| |
VK5QX > SPOIL 17.07.03 08:12l 135 Lines 4935 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 740659VK5QX
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Aussies and 40m
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<RZ6HXA<SP7MGD<7M3TJZ<ON0BEL<ZL2BAU<VK6HGR<VK5UJ<
VK5BRC<VK5SPG<VK5LZ
Sent: 030716/0420Z @:VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC #:1607 [Elizabeth] $:740659VK5QX
From: VK5QX@VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC
To : SPOIL@WW
COMING ON A BIT STRONG!
I think that Andy G0FTD is coming on a bit too strongly regarding the 40
metre band allocations and the WARC situations.
He quotes from a VK3ZWI message and then "Tut, Tuts" about the Aussies'
actions."
It almost seems that he is blaming the Australian Amateur Radio operators
for the actions described.
The content of his bulletin was as follows:-
__________
" Some pundits on here just cannot see it.
VK3ZWI sent a few weeks ago in a bulletin sent to WIAVIC with a title of
"WRC03 concludes" :-
_____
" A dramatic improvement in the 40-meter band. WRC03 has agreed that the
HF broadcasting service will move out of 7100-7200 kHz by March 2009. This
is a compromise on the 300-kHz worldwide exclusive amateur allocated that
was
originally sought, yet is still a significant improvement for the amateur
service. Australia came to the conference with a strong "no change"
position and had to shift its position dramatically in order to embrace
the
compromise. "
_____
Ahhhhh, so Australia (who already had a full 40m allocation) DID go to the
conference intent on spoiling the chances for Region 1 amateurs to have
a proper 40m allocation.
Tut tut !
- Andy -
__________
I feel that Andy is wrong in his interpretation of what has occurred and
also seems not to have taken into account the nature of the various WARC
processes.
Firstly, why would Australia have any reason to try and spoil the chances
for Region 1 Amateurs unless what was proposed for Region 1 cut clearly
across the needs of Australia as seen by the Australian delegation.
I strongly suggest that this would not be the case.
One should realise that at the WARC meetings each individual country
represents its own specific interests as being of foremost importance.
Matters that affect other countries can often be considered as being of
much lesser consequence.
This is the normal way in which each country works, albeit within the
framework of the ITU and WARC conference procedures.
The VK3ZWI item could be considered as being poorly presented in the terms
of its wording as it does admittedly seem to infer an obstructionist
attitude on the part of Australia.
However, I venture to suggest that the Australian representatives are, to
a degree, probably more cooperative within many of the areas of
negotiation than those from quite few other countries.
Let's face it. They are pretty well experienced and versed in these
matters.
You might also note that the VK3ZWI report made it clear that Australia
HAD shifted its position so as to allow change to be made.
Surely that alone indicates a willingness to compromise on the part of the
Australian delegation.
We must also realise that where the name of "Australia" is used in the
context shown, it was the Australian Government that determined, based on
the advice of the relevant administration authorities, the position that
it initially preferred to adopt in this matter.
Even so, delegates do go to these conferences with a recognition that
invariably there are items where discussion and negotiation must take
place so as to allow a reasonable result.
If this were not the case how could there ever be a useful result
eventuating from such conferences?
Andy's wording borders on the insulting in that it seems to infer
DELIBERATE INTENT on the part of Australia and its accredited delegates,
towards "spoiling the chances for Region 1 amateurs".
The official Australian delegates are well advised by WIA Amateur Radio
observers who attend as accredited members of the Australian contingent.
Those representative Amateur Radio officials, whilst having no formal
standing as far as the ITU is concerned, are there in the best interests
of Amateur Radio as a whole and they are taken notice of by the official
delegates.
The IARU in turn does a lot to represent the interests of ALL Amateur
Radio operators on a world-wide basis. In fact, Australia plays a leading
part in this area and probably provides some of the most experienced
Amateur Radio operators available for such tasks.
It may also be noted that here in Australia we have suffered at the hands
of the "Short Wave" broadcasters for a long time.
The 40 metre Amateur Band has for years been cluttered to such a degree
that it is rarely used by Amateur Radio operators at night time when the
ionosphere favours longer distance propagation.
This, despite the fact that we do have access to a wider range of
frequencies than the Region 1 people have had.
Australian operators will surely be looking forward to the change when it
does take effect in a practical way.
I hope that this explanation and comment might help to steer discussion on
this and allied subjects towards a somewhat better understanding and more
thoughtful approach to such matters.
Regards,
Ian
__________
73 de Ian, VK5QX
@ VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC
16 July 2003
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
