Copy of RMS Risk Assessment + other records
Dear Roads and Maritime Services,
As per Roads Act 1993, RMS appears to have authority to act as an over-sight body per s.228.
Local Council, being the local authority for the Roads Act 1993, Upper Lachlan, has indicated that both it and RMS have conducted and carried out 'risk assessments' of recently installed gates, over the Taradale Road and Federal Highway junction stock grid (approximately 30kms south-bound from Goulburn).
That is,both parties have deemed that the recent placement of gates in the middle of a stock grid do not pose any significant risk to any member of the public, at any time, for any reason. Given a stock grid is so design as to pose a significant trip hazard thus baulk animals, it comes as a surprised gates are warranted after approx 30 years since installation by the DMR.
With out evidence to under-pin the installation of these gates (Roads Act 1993 s.128, s.129, s.138 or Roads General Regulation 2008), such inspections are questionable.
The Federal Highway being a major thoroughfare, my FOI request is of public interest and is to request is for a copy of the Risk Assessment indicated as being so done by RMS.
Further, in public interest, RMS to provide information on the installation of those recently installed gates, under s.228 Roads Act 1993, including the apparent absence of procedural adherence to the requesting of / application for and compliance for 'Public Gate Permit'? As well as evidence held by Upper Lachlan of the installer's compliance to regulatory obligations?
Yours faithfully,
Paddy Galvin
Dear Paddy,
Thank you for your email.
You can request this by lodging an Access Application under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (GIPA Act)
http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/about/ac...
There is an application fee of $30, which you can pay by credit card, cheque or money order. Alternatively, you can make the payment at your local Motor Registry or Service NSW office, should you wish to lodge the application.
Regards,
Information, Corporate Policy and Investigations
Transport for NSW
T 02 8202 3768
Upper Ground, 18 Lee Street, Chippendale NSW 2008
Use public transport... plan your trip at transportnsw.info
Get on board with Opal at opal.com.au
-----Original Message-----
From: Paddy Galvin [mailto:[FOI #2972 email]]
Sent: Friday, 20 January 2017 8:44 AM
To: Information
Subject: Government Information (Public Access) request - Copy of RMS Risk Assessment + other records
Dear Roads and Maritime Services,
As per Roads Act 1993, RMS appears to have authority to act as an over-sight body per s.228.
Local Council, being the local authority for the Roads Act 1993, Upper Lachlan, has indicated that both it and RMS have conducted and carried out 'risk assessments' of recently installed gates, over the Taradale Road and Federal Highway junction stock grid (approximately 30kms south-bound from Goulburn).
That is,both parties have deemed that the recent placement of gates in the middle of a stock grid do not pose any significant risk to any member of the public, at any time, for any reason. Given a stock grid is so design as to pose a significant trip hazard thus baulk animals, it comes as a surprised gates are warranted after approx 30 years since installation by the DMR.
With out evidence to under-pin the installation of these gates (Roads Act 1993 s.128, s.129, s.138 or Roads General Regulation 2008), such inspections are questionable.
The Federal Highway being a major thoroughfare, my FOI request is of public interest and is to request is for a copy of the Risk Assessment indicated as being so done by RMS.
Further, in public interest, RMS to provide information on the installation of those recently installed gates, under s.228 Roads Act 1993, including the apparent absence of procedural adherence to the requesting of / application for and compliance for 'Public Gate Permit'? As well as evidence held by Upper Lachlan of the installer's compliance to regulatory obligations?
Yours faithfully,
Paddy Galvin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2972 email]
Is [RMS request email] the wrong address for Government Information (Public Access) requests to Roads and Maritime Services? If so, please contact us using this form:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/change_re...
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information and is intended only to be read or used by the addressee(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by return email, delete this email and destroy any copy. Any use, distribution, disclosure or copying of this email by a person who is not the intended recipient is not authorised.
Views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of Transport for NSW, Department of Transport or any other NSW government agency. Transport for NSW and the Department of Transport assume no liability for any loss, damage or other consequence which may arise from opening or using an email or attachment.
Please visit us at http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au or http://www.transportnsw.info
Dear Roads and Maritime Services,
Thankyou for your response. I have several points to clarify;
1. As per Roads Act 1993, RMS appears to have authority to act as an over-sight body per s.228. Is this correct?
2. RMS is indicating that the information I requested is available by an informal request, being for planners reports, application, consent, etc, is not so available?
