The number of children killed while playing illegally on

I will go with B and here is how I do this CR type:

Given logic:
Premise: No. of children killed in railway lines has increased 10 times.
Conclusion: Childrens safety is insufficient and lives are lost due to lack of safety.

The above can be restated as:
One issue is noted.(effect)
Author mentions the cause of the effect. However there is no mention about fixing the issue.

A) Dept is to achieve budget cuts
X cannot be trusted . so outcome is uncertain. Uncertainity is not pointed in Argument. This is not even close to the logic presented above So elliminate.

B) states : " lung cancer decreased
The financial impact of issue was huge for NHS.
So cost for NHS reduced."
Author mentions the cause of the effect (lung cancer has decreased)
issue noted . (the financial burden was huge for NHS)
The conclusion is drawn based on these two stmt just like the argument does. Also there is no focus on the main problem which is dealing with the lung cancer. This shifts the focus from a more serious problem (lung cancer) to financial burden. This is exactly what the argument did. The more serious issue was child safety. The argument says child safety is insufficient and makes a conclusion without mentioning any solution for the problem.

C) No issue is described here. So elliminate

D) Issue noted.
A solution for the issue is proposed. The argument doesnot discuss a solution for the stated issue . so this is not parallel . elliminate.

E)A new program's outcome is positive for Peter and so should be continued. This is not parallel to the argument either. This is out of scope. When there is no solution discussed in argument how can a analysis of that solution parallel the argument. So elliminated.