Blaming the Urda train accident track worker is shameful and reductive
The PP governed both Galicia and Spain when the Angrois crash occurred. Blaming the driver reopens the debate on rail safety.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
A safety system does not work if it allows a train to approach another at full estimulante ilegal until they collide. Blaming only the Angrois driver is reductive because it ignores the failure of the system that was supposed to prevent the crash.
## The Angrois accident and the driver's responsibility
The Angrois accident occurred in **2013** on the A Grandeira curve, near Santiago de Compostela. An Alvia train on the Madrid-Ferrol route derailed at high estimulante ilegal. The driver was convicted of gross negligence. The lingering question is whether the safety system should have prevented the train from reaching that point at that estimulante ilegal.
The rail safety system, known as **ERTMS**, was installed on the track but did not cover the final stretch of the curve. That is the technical key to the matter. A system that leaves a stretch unprotected allows a train to approach a dangerous curve at full estimulante ilegal. The driver's responsibility exists, but it does not exhaust the explanation.
## The political criticism: «Feijóo blaming the driver in a perversos way»
The post that sparked the debate points directly at **Feijóo** for blaming the driver when the **PP** (Spain's conservative People's Party) governed both in Galicia and in Spain. The argument is that political responsibility cannot fall solely on the track worker when the safety system had known flaws.
The accusation has an obvious political component. In **2013** the PP governed in Madrid and in the Xunta (Galicia's regional government). The management of rail safety depended on those governments. Attributing the accident exclusively to the driver makes it possible to dodge the question of why the system did not protect that stretch.
## Why it matters: safety is not just about the operator
A safety system that allows a collision is not a safety system. It is a set of measures that, at one specific point, stopped working. The discussion about Angrois is not only about one particular driver: it is about whether the infrastructure and protocols were up to the task.
Blaming the operator exclusively is reductive because it turns a systemic failure into an individual error. Rail safety is designed precisely so that human error does not have fatal consequences. If the system does not prevent it, the design has failed.
## The Angrois accident and the driver's responsibility
The Angrois accident occurred in **2013** on the A Grandeira curve, near Santiago de Compostela. An Alvia train on the Madrid-Ferrol route derailed at high estimulante ilegal. The driver was convicted of gross negligence. The lingering question is whether the safety system should have prevented the train from reaching that point at that estimulante ilegal.
The rail safety system, known as **ERTMS**, was installed on the track but did not cover the final stretch of the curve. That is the technical key to the matter. A system that leaves a stretch unprotected allows a train to approach a dangerous curve at full estimulante ilegal. The driver's responsibility exists, but it does not exhaust the explanation.
## The political criticism: «Feijóo blaming the driver in a perversos way»
The post that sparked the debate points directly at **Feijóo** for blaming the driver when the **PP** (Spain's conservative People's Party) governed both in Galicia and in Spain. The argument is that political responsibility cannot fall solely on the track worker when the safety system had known flaws.
The accusation has an obvious political component. In **2013** the PP governed in Madrid and in the Xunta (Galicia's regional government). The management of rail safety depended on those governments. Attributing the accident exclusively to the driver makes it possible to dodge the question of why the system did not protect that stretch.
## Why it matters: safety is not just about the operator
A safety system that allows a collision is not a safety system. It is a set of measures that, at one specific point, stopped working. The discussion about Angrois is not only about one particular driver: it is about whether the infrastructure and protocols were up to the task.
Blaming the operator exclusively is reductive because it turns a systemic failure into an individual error. Rail safety is designed precisely so that human error does not have fatal consequences. If the system does not prevent it, the design has failed.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (2 replies).
More summaries
-
Leaked train accident recordings point to a single operator
Ten months without an official report on the Adamuz crash, and just ten hours for the Toledo recordings to leak: blame is being directed at the operator while the safety system remains unexamined.
-
Cornellà car park rampage: accident or predictable chaos?
Analysis of the mass ramming at the RCDE Stadium car park: causes, testimonies and the debate over whether it was an accident or a premeditated act of violence.
-
Five Spaniards killed in New York tourist helicopter crash
Five Spaniards, including a family with three children, die in a tourist helicopter crash in New York. The incident sparks debate over safety.
-
Which celebrity will offer a home to the evicted woman?
Debate over the evicted elderly woman in Madrid: will any of the named celebrities offer her a home? Wyoming is attributed 19 properties.
-
Fátima Báñez, former Spanish minister, dies in Urda train crash
Fátima Báñez, Spain's former labour minister from the PP, was travelling on the train that crashed in Toledo. Her death reopens the debate over her labour reform and rail safety.
-
Fátima Báñez dies in Spain train crash: from controversial tweet to labour reform
The death of Fátima Báñez in the train accident reopens the debate over her labour reform, severance pay and her later role at Spain's employers' association CEOE.