A lot of unnecessary UK Ground RT
Look at the amount of RT required on the ground and many regional UK airports, required seemingly for 'ar*e-covering' reasons. With the current concern about rwy incursions, surely the emphasis should be on 'less is more' - the tendency for the important bits of info to get lost in the meleé is increasing.
I mean no criticism of the ATCOs thumbing the mic; the whole developing trend is widespread across the UK and smacks to me of someone somewhat removed from operational activities jerking their knee rather vigorously.
Example, compare EDI to AMS.
EDI: "EZY 123 After inbound 146 Taxi Hold D1 Runway 24 via E1 cross undershoot runway 12 QNH 1019"
AMS: (from 'H' cul-de-sac, on the opposite side of the airfield): "Taxi Runway 24"
Standard taxi routings and removal of all unnecessary bits of RT (checking the QNH again? Make sure you hold short of everything! Watch those wingtips! Cleared to cross that closed runway!" do wonders for clarity of RT.
I promise you I have had colleagues in that very situation forget to readback the most important 'hold short' condition of the clearance in all the mess, and amongst the (unnecessarily) saturated RT it has gone unnoticed by ATC.
What's more important, actually ensuring good communication and preventing runway incursions, or making sure that when there is one it isn't the manager's fault - because he thought of insisting on inserting seven different ar*e-covering instructions in the taxi clearance?
A rhetorical question to end on, but thoughts (and/or more enlightened background) please...