| |
VK5QX > SPOIL 20.07.03 10:46l 143 Lines 5433 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : EE0662VK5QX
Read: GUEST
Subj: Re: Aussies and 40m
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0FBB<DB0GOS<ON0AR<ON0AR<VK6HGR<ZL2TZE<
VK5UJ<VK5BRC<VK5SPG<VK5LZ
Sent: 030719/0209Z @:VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC #:1739 [Elizabeth] $:EE0662VK5QX
From: VK5QX@VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC
To : SPOIL@WW
USE SOME COMMON SENSE PLEASE !
We now have the following exchange initiated by Andy G0FTD:-
__________
" VK5QX sent:-
> 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.
Well you tell me.
After all it was the Australian delegates that went there with the
*intention* of voting for no change.
The *boffins* must have had their *original* reasons before they changed
their minds.
I wonder what they were ?
- Andy -
__________
I have to wonder whether Andy has some kind of persecution complex as
regards this matter. He does not seem to accept the very facts of life
that things will not always be exactly as we may wish.
Perhaps he needs to be taken aside and the explanations given to him in a
manner such as we would do with a little child.
I have taken time, with several bulletins, to be patient and explain to
him somewhat of the nature of the ITU conferences. He still does not seem
to understand. So, let's try just once more.
EVERY country goes to these events with their OWN agenda as to what they
would like to have happen.
Sometimes the background to the various cases developed for consideration
are extremely complicated and based also on the particular conditions
applicable to the country concerned.
Unless you are directly involved with such matters it would often be a
completely worthless exercise to try and analyse the reasons, diplomatic,
political and technical, that lie behind development of a particular case.
HOWEVER, the delegations also go with a practical approach and usually
with an understanding that, to achieve some kind of reasonable result,
they will almost undoubtedly need to modify their stance and thus allow a
compromise to the maximum feasible benefit for ALL.
If this were not the case there would be no reason to have ANY conferences
and complete anarchy and chaos would reign. Every country would simply go
ahead and do whatever they liked.
(By the way, it would also seem that even where the possibility of
resolution is not obvious they seem to eventually find ways of dealing
with a problem.)
It was pointed out that Australia initially took a viewpoint to the effect
that the proposed changes regarding the 40 metre band were not necessary.
(That would obviously have been based on a particular understanding of
conditions applicable to Australia.)
It is surely reasonable, as already explained, for delegations to be able
to change their minds based on the discussion and negotiations that occur
at the conferences. That is what it is all about, and what on earth is
wrong with such an approach ?
In many cases such situations as do occur turn out to be a learning
experience for many of those involved.
What is more! Why on earth is Andy bleating so much regarding a change of
mind on the part of the Australian delegates?
And so what, if they did change their minds? Region 1 has, seemingly,
obtained what was wanted for the Amateur Radio operators there.
It is only reasonable to allow people to change their minds on any subject
if a suitable case for change is made.
It also appears that we (Australian) operators will eventually benefit to
some degree as a result of the final decisions made.
IF there had been no comment made at all about Australia's original stance
Andy would apparently have had nothing at all to worry or whinge about.
Instead, he should possibly be praising the Australian delegation for
being flexible enough to change their position. Who knows, they may even
have gone to the lengths of strongly supporting the final move when it
came to the vote.
I have to query as to whether there may also have been quite number of
other countries who were against the original proposals for change.
Why don't you try and find out, Andy, and then ago ahead and lambast all
those other countries that may not have gone to the conference with the
best interests of G0FTD in mind ?
Anyway, WHAT THE HECK IS ANDY'S BLEATING REALLY ABOUT? They (the Region 1)
operators apparently now have something along the lines of what they
wanted.
I have to suspect that he either just wants something to grizzle about or
simply wants to stir up argument.
Either way it seems to be a childish thing to do.
As to Australia's reasons for initially opting for no change what does it
really matter?
As far as I am concerned that is the end of this nonsense instigated by
Andy. I can only hope that some people may have gained at least a little
value as to some understanding of how the ITU conferences work.
There is certainly a great deal more organisation behind the scenes should
people wish to go deeper into how all of this works.
As another aside, the Vice-President of the IARU, David Wardlaw VK3ADW has
been a personal friend of mine for many years. As a member of the VK3
State Council and also as President of the VK5 Divisional Council I have
spent time working with him, and others, with regard to similar matters as
discussed above.
David was also a long-serving Federal President of the WIA and has made a
major personal contribution to Amateur Radio as a whole over his years of
involvement with the hobby.
Regards,
Ian
__________
73 de Ian, VK5QX
@ VK5LZ.#ADL.#SA.AUS.OC
19 July 2003
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