On that basis the information requested being unavailable informally through an informal GIPA / FOI request, interest, would be available through a formal application and payment of the $30 fee, correct?
Being in the public interest, would RMS consider the release of the requested information via the Right to Know email address? As then it will be public for the world to see without someone else having to go through the same process.
Yours faithfully,
Paddy
Dear Information,
Please calrify if per Roads Act 1993, RMS appears to have authority to act as an over-sight body per s.228. Is this correct? And that you can obtain information from a local authority discharging the Road Act 1993?
Further, per your link to your website, there is mention of 'informal request'
"NSW government agencies are authorised to release government information to a person in response to an informal request by the person. The agency, having regard to the nature of the information, may make such information available by whichever means it considers appropriate and it may be subject to conditions."
Please indicate on what basis my request is not seen as a valid informal request; and thus stipulating a formal request process?
Yours sincerely,
Paddy Galvin
Dear Roads and Maritime Services,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Roads and Maritime Services's handling of my FOI request 'Copy of RMS Risk Assessment + other records'.
- this is in the Public Interest
- this route has been in use for atleast 100 years, although earlies documented reference is from 1837
- this route has been accorded Council official recognition for atleast 100 years
- Upper Lachlan Council, while appearing aware of Roads Act 1993 and Roads General Regulation 2008 appear not to act per regulations with gates being put ACROSS a public road - then locked; have indeed appeared obstructive with information
- Upper Lachlan Council appears complacent with inherent danger associated with the position of gates, with the steepness of the access ramp
- RMS can exercise authority in compliance to Roads ACt 1993
- RMS can ensure information flow
- RMS can ensure impartiality
- RMS can remove ambiguity
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/c...
Yours faithfully,
Paddy Galvin
Dear Paddy,
Thank you for your email.
As no Access Application was lodged with us, we are cannot undertake an Internal Review.
Should you wish to continue with this application, please lodge a formal application under the Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009. http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/about/ac...
Regards,
Information, Corporate Policy and Investigations
Transport for NSW
T 02 8202 3768
Upper Ground, 18 Lee Street, Chippendale NSW 2008
Use public transport... plan your trip at transportnsw.info
Get on board with Opal at opal.com.au
-----Original Message-----
From: Paddy Galvin [mailto:[FOI #2972 email]]
Sent: Saturday, 18 February 2017 11:39 AM
To: Information
Subject: Internal review of Government Information (Public Access) request - Copy of RMS Risk Assessment + other records
Dear Roads and Maritime Services,
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
I am writing to request an internal review of Roads and Maritime Services's handling of my FOI request 'Copy of RMS Risk Assessment + other records'.
- this is in the Public Interest
- this route has been in use for atleast 100 years, although earlies documented reference is from 1837
- this route has been accorded Council official recognition for atleast 100 years
- Upper Lachlan Council, while appearing aware of Roads Act 1993 and Roads General Regulation 2008 appear not to act per regulations with gates being put ACROSS a public road - then locked; have indeed appeared obstructive with information
- Upper Lachlan Council appears complacent with inherent danger associated with the position of gates, with the steepness of the access ramp
- RMS can exercise authority in compliance to Roads ACt 1993
- RMS can ensure information flow
- RMS can ensure impartiality
- RMS can remove ambiguity
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.righttoknow.org.au/request/c...
Yours faithfully,
Paddy Galvin
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #2972 email]
This request has been made by an individual using Right to Know. This message and any reply that you make will be published on the internet. More information on how Right to Know works can be found at:
https://www.righttoknow.org.au/help/offi...
If you find this service useful as an FOI officer, please ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's FOI page.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information and is intended only to be read or used by the addressee(s). If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by return email, delete this email and destroy any copy. Any use, distribution, disclosure or copying of this email by a person who is not the intended recipient is not authorised.
Views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender, and are not necessarily the views of Transport for NSW, Department of Transport or any other NSW government agency. Transport for NSW and the Department of Transport assume no liability for any loss, damage or other consequence which may arise from opening or using an email or attachment.
Please visit us at http://www.transport.nsw.gov.au or http://www.transportnsw.info
Ben Fairless left an annotation ()
If you choose to go through with the GIPA process, please consider asking the department to release the information via the Right to Know email address. Then it will be public for the world to see without someone else having to go through the same process.