Would Terror Strike 'Be Made Deadlier' By Cuts?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

From the Morning Star

STAFFING cuts to Britain^s transport network could endanger lives in the event of a terror attack, rail unions warned yesterday.

The rail union TSSA^» (Transport Salaried Staffs' Association - about) is threatening strike action if ScotRail and Network Rail do not withdraw a threat to slash jobs north of the border. Leader Manuel Cortes said: "We have been reminded this weekend of just how insecure the world is becoming and where we can avoid tragedy and loss of life we should. There is no reason ScotRail should compromise safety. To do so is ludicrous and will put passenger lives and the lives of our members at risk."

And transport union RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) leader Mick Cash urged "vigilance and advance preparation" due to the transport network always being a "prime target." "This is no time to be cutting back on staffing levels," he warned. "We know that across every part of the transport system it is those staff that are both the eyes and ears on the ground and the critical element to safe evacuation in response to any alert."

[ChrisB]

Prime target a decade ago maybe. IS seem to prefer other methods?

The unions living in the past. And you can be sure they wouldn't be asked to tackle terrorists either, so no, in general.

[Tim]

Not really.  Cuts to police numbers and closing police stations worry me far more. 

[Rhydgaled]

Not really.  Cuts to police numbers and closing police stations worry me far more.

Agreed, police cuts are far more likely to 'make Terror Strikes Deadlier' than rail staff cuts. I doubt stopping terrorists is part of rail staff's job descriptions, there are far better reasons to oppose cuts to rail staff, the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) have lost the plot.

[grahame]

Whilst we are already encouraged to report anything or anyone suspicious to "A member of the staff or a member of the British Transport Police",  I can't help feeling that any adding a more formal and defined role in this arena for train and station staff would change their job description beyond the comfort of many of them, and would also lead to significant management, union and staff interaction in defining that formality.

[JayMac]

On the police front, actually finding one to report suspicious activity to will become increasingly difficult. All forces, BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) included, are cutting the number of officers.

Meanwhile, Dave & Co have just magiced up ^2bn for the intelligence services and SAS. If they fail it's front line police officers that are required, both as the last line of public defence and in dealing with the immediate aftermath of an incident. Police are also required to gather evidence of suspected terrorists.

However, no changes to the swingeing cuts in Police budgets hwve been announced. Instead we have to rely on Spooks and Special Forces. How well did they do in July 2005?

[ChrisB]

Just as well as current numbers would do now....

[Phil]

I've been spending a fair bit of time at Bristol Temple Meads this past week or so due to a change of work pattern just recently. They still boom out messages over the Tannoy about unattended luggage, which is good to hear, and you'd think given recent events people would take extra care. I was a little surprised therefore to be sitting in what used to be the First Class lounge area last week when a woman walked in, dumped her bags, and still talking on her phone walked out of the opposite door and continued her conversation outside the closed door.

I sat there for a few minutes. The bags sat there too. A couple of other people in the waiting room glanced at me, and glanced at the bags. Still the bags sat there. My train was announced then, so I got up to leave, and just a few yards down the platform I spotted two chaps wearing fluorescent GW^▸ (Great Western) tabards (probably waiting to see the same train into the platform). So, obviously mindful of the announcements, I notified them of the unattended baggage which someone - I didn't say who - had left in the waiting room, which to their credit they attended to IMMEDIATELY.

Now, you're all thinking what a good, public spirited, person I am - and of course I was only doing my duty. The thing is though, I was actually wondering if in fact I was being a bit mean spirited because the woman who left the luggage there, and who was STILL chatting on her phone when the two men approached her (I glanced back from the other end of the platform....) was none other than GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) management herself. I knew this. I recognised the uniform. I saw papers sticking out of her bag.

The conversation can only be imagined! I stand by what I did though. She acted, quite frankly, b****y irresponsibly under the circumstances. She should think herself lucky I didn't phone the British Transport Police.

[IndustryInsider]

The conversation can only be imagined! I stand by what I did though. She acted, quite frankly, b****y irresponsibly under the circumstances. She should think herself lucky I didn't phone the British Transport Police.

Quite staggering really.  Though luggage left in a waiting room would not normally be enough to trigger an evacuation, at the current heightened level of risk it could, and at the best of times is hardly a sensible thing for anybody to be doing, let alone staff. 

[Western Enterprise]

Is there any common sense here ?

[SandTEngineer]

Is there any common sense here ?

Personally, I think theres a lot of common sense on here, but I'm not too sure about out there........

[TaplowGreen]

However, no changes to the swingeing cuts in Police budgets hwve been announced. Instead we have to rely on Spooks and Special Forces. How well did they do in July 2005?

They've actually done rather well (in conjunction with the Police) at preventing numerous other incidents.

No amount of Police resource will ever stop every attempt at a terrorist outrage. If you had any idea how many terrorist incidents have been prevented since 2005 by information obtained and provided by the Intelligence Services you may not be so disparaging about "Spooks" as you call them.

The amount of protection which can be provided by an unarmed PC against someone wielding an AK47
is somewhat limited, it's rather better to uncover their plans & stop them before they get that far.

The bad fellas only have to get lucky once remember.

[ChrisB]

And you are privvy to the spooks workings?

The only current way any of us can guage the number of potential attacks foiled is by the cases coming to court/charges being laid.

Certainly not 'numerous' as you state, so are you exaggerating? Some of those 7 Cameron mentioned this week I suspect will tirn out to be cyber attacks. While unpleasant for those affected, they'll not lead to loss of life. I certainly haven't seen 7 sets of charges....unless they were all in the last month or so

[TaplowGreen]

And you are privvy to the spooks workings?

The only current way any of us can guage the number of potential attacks foiled is by the cases coming to court/charges being laid.

Certainly not 'numerous' as you state, so are you exaggerating? Some of those 7 Cameron mentioned this week I suspect will tirn out to be cyber attacks. While unpleasant for those affected, they'll not lead to loss of life. I certainly haven't seen 7 sets of charges....unless they were all in the last month or so

"Privy" to some information in a very limited way, related to previous employment, yes. Not everything is as black and white as you'd like it to be Chris.

[chrisr_75]

And you are privvy to the spooks workings?

The only current way any of us can guage the number of potential attacks foiled is by the cases coming to court/charges being laid.

Certainly not 'numerous' as you state, so are you exaggerating? Some of those 7 Cameron mentioned this week I suspect will tirn out to be cyber attacks. While unpleasant for those affected, they'll not lead to loss of life. I certainly haven't seen 7 sets of charges....unless they were all in the last month or so

I'm not sure if I remember correctly, but I think some of these things are now tried in secret without a jury, depending on the circumstances, so you may never know anything about them at all. Therefore, court cases/charges are not a reliable gauge on the number of attacks foiled. Just because there are no charges doesn't mean plots haven't been disrupted in other ways...airstrikes, disrupted by special forces on the ground etc.

The Official Secrets Act should ensure that the general public never know what the intelligence services & 'special' armed forces are up to (obviously this is the big advantage they have over the police), so any speculation about their successes or lack thereof is just that.