Charging for the weather

Press, 27 December 1985, Page 14

Charging for the weather

Airlines in New Zealand — and their passengers — face a fresh burden from January 1. Airlines have been told that they must begin paying for the weather forecasts that pilots receive before take-off. The airlines will have the choice of passing on the charge in higher fares and freight rates, or of absorbing the cost, to the detriment of profits, or of attempting to fly without forecasts. Passengers may be left wondering whether the airline with which they have chosen to fly can afford a forecast tor- the flight. Will it be proper to inquire before boarding an aircraft? The Weather Office said last January it was considering how charges might be made for the information it provides. The charge to airlines announced by the Ministry of Transport this week is not large — just under half a cent for every dollar of revenue earned from fares or freight. The principle is daunting. Are charges on the way for marine forecasts and mountain forecasts, or even for weather forecasts in general? Surely all weather forecasts have already been paid for through taxation. If there was some prospect of lower taxes thanks to the charge for forecasts the idea might have supporters. Alas, no such reduction is likely to show up. What happens if a forecast is wrong, and an aircraft is delayed or diverted by bad weather? Will an airline be able to sue the Weather Office to recover any loss of revenue? Will individual passengers be able to seek recompense for any inconvenience that an accurate forecast might have avoided? At the

very least, an airline that is the victim of an inaccurate forecast ought to be able to ask for a portion of its money back. Why should the charging stop with the forecasts from the Meteorological Service? A Government that has been ingenious in finding new ways to make money might well extend the principle to any supply of information — whether mail clearance times or road conditions. A charge could be made for the time and temperature information supplied from the Government Life Building in Cathedral Square. A weather forecast is an attempt to describe conditions ahead, in the interests of safety. So, too, are railway signals or traffic signs. The possibilities seem endless. Local authorities, for instance, might consider a 10-cents-in-the-slot arrangement for motorists wanting a green traffic light. In fairness to the charge for the weather service to pilots, the forecasts they receive are a good deal more detailed than the ordinary public forecasts. Against that, pilots and airlines are frequently the source of helpful information for weather forecasters, especially iei less accessible parts of the country. Perhaps tlie airlines have time, before January 1, to work out a scale of fees to be charged before pilots will provide information about conditions on routes they have just flown. Both sides in the weather information game could run up charges. Keeping track of the accounting would be a splendid way of creating jobs. An airline with observant and garrulous pilots might even come out showing a small profit.