>Maurie Daly (mauried@commslab.gov.au) wrote:
>>I am interested in exactly what Railway Lines are covered by this Act.
>>If as I suspect is the case that all Government Railway Lines in NSW are
>>covered,then I would like to know how the NSW DOT is able to accredit PTC
>>drivers who operate trains between Echuca & deniliquin bearing in mind that
>>this line uses a proprietary PTC safe working system based on proprietary
>>Radio technology which has never been used elsewhere in NSW.
>There are always grey areas which have never been clearly defined. For
>example, there is an ongoing argument between the RTA and PTC over who is
>responsible for level crossings on the Deniliquin and Moulamein lines.
You are dead right here of course, however Government departments normally
function in response to the Acts or Acts of Parliament for which they are
responsible.
There is usually no provision for a dept to arbitrarily decide what bits of an
Act it wants to enforce and what bits it doesnt ,so in the case of Echuca to
deniliquin , unless the Rail Safety Act explicitly exempted this line the NSW
DOT would have no option but to enforce safety standards on this line in
exactly the same way as they do for all other lines covered under the Act.
Its most likely that all the grey areas havnt been considered at all,and the
DOT is simply making rulings which suits them at the time.
However this doesnt mean that they have the legal basis for making arbitrary
determinations ,unless the Act specifically allows , which would be a most
unusual situation.
Most Acts of Parliament usually limit even the powers of the Minister of the
Portfolio from making arbitrary determinations .
Ill try and get a copy of this Act and have a read , could be most amusing.
Rulings like bg passenger rolling stock cant be run in NSW as they arnt
accreddited,but PTC wagons can be as they are,would be the sort of ruling to
challenge in court to see whether the DOT was acting outside its legislative
base.
cheers
MD