What I hadn't realised was the war going on in the background...
'K', you see, is the new Regional Secondary Locator (RSL) for Cornwall ('Kernow', in the local language), a region in the SW of the UK that, a bit like Wales and Scotland, has had its own language, culture and identity. Again like Wales and Scotland, all these features have, from time to time, attracted the condemnation of England-based politicians.
 |
| King-sized hot air about, erm, something... |
In June 2014, the Poldhu Radio Society, through the RSGB, made a submission to OFCOM that, as Cornwall had been granted National Minority Status in the UK, it ought to have a separate regional locator - "K." If this sequence of events is correct, then the RSGB could hardly claim to have been ignorant of it.
The PARC's account of events can be read here.
In what must be a record five days, this application for the use of 'K' was rejected by OFCOM, on the supposed grounds that confusion could ensue if other counties started asking for recognition. This altogether missed the point about National Minority Status, which isn't something awarded to any of the "other counties" it claims to be worried about. Indeed, according to the PARC, the government has issued a statement that it has no intention to award such status to other counties.
The RSGB do not seem to have said much about this, and there is nothing published online to suggest they were in any way disappointed. Nor indeed that they were glad of the rejection. They did say they would support "temporary" use, for special events and the like.
According to a report in a local (web presented) newspaper, dated October 16 2014, it seems OFCOM had by then, in response to a new submission by PARC, made an announcement that seems to have taken the RSGB - but few others - by total surprise: it announced that the 'K' regional secondary locator was to be approved for Cornwall.
Two weeks later, in a release dated 31st October 2014, the RSGB issued releases saying they were "confused", and wanted a "significant number" (it does not tell us how many) of representations taken into account, and OFCOM's "unexpected" decision "reviewed."
At this point, the RSGB seem to have changed tack, because at no point were they unaware that the application had been made - yet now they say they are surprised by the unexpectedness of a decision. Clearly, with an application pending, they could never have been genuinely surprised. One is therefore led to believe that what they found unexpected was the granting of the 'K' RSL - and that as a result, they seem not to have supported it.
The latest available RSGB minutes I can find - which contain scant information for the plebs like me who pay these people's lucrative allowances and (for some) very generous wages - seems to show the RSGB is getting rather hot and bothered by the whole "K" affair. It has started using words like "escalation" and terms like "deep concern", whilst OFCOM are consulting lawyers.
Quite exactly what is going on between Cornwall, the RSGB and OFCOM is not very clear, to say the least. However, "disagreement" seems to be a word that covers it. It seems very odd to me that there possibly could be "deep concern" over a simple regional locator - for a region that has, with no doubt - an unique identity traceable back over many centuries.
As the RSGB is not very keen on detailed minutes of meetings, I've made an application under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to OFCOM, asking for all information held by them that amounts, in practice, to copies of all correspondence between the RSGB and OFCOM.
In 20 working days' time - but hopefully less - we'll have much more to go on.
In the meantime, I'm very much hoping this type of rubbish hasn't been typical of the "significant number" of concerns the RSGB claims has been raised with it. I personally think the comments about the 'K' locator being all about "vanity" by a "minority" is utterly misguided and very regrettable.
And quite why anyone intelligent enough to hold and use a ham radio licence would be caused "considerable confusion" by the new RSL is, well, beyond me, for sure.
On hunting down some more background to this matter, there is a RSGB 'guidance' to members on how they might respond to the OFCOM consultation on several matters related to the licence last year. The society took a particularly strident stance against RSL changes, which can be found amongst all this stuff. Being quite so strident, and often appearing to throw mud at OFCOM, was probably not a very good idea.
My expectation is that, if someone were to key-up with the callsign, they would be operating pile-ups for weeks on end. Good luck to them, for it harms nobody and raises the profile of Cornwall considerably.
UPDATE:
I like to think the RSGB should be properly accountable to its members. Usually, this differs markedly from the impression I get from the society of what it thinks accountability looks like. I didn't like the lack of detail on this issue, because the society is meant to be representing its members - and not a vocal, resistant subset of it who seem to object to the 'K' allocation.
I asked why the RSGB was expressing "deep concern" and asking OFCOM about "escalation"(the context of which was obscured by the lack of detail in the minutes.) Here is what Graham Coomber has to say just yesterday. Needless to say, I remain unimpressed about the claims of "numerous" and "a number" of members protesting about this, whilst somehow not knowing how many that was. More than 1? Less than 10? It's pretty likely it was a very low number, I'd say. How about any that supported it?
Without being able to check the history of what OFCOM have done with RSL licence issues in the past, it may well be true that OFCOM haven't helped matters by not having a clear and consistent view of how licences are issued in relation to the various UK regions.
We'll see how this response compares to the material from the RSGB that OFCOM must release very shortly. This morning (06/05.2015) OFCOM sent me an acknowledgment of receipt for the FoIA request - after I had prompted them to - only to find it was addressed to a mysterious "Ms. Tilt." At least it wasn't "Mr. Annoyingbastard!" OFCOM "recalled" the erroneous piece of e-paper within two minutes.
"Thank you for your note.
To summarise the position, a number of our Members (and I do not have a note of how many)raised with us the fact that Ofcom was intending to issue a permanent RSL to be used, in a yet to be determined way, within Cornwall without consultation, at a time when the status of RSLs were the subject of the Ofcom licence consultation. As you know, that consultation attracted a significant response from the amateur radio community, and the Board is pleased that Ofcom have listened to the opinions they received and acted upon them. It is not normal for decisions related to matters out for consultation to be made during the period of consultationand this is one of the key issues that we have asked Ofcom to comment on. The Board's concern is, and always has been, the absence of due process in how Ofcom arrived at its decision, and we have simply asked Ofcom to rectify that situation.
Best Wishes Graham Coomber, G0NBI"
No comments:
Post a Comment