Ofcom

MikeGodsell · Post by **MikeGodsell** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 3:05 am

In my rage at the arrogance of Ofcom I came close to insulting John Brady. John please accept my sincere apology. I know that you contentiously and diligently negotiated with Ofcom and achieved a good result for the LAA.
What fuels my anger however is the belief that Ofcom had another agenda, which your negotiations inadvertently facilitated. Their two 'consultations' had only one purpose, to flush out opposition to their outrageous proposals, so as to plan their attack on us. Negotiating with Ofcom gives them political legitimacy, and a precedent is established whereby spectrum pricing becomes a perfectly reasonable proposition. From now on they can pick us off one by one. What is a good result for the LAA is also a nail in the coffin for GA.
As an aside: Have any of you looked in the eyes of a traffic warden as he writes the ticket? Do you remember the look on the face of a CAA surveyor who has found a non-conformity? What about your school prefects? Or the council planner who turns down your application to build an aeroplane in your garage? Or a politician weeping crocodile tears as he increases VAT? There is an unhealthy glint in their eyes that hints at the exultation of exercising power, and a disregard for their victims. Too many things in our country are controlled now by those sorts of people.

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 6:30 pm

Thanks for all your comments. To answer a few:

There is no point in complaining to EASA as this is a national matter and it is of no concern to them.

AOPA have been involved in the meetings with OFCOM and the consultations but they made their own response wheras we were included (led actually) the GAA response which represents 70,000 individual members.

Yes the industry is being picked off bit by bit. When OFCOM had a go at maritime VHF the RNLI savaged them. When they included aviation radar in their consultation, NATS said they would move their radars to France and take OFCOM to judicial review (they could afford that). Both those were dropped.

Agreed that Ofcom is a revenue stream. From their annual accounts they took £132m in the year to March 2010 but after own costs their surplus was only £11m. Not a great apparant efficiency

John

Bill Scott · Post by **Bill Scott** » Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:51 pm

John,
Thanks for an informative response. The reaction from NATS is a classic!
It illustrates the farce that is Britain (formerly Great).
As for the OFCOM profit on return..... Very efficient if you run the shop

Self financing body which produces a net return to the Exchequer.

steveneale · Post by **steveneale** » Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:05 am

John Brady wrote: Agreed that Ofcom is a revenue stream. From their annual accounts they took £132m in the year to March 2010 but after own costs their surplus was only £11m. Not a great apparant efficiency

John

Good info John, ta.

Had Ofcom not existed and that £132m been spent on simple goods and services the government would have received £20M in VAT. Had it all been spent on AVGAS they would have received £31m in duty as well as the VAT. That would be a tax take of £51M.

Why isn't Ofcom on Cameron's QUANGO hit list?

John Brady · Post by **John Brady** » Sat Dec 18, 2010 3:20 pm

It was Steve - during the election run up the Conservatives said they would abolish OFCOM. But then the Liberals said something about tuition fees too.

JB

J.C. · Post by **J.C.** » Sat Dec 18, 2010 9:16 pm

From where I'm sitting this is like giving the Giant a macdonalds to stave of his hunger, he'll be back soon to eat the boy. What we need is some-one called Jack and some beanseeds.

As for Cameron, his entire memory was obviously wiped clean one nanosecond after getting in to power.

Brian Hope · Post by **Brian Hope** » Sat Dec 18, 2010 10:51 pm

Speaking of our glorious leaders, did you hear about the guy who rang the Lib Dem office and asked for a copy of their manifesto, "I'm sorry but we've sold out" said the young lady on the end of the line, "I know" said the guy, "but I'd still like a copy of your manifesto".
Never a truer word.