Do we need the RNLI?

[ QUOTE ]
That is the point I am making - why on earth shouldn't yachts people pay for the rescue service?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok - senario for you ... assume that the RNLI will levy a £100 charge to tow you back to the nearest port.

Your on a little day trip from Yarmouth to Weymouth, little breeze so you motor the first bit ... about 10 miles south of St Albans head your prop gets fouled, and despite a swim you cannot free it - so no engine. ... ok, no problem, you're on a sailing boat - get sailing ... fine, but the wind is only a F2 and it is now 14:00, it is gonna take you 7-8hrs to get into Weymouth. A few hours later and the tide is now against you and the wind dropping off (as it so often does in the evening). You've not night sailed before ... it is still a way to go, but your VMG is now negative (no wind and adverse tide).

If you were experienced then a watch over night might be ok, but you have friends onboard with children, who although not scared are definatly getting restless.

£100 may not seem a lot (what do the french charge?) but knowing you will be charged could make you delay a "rescue" that could have been resolved quickly and easily at the time, with less "stress".

I'm happy in the knowledge that we do contribute to the RNLI and will have NO problem asking for assistance if the situation gets out of my control or too uncomfortable for the crew. (and I'll add here that I have had the drive shaft drop out of the gearbox, just sailed back in. I have grounded and eventually got ourselves off and numerous other silly things - I call it experience!)
 
Keep it as it is.
Loads of public awareness compared with other countries which urely must help keep casualies down.
In addition the lifeboats are crewed by those who are keen, experienced and want to do it. Other countries, if they have a service at all, have crews who are paid. And we all know the variances in dedication when that happens.
A volunteer is worth 10 pressed men.
 
I did think about the "Think twice before setting sail" ... but I don't mean just in marginal conditions .. someone said (I think on here) that you shouldn't do things you don't have experience of ... that is rather difficult because in order to experience "it" you have to do it ...
I would hope that everyone thinks twice before going out to sea/harbour/lake/pond but if the lack of "free" rescue service prevents some from enjoying boating I believe that to be of detriment to the sport.
I feel it is similar to the patrol service clubs provide for their racing fleets - they are there to help you when the sh*t hits the fan and extrordinary things happen (we had a 505 dismast a few weeks ago, at the same time we had an inversion - another clubs patrol boat helped out, we would do/have done the same - no charge)
 
Brilliant - you could extend this to all walks of life and set aside a day to celebrate it - say May 1st and have a catchy slogan "From each according to his ability..." or something. I can't believe no one has thought of this before.
 
Well why don't you give your money to the Charities you feel strongly about? I'm sure that most boat owners donate or make some other contribution to other charities as well as the RNLI. Nobody is forcing you to make contributions. You also keep on mentioning " The Rich Boat Owners". Are we? Are you?

If I were going to give money to a charity it certainly would not be the RNLI which actually subsidies relatively well off people.
Sure lots of boat owners throw a couple of quid or much more in the charity collecting box BUT so do lots of little old ladies, romantics or people who are fooled into thinking it is a worth while cause. I think there was an argument historically for this freebie to the boating industry but is there still? I really question the whole charitable status. If you have dosh to own a boat then it is up to you to pay to get your self rescued - life saving excepted.
There is an attitude in some previous posts of I have made a donation (how much?) so I deserve to be rescued at less than the commercial rate...
 
[ QUOTE ]
If you have dosh to own a boat then it is up to you to pay to get your self rescued - life saving excepted.

[/ QUOTE ]
What is the difference between a tow home and saving a life? If your boat is disabled and you drift off out to sea ... at what point is your life officially in danger ...
Whilst I agree that we should pay for the service I disagree with the "per incident" charging scheme ... perhaps the RNLI should be more like the AA/RAC ... where you become a member for a fixed fee each year ....?
 
Re: I hope not to need them.

Fact is I hope not to need any service provided by any of the charities I subscribe to.

