What IARU "forgot" to tell...
<!A HREF="/news/?news=20180901&lang=en" TITLE="english">
This summer, the nice guys of IARU Region 1 have issued an unusual propaganda statement, translated into several languages,
in which, in addition to explaining the things they do and how cool they are, they point out that they are the ONLY ones that attend to the
meetings of the international bodies where ham radio issues are discussed, in clear allusion to the absence of EURAO in
these forums so far this year.
How the story has changed: from being the only representatives, to being the only attendees. Obviously they omit that EURAO
still has no place in ITU, in part thanks to its boycott.
But there are more things that they do not say and, for the sake of information transparency, it is good to know them. So we're going to tell you.
First: the appalling ridicule before the CEPT, which makes others feel embarrassed, withdrawing, less than a week before
the international meeting scheduled to discuss the issue in May, their "star" proposal on a new Entry Level License (ELL), with which they intended to copy the
English model of three types of amateur radio licenses, and that their national societies could organize the exams in order to attract new members, younger,
as a lifeline for amateur radio and, incidentally, the coffers of its business network.
The official reason, given by IARU for this withdrawal, was the lack of support from national administrations, when, precisely, its initial strategy consisted
in approving the ELL at European level in the CEPT, to then be able to press the adoption of such a license at the national level.
Total failure. They went for wool and they came out shorn. But about this, no word in its statement.
In fact, EURAO canceled its attendance at that meeting of the CEPT as soon as this point was removed of the agenda, otherwise, they could not have said that
"to be the only organisation present at these meetings".
Just a couple of months later, that statement has become false, since EURAO has participated in a meeting of the CEPT held at the end of September,
precisely on the following topic: 50-54 MHz. IARU recognizes it on its website and appreciate the cooperation of EURAO, but URE no word.
Second: the tricky extension of the 6 meters band to 50-54 MHz, to match it with the concession already enjoyed in Regions 2 and 3,
which also have it on a primary basis.
This is a very sweet segment of the spectrum, as we mentioned in a
previous article, in which the lobby of European companies related to defense
is not willing to give a millimeter. What's more, it has gone on the counterattack and is trying to reverse the situation: reduce the band that we radio amateurs
can currently use in Europe, which is: 50-52 MHz, on a secondary basis and only granted country by country.
Faced with this offensive, the IARU guys asked the others to move away and let professionals do, that is, they, in a battle more than lost,
before which they reacted with despair, improvising, in extremis, an alternative that could prevent another resounding failure.
The bright idea was to give up the 50-54 MHz extension and settle for keeping 50-52 MHz, but trying to scratch 500 KHz on a primary basis,
the segment 50.0-50.5 MHz. The thing looks bad and we'll see how the matter ends. It would not be surprising if they try to blame others. To themselves never!
Third: furthermore, we must say that one learns of these last-minute changes because the documents of the proposals are publicly exposed
on the CEPT website, not because the IARU Region 1 has communicated them to EURAO, despite what it promised in the report presented at the recent Region 3
conference held in Korea: "To avoid disagreement in front of CEPT, it was agreed to let EURAO have prior sight of proposed inputs to CEPT".
They also have not fulfilled what they promised in the last contribution just presented: "Radio Amateur applications below 9 KHz".
Although we are already habituated to their repeated defaults.
This being the case, IARU Region 1 can not be considered a reliable "partner". At least with its current directorate.
The quote from John C. Maxwell comes to mind: "When you make a commitment, you build hope. When you keep it, you build trust".
Fourth: the pamphlet does not mention the "occurrence" of the IARU Region 1 president, Don Beattie, G3BJ, of suppressing its Resolution 85-9.
Yes, yes, the one that refers to QSLs for non-members. The objective is no other than to cut to the bone with all the numerous claims they have received and
can no longer hide. Solution in the purest style "dead the dog is over the rage". Cool!
But if you thought you had already seen everything in this life, do not miss the next chapter of this series: to hide the measure, with all the impudence,
now they are studying how to disguise it as "environmental concern". Hallucinatory!
Fifth: Not a word, in the summery statement, about the wake-up call ITU has given them, publicly, about the use of the Z6 prefix
that illegally uses Kosovo and they had included in its website and in the DXCC.