Race against time to change law on car park barriers before bereaved mum loses cancer battle
A father who is fighting to make multi-storey car parks safer after his son fell to his death says he hopes to change the law before his wife's terminal cancer progresses.
Gabriel Santer was 15-years-old when he fell from the top of a multi-storey car park in October 2020.
He had been with friends at the Q-car park, in Liverpool city centre, and had just texted his mum to tell her what he wanted for tea, but never came home.
Since then, his dad Johnny Santer has campaigned to increase the minimum height of barriers on top of car parks through the Multi-Storey Car Parks (Safety) Bill, known as Gabe's Law.
But he says "time is of the essence" for his wife and Gabriel's mother to see the law passed before her cancer, which she has been living with for the last 10 years, progresses any further.
Johnny said: "It would be lovely for her knowing Gabe's law has been enacted to protect the most vulnerable people in our communities and make sure no other family goes through the pain we have."
On Monday, 7 July, Johnny met with the Building Safety Minister Alex Norris to make his case. If the law were to pass, it would see:
"When you look as I have done extensively into this problem, specifically surrounding multi-story car parks, you realise we've got a really big problem", Johnny said.
"We are having repeated preventable deaths - six at the last count in Liverpool alone since Gabriel's death, and unbelievably another from the same operator as the one that Gabriel fell from. It has to stop."
The company that runs the site where Gabe died have previously said that their car park outperformed the required building regulations and they were cleared of any wrongdoing.But the Liverpool Garston MP Maria Eagle believes that is exactly why the regulations need to change, and says the best way of preventing future deaths is to "stop it being so easy."
She said: "At the moment the law requires only a very low barrier, that people can easily topple, fall or jump over. So, make the barrier higher, people can't fall, and they can't jump, its simple as that."
At the beginning of July, the Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer promised to review safety standards in multi-stories to 'prevent future tragedies."
Speaking in Parliament on 2 July, he said the Government will conduct a call for evidence on minimum barrier heights in car parks.
He added: 'We will conduct a call for evidence on part K of the building regulations about minimum guarding heights, so that necessary protections are in place to prevent future tragedies.
"We will also look at the contents of the Bill.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
10 minutes ago
- Leader Live
MoD could face ‘substantial' compensation claims over data breach, lawyer says
Sean Humber, a specialist data breach lawyer at law firm Leigh Day, who acts for Afghan citizens affected by previous data breaches of their personal data by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), said the department 'seems institutionally incapable of keeping information secure'. It follows an unprecedented superinjunction being lifted on Tuesday, which had prevented the media from reporting that a dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The breach resulted in the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – in April 2024, which is understood to have cost around £400 million so far and could cost up to £850 million once completed. The Government originally outlined plans to launch a compensation scheme for those affected by the breach, with an estimated cost of between £120 and £350 million, not including administration expenses. Hundreds of data protection legal challenges are also expected, with the court previously told that a Manchester-based law firm already had several hundred prospective clients. Following the superinjunction being lifted, Mr Humber said that those affected could sue the Government over the 'inevitable anxiety, fear and distress' caused by the breach. He said: 'Given the extreme sensitivity of the information and the numbers affected, plus the vulnerability of those affected due to the dangers they already face from the Taliban, this data breach can only be described as catastrophic. 'Those affected are likely to have strong claims for substantial compensation against the Government for failing to keep the information secure and for inevitable anxiety, fear and distress this has then caused. 'Unfortunately, this is just the latest in a long line of data breaches by the MoD of personal data of Afghan citizens who had previously worked with UK armed forces. 'Frankly, the MoD seems institutionally incapable of keeping information secure. 'There is now an urgent need for a thorough and independent review of the MoD's whole data-processing policies and practices in order to try and prevent yet further breaches. 'We have already been approached by Afghan citizens who had applied, with their families, for relocation to the UK under the Arap scheme and who are now extremely concerned to find that their personal information may have been disclosed without their knowledge or consent. 'They are particularly concerned at the risks posed by their personal information now being in the hands of the Taliban, who continue to imprison, torture and kill those suspected of previously assisting international forces, as well as the risks of fraud and identity theft.' The superinjunction prohibited making any reference to the existence of the court proceedings and is thought to have been the longest and widest-ranging of its kind. Mr Justice Chamberlain said in a ruling on Tuesday that he was lifting the order following a review conducted by a retired civil servant for the Ministry of Defence. He said that this review concluded that the Taliban 'likely already possess the key information in the dataset' and that it was 'unlikely that individuals would be targeted simply because of their work for the UK'. He continued that one of the 'many remarkable features' of the case was that there had been no mention of the data breach while the superinjunction was in force, which he said was 'very much to the credit of the media organisations and individual journalists involved'. Defence Secretary John Healey offered a 'sincere apology' for the breach in the Commons on Tuesday, and said that the MoD has 'installed new software to securely share data'. Erin Alcock, a human rights lawyer at law firm Leigh Day, who has previously assisted hundreds of Arap applicants and family members, said that there had been 'rumours circulating of an incident of this kind for some time'. She said: 'The news today is extremely concerning. 'We have been aware of rumours circulating of an incident of this kind for some time and have been concerned about any potential risks posed to our clients, particularly those remaining in Afghanistan. 'Sadly, this incident represents a catastrophic failure by the Government to protect the personal information, and therefore the safety, of what is an extremely vulnerable group of individuals. 'We will be urgently seeking clarification as to which of our many clients may have been affected and confirmation that all necessary precautions have and will be taken to mitigate any risk of harm to them.'