We are lucky to have an RNLI service that is so well funded. You only have to compare and contrast the running of the RNLI with HMCG to see how a government run service compares. The CG is subject to the same inititatives, cut backs and rationalisations that beset every other government department. The moral of the people I talk to there is not of the highest. RNLI moral seems pretty high and there's no sign of cutting back the quality of equipment to make some minister look good.

I wouldn't use the RNLI as a kind of AA service but if lives are at risk it's nice to know that people who care are an option and that they've got some really good kit to work with. That being said. Should I find myself in a mayday situation I'd rather they sent a helicopter.
 
"why on earth shouldn't yachts people pay for the rescue service?"

Surely we do. Either through donations or membership subs. True - there isn't a compulsory fee, payable on rescue, which is what you appear to be advocating but the RNLI have healthy finances and have repeatedly taken the view that they are happy with the status quo.

I'm very heartened by the fact that there is still so much goodwill around. Long may people continue to give whatever thay can - time or money - to assist those who are in distress. It makes everyone feel good - and you can't put a price on that.
 
Free Speech, freedom of determination, freedom of action

All are your entitlements in a free society.

Just as you have a right to express this opinion, so too do people who give of their money to whatever cause have a right so to do. Similarly, those who put to sea willingly and for the benefit of others without asking for reward have a right so to do also.

I tow a retired D class lifeboat around the area of our fundraising branch and with it is a placard from the Lytham St Annes station from where it came. On this are listed 26 rescues of which only two were private vessels. The rest, as at most stations were beach rescues or fishing boats in trouble. So how does your arguement stack up against that?

The RNLI exists because of the generosity of it's benefactors and the dedication of it's crews. Why would you want to change that?

Steve Cronin
 
Re: Yes.

Upgraded our membership when we bought a boat and look at it as just another necessary cost to keep afloat - I couldn't look a volunteer in the face if he (or she) had risked their life to save me and I hadn't paid a penny.

That said, I'm amazed how many water users aren't members - PWC users and windsurfers etc.!!!
 
Michael, I would be totally in favour of the state intervening and funding the service in its entirety, if the present system didn't work. If, for whatever reason, the present system became untenable (perhaps because of an extension of the issues that Woofy raised) then it would be appropriate for the service to be run by the RN or MCA or whoever.

It seems to me that a group of motivated people bonded by a common purpose is intrinsically better than a body that is administered by people who may not share that motivation.

As others have said, if it ain't bust........
 
Yes, we do need the RNLI. Even if there was not a single other reason for retaining the present arrangement than to keep the service out of government or commercial hands it would be more than enough.

The RNLI is a shining example of what can be achieved by dedicated, knowledgeable people unfettered by political expediency and ineptitude or greedy short term commercialism.

Why do you have a problem with other people's willingnes to support an institution that exists on voluntary contribution in the very best tradition of this nation?

The notion that only the rich sail or own a boat is narrow minded and ill informed. Perhaps you would just prefer it to be true.
 
Yes,

Thats my big issue with Eloise_Ex_Bambola's argument....

We could do with a new lounge carpet, replacing the soffits, buying a more reliable car for SWMBO, clearing the credit card etc etc...all of which we could probably afford to do if we didn't have a boat..... instead we choose to scrape every penny together to afford to keep the boat... .....

I think the assumption that all boat owners are rich is seriously flawed....
 
I support the RNLI fully in their present modus operandi & others here have put the arguement better than I can.The arguement that sailing is a rich man's pastime may have been true some time ago, but on the East coast for instance there are alot of people sailing boats that cost no more than than it costs for say 2 or 3 years of watching a Premiership football match.
 
Re: Yes.

