sunnySA:
Is this the section that the NZ are relying on?
Not quite:
Under the NZ CARs, an Air Traffic Service (ATS) is defined as:
A generic term meaning variously, flight information service, alerting service, air traffic advisory service, air traffic control service (area control service, approach control service or aerodrome control service)
and in NZ AIP Gen 3.3-5 para 3.1.1
the ATS provided are:
(a) Air Traffic Control (ATC) services, to prevent collisions and maintain
an orderly flow of traffic....
(b) Area Flight Information Services (FIS), to give advice and information useful for the safe and efficient conduct of flights.
The above references clearly establish that FIS is a component of the overall definition for ATS.
Now for the references that requires clarification and which have been the subject of my posts; NZ AIP Gen 3.3-4 para 2.2.1 states (my emphases)
Airways provides ATS throughout the Auckland Oceanic FIR (NZZO),
EXCEPT in the Cook, McMurdo, Samoa, and Tonga sectors and at Norfolk Island
and
Norfolk Island
2.2.9 Norfolk Island is contained within the Auckland Oceanic FIR and
administered by Australia.
2.2.10 For Norfolk Island MBZ procedures refer to the Australian AIP and
use Norfolk Island aerodrome QNH
Given the wording above, particularly that under the provisions of NZ AIP Gen 3.3-4 para 2.2.1 which could be interpreted a number of ways, I believe it may not be unreasonable for the Airways Auckland Oceanic controller or FIC operator to assume that they
DID NOT HAVE a responsibility to pass the amended TAF on NF to the Pel Air aircraft as the FIS delivery responsibility for NF was allocated to Australia.
So if NZ believes FIS delivery responsibility for NF rests with Airservices, and Airservices believes FIS responsibility belongs to Airways NZ, then clearly this issue needs to be sorted out urgently by the respective Australian and NZ aviation agencies.
CaptainMidnight:
....I recall something in there saying that when a State accepts allocation of an FIR, they accept responsibility for the provision of ATS in it.
Yes, that is correct but as you can see from the AIP references above, NF appears to be excluded as a NZ ATS responsibility. However, I accept your previous comment that the NZ AIP may be wrong as the required coordination may not have occurred between the Australian and NZ agencies to facilitate the updating of the NZ AIP when either the FSU was decommissioned, or due to the subsequent changes to the ATC/FS structures and the abolition of the directed FIS service in favour of Flightwatch.