Imagine stepping onto a train, a space meant for transit and connection, only to be confronted with unimaginable violence. That's the chilling reality that unfolded on an LNER train in Cambridgeshire recently, a mass stabbing attack that has ignited a crucial debate: are our railways safe enough? Rail unions are now demanding a serious overhaul of security measures to protect both staff and passengers in the wake of this horrific incident.
The attack, which you can read more about here (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/nov/02/two-men-in-police-custody-after-mass-stabbing-on-cambridgeshire-train), has brought transport safety sharply into focus, particularly given the backdrop of budget cuts that have impacted police presence and rail staffing levels. It begs the question: have we compromised safety in the pursuit of cost savings?
While the investigation is still ongoing, early reports suggest the quick thinking and bravery of the onboard crew played a vital role in minimizing the number and severity of injuries. And this is the part most people miss: these everyday heroes, often unseen and unthanked, are the first line of defense in such crises. But should they have to be?
Tragically, it has emerged that one of the individuals critically injured was an LNER staff member. This brave worker reportedly intervened to stop the attacker, putting their own life on the line to protect others. British Transport Police have lauded their actions as "nothing short of heroic," stating definitively that they "undoubtedly saved many people's lives." This highlights a critical point: rail staff are not just employees; they are often unsung heroes in emergency situations.
The RMT and TSSA unions have been quick to commend the courage of rail staff and to advocate for immediate action. Eddie Dempsey, the RMT’s general secretary, has pledged to seek “urgent meetings with government, rail employers and police to ensure that we have the strongest possible support, resources and robust procedures in place.” Maryam Eslamdoust, the TSSA’s general secretary, has called on LNER and the government “to act swiftly to review security, to support the affected workers, and to ensure nothing like this happens again.” Their demands are clear: increased security and enhanced support for rail workers.
While such extreme violence on trains is rare – the LNER attack brings to mind the 2019 Guildford train killing, known for its randomness – the concern is understandable. The enclosed environment of a train carriage can amplify the sense of vulnerability. This raises the question: what practical measures can be implemented to enhance security without turning our railway stations into airport-style security zones?
The level of security seen at Eurostar terminals at London St Pancras, with airport-style checks, is currently unique in the UK rail network. But here's where it gets controversial... Could a scaled-down version of this be implemented across the wider rail network? The challenge lies in balancing security enhancements with passenger convenience. Extensive security checks could lead to significant delays and require substantial investment in infrastructure and personnel, a prospect that may be unpalatable to both the cash-strapped rail industry and the government.
Andy Trotter, a former chief constable of the British Transport Police, has already dismissed the idea of airport-style security as unrealistic. But he suggests that increased investment in other areas, such as facial recognition technology, random searches, and increased staffing (both police and railway personnel), could be viable alternatives. However, the BTP's funding model, reliant on the railway itself, adds another layer of complexity, especially with fares rising and governments seeking cost-cutting measures across the board.
Recorded assaults on the railways have been on the rise in recent years, increasing by 7% to reach an annual high of 10,231. But it's important to understand the context. And this is the part most people miss... The vast majority (80%) of these incidents involve harassment or common assault, including threatening behavior. While still unacceptable, these incidents are different in nature and severity from the recent stabbing attack. With over 1.7 billion passenger journeys made annually, the overall risk of serious violence remains relatively low. However, the perception of risk among rail staff is a serious concern.
A 2024 report by the Rail Safety and Standards Board revealed that 2,793 rail workers had been injured or traumatized by assault or abuse in the previous year. Furthermore, a TSSA survey found that 40% of its members had experienced incidents involving weapons. These statistics paint a worrying picture of the risks faced by those who work on our railways.
Eslamdoust powerfully argues that “Safety and staffing go hand in hand. You cannot talk about safety while cutting back on the very people who keep others safe.” This raises a fundamental question: can we truly prioritize passenger safety without adequately protecting and supporting rail staff?
What are your thoughts? Should we accept longer queues for increased security, or are there more effective, less intrusive measures that could be implemented? Is the current level of investment in railway security sufficient, or are more resources needed to protect both passengers and staff? Share your opinions and let's discuss how we can make our railways safer for everyone.
