"Ask the McCannes..."
Without getting too bogged down, sqad, the comparison hardly bears examination. The McCannes left their daughter alone in a holiday apartment to go out to dinner and whilst that does not justify her being taken it is not quite the same as walking your child around a theme park.
"...why would you as a 'single adult' want to go to any of these places? "
Well, they have a falconry section (which is what this particular single man was interested in). Falconry is not exclusively a child-friendly attraction. In fact it has a number of aspects which are arguably not suitable for children (the birds being fed live or very recently killed whole animals, for example). It also has a fully licensed restaurant and a farm shop, neither of which are specifically attractive to children but may interest single adults.
Sqad's figures on child abduction also make interesting reading. More than 50% of the children taken were abducted by either a parent, a relative or someone known to them (i.e. the sort of people who might take them for a day out at a theme park). On that basis it is more likely they will be abducted by someone known to them than by a stranger, so perhaps the theme park should only allow children to be accompanied by someone they do not know (just to be “on the safe side“).
Finally, Alistair Mead Managing Director of Puxton Park, said this at the end of his statement:
In light of: this coverage we will look at what other parks are doing with their admissions policy, speak to our customers and review."
I'm not so sure about theme parks in the vicinity of Puxton, but if Mr Mead looks a little further afield he may find that Puxton’s stance is unusual. I've looked at a few at random (Blackgang Chine and Robin Hill on the IOW, Crealy Adventure Parks in Exeter and Wadebridge, Oakwood Theme Park in North Wales). All of these are very child-centric establishments. Whilst they all have policies on unaccompanied children (minimum ages, mainly) none has a policy on unaccompanied adults. Methinks that Puxton is trying to justify its policy on the basis that "everybody does it" and from my random examination everybody most certainly does not.
The theme park's rules are ridiculous and demonstrates a somewhat hysterical attitude far out of proportion to the risks involved. This is becoming increasingly prevalent in the country ("must err on the safe side" regardless of how ridiculous the safe side appears).