QNH
When the procedures and R/T were revamped in 1997, the QNH was discussed for hours. It got up, as it was an ICAO recommendation. One of the points that failed to be understood by the CASA rep on that working group was that "Area QNH" is information and as such should not be a readback. He did not really understand and now many read back the AQNH! Don’t know if that was the intent, but it certainly is the result. Everybody was just too busy to fully work thru the PIR of those changes.
READBACKS
Major problem is that many just don’t understand the system and what is needed, hence the default position of reading everything back. (which was warned of in the 97 working group discussions) Some even readback traffic info... give me a break! It is just not required!
ATC STAFF LEVELS
Have to agree that there is a problem in Oz, and the real problem started way back in the early 90s when we saw the bulk introduction and use of re-transmission. Many pilots don't understand the concept and sadly there are some controllers that can’t seem to use it efficiently. Once I thought it was the system, but on different days with different controllers it can be very different.
CULTURE
Like it or not there is a different culture in every countries ATC world. My quote is some years old, but there is nothing to suggest it has changed much. Everyone is just too obsessed with procedures and getting it right by the book when really it is all about communicating in a professional manner. Maybe if the AG's Dept got out of writing many of Oz documents it might improve??
We can only do our best and work within the guidelines we have…..