Reviewing the introduction of the Foundation License.

Foundations of Amateur Radio The history of the evolution of amateur licensing is a nebulous affair, told and re-told, moulded, changed and interpreted by the story tellers along the way. There is an on-going debate about how the restructure of the licensing regime in Australia, in 2005, has affected our hobby. In 2005, after a 10 month review period, three classes of license were established, a new Foundation class, an a re-imagined Standard and Advanced class, using existing novice and novice limited licenses to create the Standard class and combining limited, intermediate and unrestricted licenses into the Advanced class. I've touched on this subject before, back in 2011, when I noted that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. The ACMA published the review in May of 2004. It summarises the responses about the introduction of the Foundation licensing option. It opens with, "Over two-thirds of submissions were in favour of the introduction". It goes on to say that the most common reason for support was the need to make the amateur service more accessible and cited that the Foundation class then introduced in the UK was the appropriate standard. The majority of respondents suggested that the maximum transmitter output should be 100 Watts PEP and suggested 80m, 40m, 15m, 10m, 6m, 2m and 70cm as the appropriate bands. Also of interest is that 39% of respondents were in favour of a two-tier licensing structure, where 24% were in favour of a three-tier structure. The ACMA report also mentions that many respondents suggested that the foundation license should not be renewed without the licensee being re-examined. If you're familiar with the restrictions and obligations of the Foundation License then you'll recognise that some of these responses were agreed to and some rejected. I've not included the full report, it goes to 15 pages, but there are some other interesting things in the ACMA report. The ACMA notes that the main reason cited for requiring a Foundation licensee to be re-examined was to promote the license as a "stepping stone" to amateur radio operation. It notes that while there are provisions in the Act for such a re-examination, where there are reasonable grounds to believe that a qualified operator would be unable to achieve satisfactory results. The ACMA notes that none of the current amateur licensing options requires an amateur operator to be re-examined regularly. I wonder if we actually forced all amateurs to re-do their license, how many would actually pass? I know I would. There are other interesting things afoot. There is discussion today about allowing Foundation Licensees to use digital modes, but there is a move to require that it be added to the syllabus before that is permitted. Of course there is a parallel to make, none of the current licensees have any such formal training, why should a Foundation Licensee be "special" and require extra training. I've been asked what I think about privileges and the Foundation License. To be clear, I'm perfectly happy with my privileges. I have yet to experience all that Amateur Radio offers, and by turning my operating power to half the permitted level, 5 Watts, I'm learning specifically what works and what doesn't. I'm learning about propagation, about antennas, about operating techniques and about patience. I'm sure that this stands me in good stead wherever I go. One final comment, the ACMA report references a submission by a group called CQVK. I managed to track down the 112 page submission and have uploaded it to the F-troop website, the home of the weekly net in which New and Returning Hams can get together every week. Have a look at the ACMA report and the CQVK report at http://ftroop.vk6.net. As I've said before, those who forget history are doomed to repeat it. Let's not. I'm Onno VK6FLAB