Re: QR and photographers

["Roy Wilke" <3891@bit.net.au>]

It's a different level of government and a different aspect of government.
I'm not going to go into detail about how the ATO work, but simply it is on
precedent - if an ATO decision is successfully challenged through the AAT or
the courts, then that creates a new precedent for the ATO to work on.
Somehow, I can't see any railway operator running a system on that basis.

If you're so keen to go and find where the legislative basis is for Railway
By-Laws, then I suggest you go and look it up and let us all know what you
find. A good starting place might be the "Railways Act."



WhaleOilBeefHooked <daproc@spambait.umpires.com> wrote in message
NGPp3.7$Gz3.419279@news0.optus.net.au">news:NGPp3.7$Gz3.419279@news0.optus.net.au...
> Roy Wilke <3891@bit.net.au> wrote in message
<37a6fe28@news.ausmail.com>...
>
> >However, the ATO is not a transport body, and is not a very good parallel
> to
> >a State Government semi-corporate entity like Queensland Railways.
>
> But the point I was making is that a government owned body does not have
the
> freedom to decide policy, as and when it sees fit, unless it has been
given
> that power by legislation or regulation. Nobody has as yet provided the
> legal basis for QR restricting non-commercial photography in areas that
> members of the public normally have access to.
>
> DaveP
>
>