IFATCA Information Handbook

IFATCA Information Handbook

27TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil, 26-29 April 1988

WP No. 18

IFATCA Information Handbook

Introduction

Years ago, a special Sub-Committee was created within SC4, whose objective was the creation and the continuous updating of the Information Handbook. The idea was that the information contained in such an IHB would be of great value to the IFATCA Member Associations.

A recommendation from the 1985 Conference, states that the IHB must be continued in close co-operation with the RVP’s, has also to be considered.

The “Continuation of updating the IHB” was kept on the 1987/1988 work programme of Sub- Committee IHB.

Discussion

After the creation of the IHB, it was the responsibility of SC4 Sub-Committee IHB to update the IHB.

In accordance with the IFATCA Manual, Sub-Committee IHB distributed at the end of 1986 questionnaires to all MA’s, whose last received information dated from 1985. 43 questionnaires were distributed but until now, only 20 replies are received. The result is that the information of 32 MA’s out of 66 is either not contained in the IHB or is dated from 1985.

The problems with the update of the IHB were discussed with EVPP Wim Rooseman at the Hannover SC4 meeting (August 1987). The EVPP was provided with lists of the MA’s per Region which did not yet reply to the IHB questionnaire or which did not update their information since November 1985. In October the matter was brought to the order at the Amsterdam Council Meeting. The RVP’s were provided with a copy of the above mentioned list and were asked to contact those MA’s in order to urge them to reply to the IHB questionnaire. Sub-Committee IHB received one additional reply.

Conclusions

Due to the fact that an important part of the MAs is not replying to the IHB questionnaire, distributed by Sub-Comm. IHB, SC4 Sub-Com. IHB is not able to update the IHB. Since the reliability of the IHB depends upon such updating, it can be concluded that the value of the IHB has to be questioned. Sub-Committee IHB is not in the position, and has no possibility at its disposal to urge the MA’s to return their revised information.

It is the opinion of SC4 Sub-Committee IHB that, as the RVPs have a much better liaison with the MA’s, a better response to the questionnaire could be obtained if the RVPs act as a link between the MA’s and Sub-Committee IHB.

Recommendations

SC4 Sub-Committee IHB shall update the IHB by means of a questionnaire which will be distributed to the RVP’s every two years, starting in 1988, and this not later than July 1st, with the request that RVP’s return the answers to Sub-Committee IHB as soon as possible after their Regional Meeting or before December 1st, in case no Regional Meeting is held before this date.

It is recommended to conference that the updating of the IHB should remain an agenda item at each Regional Meeting.

It is recommended that the Executive Board tasks the RVP’s with the distribution and collection of the IHB questionnaires within their Region.

Last Update: September 20, 2020  

December 2, 2019   281   Jean-Francois Lepage    1988    

Comments are closed.


  • Search Knowledgebase