RadioBanter - View Single Post - RAC Bulletin - Industry Canada Posts Responses to RAC Recommendations on Morse Code

January 20th 05, 03:54 PM

Leo wrote:

On 20 Jan 2005 02:15:19 -0800, wrote:

Leo wrote:

The following bulletin was sent out today by the Radio Amateurs of
Canada HQ:

Great stuff, Leo! Thanks for posting it.

After following the link and reading, I see a couple of interesting
points:

1) The expressed support for reduction of code testing in Canada is
overwhelming. A clear mandate from those who commented.

I found that quite surprising as well - the original RAC survey (which
formed the basis for the recommendations made to IC) showed that
around 66% of the Amateur community was in favour of retiring Morse as
a mandatory requirement.

The comments to IC on those recommendations were an amazing 123 to 19
in favour of dropping code - a significant increase.

2) The proposal, if I understand it correctly, does not completely
eliminate Morse Code testing. Instead, it offers alternative ways of
getting a license, with or without a code test.

Correct - but I suspect that this was an effort by the RAC to try and
accomodate the wishes of as much of their membership as possible
(which was not too well received, based on the responses...).
Actually, they exceeded the request of IC considerably - the question
was whether to retain Morse, but the RAC took it a step further and
used it as a platform to reform the entire license structure. It is
unlikely that this will be done in the short term - to quote IC:

".....the RAC proposal went substantially beyond the issue of Morse
code, and made recommendations to modify the existing amateur
certificate structure through the introduction of a new certificate
(Intermediate) as well as a general increase in the pass level for
obtaining the existing basic and advanced certificates. While these
recommendations received various levels of support as indicated in the
comments received, it is not clear whether each element of the
proposal can be entertained without the benefit of a more
comprehensive certificate review, and substantial regulatory
amendments to accommodate an additional amateur certificate."

3) The comment period was only 60 days long, and only about 150 people
(mostly already-licensed amateurs, I think) commented.

That's true - although the opportunity to comment was not limited to
the Amateur community, few (if any) others showed any interest.

60 days is plenty of time for a subject of this level of signifigance
to the public - we get things done efficiently up here!

One has to keep moving, lest they freeze? ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -