Do you support the RNLI?

[Babylon]

Are you a UK- or Ireland-based sailor/boater and support the RNLI by way of regular DD donations?

A simple YES or NO please.

Don't need to know your justifications, nor if you sometimes put small change in the pub collection tin.

It would make for a more meaningful result if those living and sailing abroad didn't vote in the poll.

 

[PilotWolf]

Does that include Shoreline members - it's a regular payment after all. if you renew?

W

 

[Babylon]

Does that include Shoreline members - it's a regular payment after all. if you renew?

W

You decide.

In terms of the poll, I'm interested in what proportion of leisure sailors who sail/motor from here (rather than elsewhere on the watery surfaces of Earth) support the RNLI by regular (monthly, annual, etc) donations.

The size of the donation doesn't matter, nor what its called, just whether its set up as a regular payment.

 

[sailorman]

Yes but they do waste money.
i was present when a new lifeboat was trucked bfrom Poole to Ramsgate, launched & named by HM the Queen.
hauled out & returned to Poole.
With many RNLI bods there as one would expect, all stopping over
on expenses

 

[onenyala]

After seeing a BBC report on flooding featuring a reporter sitting in an RNLI inflatable being pushed around by three or four fully kitted out RNLI crew in water that looked about two feet dip I wonder why I am continuing to subscribe and will probably pull my subscription. I started subscribing originally because I believed the money was going to those in peril on the sea.

 

[sailorman]

After seeing a BBC report on flooding featuring a reporter sitting in an RNLI inflatable being pushed around by three or four fully kitted out RNLI crew in water that looked about two feet dip I wonder why I am continuing to subscribe and will probably pull my subscription. I started subscribing originally because I believed the money was going to those in peril on the sea.

Its like the old lady standing beside the road

 

[Boathook]

Might need them one day ! - though I hope not.

 

[MoodySabre]

After seeing a BBC report on flooding featuring a reporter sitting in an RNLI inflatable being pushed around by three or four fully kitted out RNLI crew in water that looked about two feet dip I wonder why I am continuing to subscribe and will probably pull my subscription. I started subscribing originally because I believed the money was going to those in peril on the sea.

When there were floods a couple of years ago and we had the same pictures I wrote to my MP asking why the RNLI weren't being paid for working alongside the other emergency services on inland disasters. Nothing changed of course.

 

[chanelyacht]

When there were floods a couple of years ago and we had the same pictures I wrote to my MP asking why the RNLI weren't being paid for working alongside the other emergency services on inland disasters. Nothing changed of course.

Many agencies aren't - mountain rescue, RNLI flood response, Red Cross flood rescue teams, etc.

Our own volunteer Coastie teams aren't exactly raking in the money...

Probably why most of them are a lot more effective than the Fire Service flood crews ;-/

UK emergency response as a whole is very much in the "broken but too difficult to fix" bracket.

 

[chanelyacht]

After seeing a BBC report on flooding featuring a reporter sitting in an RNLI inflatable being pushed around by three or four fully kitted out RNLI crew in water that looked about two feet dip I wonder why I am continuing to subscribe and will probably pull my subscription. I started subscribing originally because I believed the money was going to those in peril on the sea.

Odd.

People in peril in their own homes don't qualify then?

 

[Chrusty 1]

Odd.

People in peril in their own homes don't qualify then?

Obviously not in his view..................Though his view might change if it was his wife / mother / child that was in peril I suppose?

 

[Bru]

After seeing a BBC report on flooding featuring a reporter sitting in an RNLI inflatable being pushed around by three or four fully kitted out RNLI crew in water that looked about two feet dip I wonder why I am continuing to subscribe and will probably pull my subscription. I started subscribing originally because I believed the money was going to those in peril on the sea.

Odd.

Doubly or even trebly odd?

Would Onenyala prefer it if they weren't fully kitted out? Should they have been doing it in bare feet and underpants perhaps?

OR does the OP mean that the RNLI should sit around and do nothing (or more likely carry on with their day jobs) just because the problem is an excess of fresh water rather than on the briney deep?

Or is it because they were pushing a BBC reporter around (having, no doubt, nothing better to do at the time)? Thus, of course, getting the RNLI in the spotlight on telly (rather than the Coastguard, Fire Service, Mountain Rescue and so on) much to the delight of the marketing and fund raising teams back in Poole (cynical? moi? )

 

[chanelyacht]

Obviously not in his view..................Though his view might change if it was his wife / mother / child that was in peril I suppose?

Quite possibly.

Flood response is an area where the voluntary sector is ideal - it often requires a large number of resources, rarely needs an "immediate" response (i.e. you often get a few hours warning of a buildup) and the capital investment needed would mean that a lot of kit would be bought, stored and never used if left to local level.

 

[chanelyacht]

Doubly or even trebly odd?

Would you prefer it if they weren't fully kitted out? Should they have been doing it in bare feet and underpants perhaps?

OR do you mean that the RNLI should sit around and do nothing (or more likely carry on with their day jobs) just because the problem is an excess of fresh water rather than on the briney deep?

Or is it because they were pushing a BBC reporter around (having, no doubt, nothing better to do at the time)? Thus, of course, getting the RNLI in the spotlight on telly (rather than the Coastguard, Fire Service, Mountain Rescue and so on) much to the delight of the marketing and fund raising teams back in Poole (cynical? moi? )

No, I mean't that the OP stating that the RNLI working in flood scenarios should be a trigger for withdrawing his support for them was odd.

Of course the RNLI should be involved, they're the UK's largest boat asset - and of course in doing so should be properly equipped.

The "properly equipped" bit is a message I'm still hammering home after 20 years of flood rescue teaching - and still seeing regularly ignored during incidents (not by the RNLI).

 

[Bru]

No, I mean't that the OP stating that the RNLI working in flood scenarios should be a trigger for withdrawing his support for them was odd.

Oops, think I may have caused confusion by quoting the OP and your reply - my meaning was that I thought the OP was even odder than just the point you initially raised about it. I agree with you 100%

(Post edited for clarity)

 

[jamesjermain]

It puzzles me that anyone who goes boating should not support the RNLI. If it didn't exist it would have to be invented and probaly by the government whicfh would be a disaster.

Any organisation that operates without a competitive market is like to be inefficient to a greater or lesser degree. While, of course, the RNLI should spend our money as wisely as possible, the institution is lucky that it finds it quite easy to attract generous donations and is therefore able to run an exceptionally well trained, well supported and well equipped service.

It is also in a position to take on related tasks that other agencies find it difficult to provide and at which they have often proved spectacularly incompetent. Hence the Thames river service, the beach lifeguards and flood rescue.

It would be different if the service was underfunded, stretched to the limit and sacrificing its core duty of rescue at sea to do these jobs but that's not the case.

If you've got the funds, the people, the equipment, the training and a job to do, do it.

 

[chanelyacht]

It puzzles me that anyone who goes boating should not support the RNLI. If it didn't exist it would have to be invented and probaly by the government whicfh would be a disaster.

Any organisation that operates without a competitive market is like to be inefficient to a greater or lesser degree. While, of course, the RNLI should spend our money as wisely as possible, the institution is lucky that it finds it quite easy to attract generous donations and is therefore able to run an exceptionally well trained, well supported and well equipped service.

It is also in a position to take on related tasks that other agencies find it difficult to provide and at which they have often proved spectacularly incompetent. Hence the Thames river service, the beach lifeguards and flood rescue.

It would be different if the service was underfunded, stretched to the limit and sacrificing its core duty of rescue at sea to do these jobs but that's not the case.

If you've got the funds, the people, the equipment, the training and a job to do, do it.

All of which is correct, but what annoys me most is their attitude to other water rescue organisations - for example, their strapline that they are the [/] charity that saves life at sea. No, they are one of a number.

They sent a nasty letter round a while back threatening to sue independent LBs who used the word "lifeboat" in their fundraising - thankfully they were told where to go.

Many of the indies are in places the RNLI wouldn't cover, or withdrew from, and do an equal job with far less funding.

 

[sailorman]

All of which is correct, but what annoys me most is their attitude to other water rescue organisations - for example, their strapline that they are the [/] charity that saves life at sea. No, they are one of a number.

They sent a nasty letter round a while back threatening to sue independent LBs who used the word "lifeboat" in their fundraising - thankfully they were told where to go.

Many of the indies are in places the RNLI wouldn't cover, or withdrew from, and do an equal job with far less funding.

Thank you, enlightening

 

[fireball]

We do contribute to the RNLI on a monthly basis - it's not a lot and I doubt if anyone would notice if we stopped - but if we all contributed a little then it doesn't cost any one person a lot to have a well equipped rescue service.

We continue to support them - however I don't think the RNLI are without fault at all...
They do seem to be awash with money - high profile offices & "wasting" money as stated earlier in this thread ...
With regards to salaries - we cannot expect others to give a greater contribution than ourselves - so should we expect volunteers to do the daily tasks of management within the RNLI? Of course, there is always the question of the requirement of the post ...

on reflection I would prefer the RNLI to have excess funds through voluntary contributions rather than scrimping every last penny wondering if they could afford to launch ... and if our modest contribution aids keeping them as they are then I'm content to do so.

 

[fireball]

All of which is correct, but what annoys me most is their attitude to other water rescue organisations - for example, their strapline that they are the [/] charity that saves life at sea. No, they are one of a number.

They sent a nasty letter round a while back threatening to sue independent LBs who used the word "lifeboat" in their fundraising - thankfully they were told where to go.

Many of the indies are in places the RNLI wouldn't cover, or withdrew from, and do an equal job with far less funding.

I think that's indicative of the probably salaried roles within the RNLI that are not required. Why they should object to other people using the term "lifeboat" is beyond me - and their strapline is clearly (technically) incorrect.