The concept of the RNLI being free is mistaken, the money comes from somewhere, Not necessarily the end user but from the thousands of volunteers who give up their time to attend, maintain, collect from door to door and the miriad of tasks to keep the service running. This is how the insurance industry likes to portray itself, large numbers pay in and the payout for the few is there when required. We need them and value them, I for one regularly work to raise funds. If it ever became a salaried organisation.........
One volunteer is worth 10 pressed men and our RNLI and the excellent service they provide is evidence. Their service is to save lives, saving the boat is part of the comradeship of the sea. My boat keeps my overdraft afloat and is fully insured. How many, at the thought of a £1000 bill for a tow even if covered, would leave it until the situation was confirmed as life threatening. Who would you call / bill to save the child on a lilo and what about respose times etc. Just my little rant, I have never needed them but it is reassuring to know they are there in addition to any other.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The notion that only the rich sail or own a boat is narrow minded and ill informed. Perhaps you would just prefer it to be true.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point I am failing to make is that anyone who chooses to own a boat is not poor - not in Somalia - Eritrea etc meaning of the word - there is sufficient disposable income to have a hobby - with disposable income. This hobby has a rescue service which is paid for to some extent by people with pretty romantic notions of 'the sea'.

I for one would prefer that the charitable status money of the RNLI went to Medicines sans Frontier or Help the Children or Pakistan.

Of course the RNLI works well - the volunteers are in fact paid per shout - why not? But in this day & age, in a highly commercial industry, should everybody in UK waters choosing to go sailing have the rescue service subsidised to some extent by 'little old ladies' and charitable discounts?

Would that money be better spent on more important charities? Have a look at the excellent RNLI advertising - tugs at the heart strings - and the purse - most people have only so much to give to charity and is this really a charity? Fishermen or yachtsmen - all are out there because they choose to be.
 
[ QUOTE ]
there are alot of people sailing boats that cost no more than than it costs for say 2 or 3 years of watching a Premiership football match.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or in my case a LOT less.
 
[ QUOTE ]
This hobby has a rescue service which is paid for to some extent by people with pretty romantic notions of 'the sea'.

[/ QUOTE ]

And why not? For many of us those romantic notions are why we started sailing. Are we to be denied any kind of thoughts that are not wholly rational?

[ QUOTE ]
I for one would prefer that the charitable status money of the RNLI went to Medicines sans Frontier or Help the Children or Pakistan.


[/ QUOTE ]

Then by all means support them but just because you would 'prefer' donations to go there does not mean they should. I am sure you would prefer RSPCA, Canine Defence League, Save the Church Spire et al donations to go to them as well. They are all far less 'worthy' in global terms. I will refrain from comments about Pakistan's needs. That is a subject for the Lounge.

[ QUOTE ]
subsidised to some extent by 'little old ladies' and charitable discounts?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is their choice and right to give where they want and the attempt to characterise RNLI giving in such an emotive way is clumsy at best. To suggest, as you do they are somehow being 'fooled' is disgraceful. I dare say that you could remove all the donations by 'little old ladies' from the equation and affect things not at all.

[ QUOTE ]
Would that money be better spent on more important charities?

[/ QUOTE ]

Possibly, yes, but we each of us decide for ourselves the issue of importance. It begs the questioin whether the donations that go to RNLI would find there way into the organisations you approve of if there were no RNLI to give to. I doubt it.

It would be a dangerous path to start down to attempt to direct charitable giving by closing those you do not approve of to try to force donations to be redirected to charities you do approve of.

No, the RNLI has no case to answer nor do the huge numbers of their supporters.
 
\"I for one would.....\"

"I for one would prefer that the charitable status money of the RNLI went to Medicines sans Frontier or Help the Children or Pakistan."

And I for one would not have given the money to the RNLI if I thought someone was going to arbitarily divert it elswhere. Instead I would cancel my other charity donations to build an emergency rescue fund, just in case I needed rescue from being cut off on cliffs at high water, or my daughter got caught in the undertow whist bathing on a beach.

So where does this leave your argument?

Donate double to YOUR chosen charities immediately, on MY behalf.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top