happening again would be to install bridges or underpasses at all current level crossings. It is highly unlikely that any government, in Victoria or elsewhere, would commit to such an undertaking as the associated costs are very high. The Victorian Opposition, for example, though accusing the state government of being far too slow to make level crossings safer, has not been ready to pledge that it would remove the 177 level crossings in greater Melbourne alone.
What does seem likely, however, is that unless further action is taken, the incidence of level crossing accidents is likely to increase. Current statistics indicate the beginning of such a trend. After years of decline followed by a plateauing period the incidence of level crossing accidents has begun to rise. The reasons would appear to be increased volume of traffic on roads, including the increased use of roads by heavy transport vehicles, and new larger and faster trains.
The Victorian Opposition has claimed, among other things, that the state government should be taking effective action to increase the use of rail for freighting goods. Whether this option is taken up, in addition to the upgrades of Victorian level crossings already planned, addition safety measures, such as alterations to the road surface approaching level crossings, are also likely to be introduced. It is also likely that the government's education campaign on the safe use of railway level crossings will also be extended.
Other states are likely to adopt similar measures in response to similar pressures.

Newspaper items used in the compilation of this issue outline
H/SUN, June 7, page 24, editorial, `The danger signal'.
H/SUN, June 7, page 25, comment by Neil Mitchell, `Crossing the line'.
AUST, June 7, page 12, analysis by Hughes and Hannan, `Dying for a solution'.
AUST, June 7, page 11, editorial, `A tragic loss of life'.
AGE, June 7, page 13, comment by Eric Wigglesworth, `Science should take front seat in rail inquiry'.
AGE, June 7, page 12, editorial, `No easy answers, but this tragedy demands full safety review'cartoon).
AGE, June 7, page 12, cartoon. AGE, June 7, page 1, news item by Ben Doherty et al, `State was warned on crossing' .
AGE, June 13, page 14, editorial, `Repositioning driver safety'.
H/SUN, June 10, page 11, news item by P Rolfe, `Truckie gets threats'.
AGE, June 10, page 8, news item by J Dowling, `Crack unit called in to hunt for answers'.
AGE, June 9, Insight section, page 1, analysis by Simon Mann et al, `An accident waiting to happen'.
H/SUN, June 8, page 21, cartoon.
H/SUN, June 8, page 1, news item, `Truckie charged' .
Using google to find newspaper items still available on the Web
Use your mouse to copy a newspaper headline (just the headline, not the entire entry as it appears in the sources) and paste it into the google search box below. Click search to see if the item is still accessible.

Google