Our unsafe railways

Some years back, it was discovered that, on high-density traffic routes, a large number of railway collisions used to take place. To prevent these, an ingenious device called the automatic warning system, designed by the Railways8217; Research and Designs and Standards Organisation was installed on these routes, and the accidents were almost eliminated. When a similar accident took place near Ferozabad in 1995, claiming 400 lives, it was discovered that it was the result of the administration ignoring the advice of the railway engineers for effective track-circuiting at the station.

Often, even when the line capacity of a particular track is saturated, populist railway ministers introduce new trains on the track and increase the frequency of the existing trains. This leads to an unbearable burden on the railway track and cracks on the rails. When the cracks are detected, the renewal of tracks becomes unavoidable. Unfortunately, there is still a backlog of track renewals for want of adequatefunds.

Similarly important for safety is the system of couplers, which provides a link between adjoining coaches or wagons. The traditional screw couplers must be gradually transformed to centre buffer couplers which can absorb shocks and pressure during accidents and minimise damage to coaches and threats to human life.

In the case of railway coaches manufactured in the Integrated Coach Factory at Perumbur, there are centre buffer couplers and in addition there is a metallic huge tube like core that protects the body of the railway coach in the event of accidents. From the safety angle, the integral coaches are very useful and there are countries which have placed orders for import of these coaches on safety considerations.

If railway safety is to be ensured, the financial constraints on the railways must be reduced and larger allocations for railway safety properly utilised. The past inquiries have revealed a need to augment funds for safety and a greater need to ensure a proper utilisation of thefunds.

The base of the financial resources and investments available for the railways is quite narrow. The railway plans are financed through three major sources: internal resources; market borrowings through the Indian Railways Finance Corporation IRFC and other schemes; and capital from the general exchequer. Even a cursory glance at the available resources indicates that, in percentage terms, the capital from the general exchequer has gone down and the level of high-cost market borrowing has gone up.

The resources available for railway development and safety measures are inadequate because the railways have to meet social obligations to the extent of Rs 1,800 to 2,000 crore per year. The burdens of these obligations arises from free movement of defence equipment, transportation of certain commodities at highly concessional rates, loss on uneconomic branch lines, loss on passenger and coaching services, freight concessions to the North-East region and 50 per cent of the cost of maintaining the RailwayPolice for maintenance of law and order on the railway system, though it lies totally in the domain of responsibility of the state governments.

Though the railways have not shirked their social obligations, it is well to remember that in several foreign countries subsidies are given to the railways from the general revenues of the countries concerned.

For instance, the Swiss Federal Railways receives subsidy to meet social obligations, which is 35 per cent of the country8217;s revenues, the German Railways 35 per cent of the revenue and the French National Railways 30 per cent of the nation8217;s revenues as subsidy. There are other countries, too, where a similar system prevails. If such a financial arrangement is available to the Indian Railways, more resources can be diverted to the modernisation of railways and for effective safety devices.

The internal resources available to the railways from freight rates and passenger fares can be augmented if a rapid shift of rail traffic to road traffic is effectivelychecked. A comprehensive study shows that, in 1950-51, the rail freight traffic was 89 per cent and that on road was 11 per cent. But, in 1996-97, the rail freight traffic came down to 40 per cent and the road traffic has increased to 60 per cent. Similarly, in this period, the rail passenger traffic has come down from 80 to 20 per cent and the road traffic has gone up from 20 to 80 per cent.

This change in the traffic pattern has taken place, despite the fact that the railways are more energy-efficient than road transport, more economical in land use and entails less social costs in terms of environmental damage.

Serious and concerted efforts are, therefore, needed to restore the rail traffic pattern so that more funds will be available for rail safety.During the rail accidents, the rescue management has to be strengthened so that relief is available expeditiously and the lives of several injured passengers can be saved. In this context, the efficient functioning of the Fire Brigade System in variousmetropolitan centres can be emulated.

In the face of an accident in which several innocent lives are lost, a merely ritual resignation of the railway minister will not have any impact on railway safety. The responsibility of the administrative failure of all concerned has to be fixed and severe action taken as a deterrent against criminal negligence of duties for which passengers have to pay the heavy price of their lives. At the same time, we must take a fresh look at the administrative and technological lacunae that cause such disasters.

Will the railway administration demonstrate the requisite will to undertake this task and make the railways safer for freight and passenger traffic?

The writer is a former railway minister