Glasgow Times
10 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
MoD could face ‘substantial' compensation claims over data breach, lawyer says
Sean Humber, a specialist data breach lawyer at law firm Leigh Day, who acts for Afghan citizens affected by previous data breaches of their personal data by the Ministry of Defence (MoD), said the department 'seems institutionally incapable of keeping information secure'. It follows an unprecedented superinjunction being lifted on Tuesday, which had prevented the media from reporting that a dataset containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 people who applied for the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) was released 'in error' in February 2022 by a defence official. The breach resulted in the creation of a secret Afghan relocation scheme – the Afghanistan Response Route – in April 2024, which is understood to have cost around £400 million so far and could cost up to £850 million once completed. The Government originally outlined plans to launch a compensation scheme for those affected by the breach, with an estimated cost of between £120 and £350 million, not including administration expenses. Hundreds of data protection legal challenges are also expected, with the court previously told that a Manchester-based law firm already had several hundred prospective clients. Following the superinjunction being lifted, Mr Humber said that those affected could sue the Government over the 'inevitable anxiety, fear and distress' caused by the breach. He said: 'Given the extreme sensitivity of the information and the numbers affected, plus the vulnerability of those affected due to the dangers they already face from the Taliban, this data breach can only be described as catastrophic. 'Those affected are likely to have strong claims for substantial compensation against the Government for failing to keep the information secure and for inevitable anxiety, fear and distress this has then caused. 'Unfortunately, this is just the latest in a long line of data breaches by the MoD of personal data of Afghan citizens who had previously worked with UK armed forces. 'Frankly, the MoD seems institutionally incapable of keeping information secure. 'There is now an urgent need for a thorough and independent review of the MoD's whole data-processing policies and practices in order to try and prevent yet further breaches. Several hearings in relation to the superinjunction were held behind closed doors at the Royal Courts of Justice (Andrew Matthews/PA) 'We have already been approached by Afghan citizens who had applied, with their families, for relocation to the UK under the Arap scheme and who are now extremely concerned to find that their personal information may have been disclosed without their knowledge or consent. 'They are particularly concerned at the risks posed by their personal information now being in the hands of the Taliban, who continue to imprison, torture and kill those suspected of previously assisting international forces, as well as the risks of fraud and identity theft.' The superinjunction prohibited making any reference to the existence of the court proceedings and is thought to have been the longest and widest-ranging of its kind. Mr Justice Chamberlain said in a ruling on Tuesday that he was lifting the order following a review conducted by a retired civil servant for the Ministry of Defence. He said that this review concluded that the Taliban 'likely already possess the key information in the dataset' and that it was 'unlikely that individuals would be targeted simply because of their work for the UK'. He continued that one of the 'many remarkable features' of the case was that there had been no mention of the data breach while the superinjunction was in force, which he said was 'very much to the credit of the media organisations and individual journalists involved'. Defence Secretary John Healey offered a 'sincere apology' for the breach in the Commons on Tuesday, and said that the MoD has 'installed new software to securely share data'. Erin Alcock, a human rights lawyer at law firm Leigh Day, who has previously assisted hundreds of Arap applicants and family members, said that there had been 'rumours circulating of an incident of this kind for some time'. She said: 'The news today is extremely concerning. 'We have been aware of rumours circulating of an incident of this kind for some time and have been concerned about any potential risks posed to our clients, particularly those remaining in Afghanistan. 'Sadly, this incident represents a catastrophic failure by the Government to protect the personal information, and therefore the safety, of what is an extremely vulnerable group of individuals. 'We will be urgently seeking clarification as to which of our many clients may have been affected and confirmation that all necessary precautions have and will be taken to mitigate any risk of harm to them.'
Telegraph
15 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Afghan allies deserve our support, but this resettlement blunder is unforgivable
Like many other Afghan veterans, I am yet again dismayed by the predictable consequences of our hasty exit from this theatre of operations, and the thousands of lives of British service personnel and their families still affected by this most exacting campaign. We all recognise the sacrifices that many Afghans made to support our operations and the many brave acts these people did to support us. The news that many lives could be in danger due to a simple administrative error is beyond comprehension. As we report that we are under daily cyber-attack from adversaries most especially Russia, this is a demonstration of on monumental scale that today the keyboard can be far more dangerous than the sword. I for one believe that every Afghan who directly supported the British Army, in combat, in Afghanistan, should be allowed safe passage and the right to live in this country away from the murderous Taliban. This is also a message to current and future governments that if you are prepared to send our men and women into potentially mortal combat, you must be prepared to see it through to the end, and not accept a messy and incomplete exit as we did in Afghanistan. If you are not prepared to go all in, do not go in at all. Accepting all these asylum seekers from Afghanistan without full and comprehensive checking had the potential for some very bad actors to slip through the net. We can only hope that we know who all these people are, and the government must ensure due process is now seen to be done in this country. I do find it rather distasteful that many commentators and politicians seem more concerned about the £7 billion price tag of the operation and how it might mess up the carefully planned budget calculations of the Chancellor rather than the human factors involved. We already knew that fighting wars is a very expensive business and should only be undertaken if no other option is available. I am sure that most of these Afghans are very worthy of their British passports having fought alongside us, unlike the thousands of others who attempt to sneak into this country. But the public trust must not be trifled with. We cannot turn the clock back, but we can ensure that in the future mistakes like these are not repeated. For the sake of our allies and our international good standing, negligence of this kind cannot be tolerated.
