There are very few scenarios where a trailing train couldn't be coupled up and used to move the train to the next station - and considering that they ended up doing just that here, eventually, there's no reason why it couldn't continue to be the case.
Except GO claimed that couldn't be done, ostensibly due to (gist) "Our rescue crews were sent to the gas leak".
I realize that you too think that procedure should be changed, but GO themselves have made statements that don't make sense as to why loco/consist help wasn't sent. You discount the lone loco scenario as being viable due to speed limitations (I still can't locate that after deep searching with Google and the DoT website search), so perhaps you can detail exactly how and why this could be done?
We still have absolutely no idea of what the "complete failure of the train" (their words) was all about. They're pretty damn quick to throw money to try and stifle the outrage of the inconvenience, but if they've released any details as to what happened, why it happened, and why exactly what you state didn't happen, then please quote and/or link.
We still have zero info, zilch, nada, on the huge cock-ups of reassigning tracks at Union. The reason GO/Metrolinx handle these situations the way that they do is because they get away with it.
If you ran that department, or a position above it, in a private, accountable to shareholder company, you'd be out of a job.
Accessing that train due to switches and/or other trains blocking the track may or may not have been a factor. That's one of the excuses being hinted at. In the absence of any kind of semblance of accountability on a litany of gaffes from GO, who here thinks we're going to get a reasonable account of what happened, and how it's planned to be addressed in the future?
There's many other questions, starting with the other trains stuck behind it. Were those passengers bussed? How was that done? Do they get a refund of some sort? You mentioned CN nixing detraining the passengers. I find that curious, since it would be marshalled by staff driven out there (three hours isn't enough time to do that?) and in such an emergency, *if* CN has an issue with that, they are *legally required* to shut down that stretch. In the event, passengers are highly unlikely to cross the gully. There's more danger of passengers crossing from platforms with freight tracks running right behind them.
This not only has indications that it can and quite possibly will happen again, but done with no accountability yet again. After all, whose money is it they're refunding? The executives? Or ours?
They fugged up, and royally, and inevitably broke laws doing it. I think an inquiry is needed on this, outside of Metrolinx' hands.
Edit to Add: CP and CN police could have been called in to marshall evacuation along the track back to Ajax. They certainly have the legal mandate to doing so.
Second edit to add:
Railway Passenger Handling Safety Rules
Legislation (Rail Safety)
TC O-0-16, March 31st, 2000
[...]
5. Training
5.1 Each railway company that operates or hosts passenger train service shall ensure a sufficient number of on-board personnel as defined in the company's safety plan, including on-board personnel employed by a passenger service provider, are as a minimum, trained:
- with the passenger handling safety plan;
- with the company's emergency response procedures;
- with the safety features of passenger equipment;
- with normal and emergency communication procedures;
- with the use of on-board emergency tools;
- to administer first-aid and CPR;
- to provide service to passengers with disabilities under normal and emergency situations;
- to supervise or assist in emergency evacuation procedures.
5.2 Each railway company that operates or hosts passenger train service shall ensure all other appropriate railway personnel and on-board personnel, who may be required to assist in a passenger train emergency, are trained to be:
- familiar with the passenger handling safety plan;
- familiar with the company's emergency response procedures.
5.3 Safety training may not be required for on-board personnel who are not directly employed by either the railway company or passenger service provider and whose duties do not include the care, comfort and safety of the passengers.
[...]
https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/rules-tco16-357.htm