Do you support the RNLI?

[Sans Bateau]

Everyone who goes to sea should voluntarily donate to RNLI, through conscience.

We should all be very pleased RNLI are over funded, the option may well be, RNLI gets short of funds, goes to Government for bail out, the Gov says OK, but ALL boat owners have to pay, Ooo! a good reason to have boats registered to ensure they do pay. Bang goes freedom.

 

[A1Sailor]

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.

How do you plan to use the money? Save up and buy a liferaft? You might have one already, of course. You'll need an outboard for getting ashore.

 

[King Penguin]

I'm proud to be a member and always fly the little RNLI flag under my yacht club burgee...........not that it matters, but I figure that if I ever need rescuing, they'll see I'm a member...........

 

[Sailfree]

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.

Thanks for your informative posts on the subject.

IMHO the RNLI do a great job but its the bit that they must be beyond criticism that I find difficult.

In the other thread a number (including you and Searush) have posted informative posts that explain how good their new craft is but unfortunately others treat the RNLI as a sacred cow and not to be discussed or commented on and unfortunately can only resort to impinging the value of any contributor that dares mention any view other than the RNLI are perfect.

 

[snowleopard]

It would make for a more meaningful result....

You'd probably get a more useful result if you said why you want to know and whether you count the occasional couple of coppers in a collecting box in the same category as an annual subscription.

 

[snowleopard]

Everyone who goes to sea should voluntarily donate to RNLI, through conscience.

A (non-boaty) friend was collecting door-to-door. I was surprised to hear that quite a lot of people declined to contribute 'because I don't go to sea'. I find it strange that people would only give to a charity if they stand to benefit from it.

 

[Koeketiene]

IMHO the RNLI do a great job but its the bit that they must be beyond criticism that I find difficult.

+1

In a health society, no-one should be beyond criticism.

 

[Koeketiene]

A (non-boaty) friend was collecting door-to-door. I was surprised to hear that quite a lot of people declined to contribute 'because I don't go to sea'. I find it strange that people would only give to a charity if they stand to benefit from it.

It's the same argument people use when they say they resent paying income tax because they do not use this or that funded from general taxation.

 

[Flying Penguin]

A (non-boaty) friend was collecting door-to-door. I was surprised to hear that quite a lot of people declined to contribute 'because I don't go to sea'. I find it strange that people would only give to a charity if they stand to benefit from it.

Well it's probably either that or "get the **** off my doorstep and stop bothering me or I'll release the rotweiler"....

Personally, if I'm not interested I just shut the door rather than make up excuses.

 

[sighmoon]

I fear I shall be lambasted for admitting it, but no, I don't. I'm happy to buy cakes from the RNLI bake sale, but I don't subscribe.

The RNLI's activities are not constrained by lack of funding. More money would not equate to more lives saved. It costs about £18,000 per life saved (their stats). Though there are exceptions (like the people in flooded homes) most of them are knowingly taking part in a risky activity. Meanwhile, £15 a month buys food, shelter and education for an Indian orphan who's circumstances are no fault of his own - seems much better value from a charitable donation.

I know a lot of people consider their RNLI sub to be a sort of insurance policy, rather than a charitable donation, and that's up to them, but I don't believe giving money makes a significant difference to the probability of my life being saved.

 

[bigwow]

I know a lot of people consider their RNLI sub to be a sort of insurance policy, rather than a charitable donation, and that's up to them, but I don't believe giving money makes a significant difference to the probability of my life being saved.

We'll all pay for that then

 

[toad_oftoadhall]

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.

Interesting. I can't find anything about it online. Can you provide a bit more detail?

 

[glashen]

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.

I attended a excellent talk by a member of the RNLI flood rescue teams it was about 18 months ago but if I recollect correctly the funding for the flood rescue teams is separate from the rest of the RNLi this is partly backed up by this statement from the RNLI website

RNLI The Flood Rescue Team relies upon voluntary donations, and is kindly supported by Toolstation. The team does not receive government funding for responding to UK floods. However, the cost of international deployment is borne by the UK Department for International Development.

The reason for setting up the flood rescue teams as I understand it was to develop the necessary expertise and rescue methods to undertake this sort of rescue in the best way since the RNLI were called on anyway when floods occurred. Surely it is eminently sensible to develop this expertise and have the trained volunteers and equipment to do it.

I would suggest to "onenyala" if you are worried that your money is not going to save "those in peril on the sea" who check the real situation with the RNLI.

 

[chanelyacht]

Interesting. I can't find anything about it online. Can you provide a bit more detail?

I could, but I'm not naming names on this one.

It was sent to a couple of indies a few years back - then raised with Poole, and a swift apology followed.

It was classed as a bit of over zealousness by one individual, but it does sum up the culture in some places of the RNLI.

I've never, ever come across that attitude at crew / station level though.

 

[glashen]

I fear I shall be lambasted for admitting it, but no, I don't. I'm happy to buy cakes from the RNLI bake sale, but I don't subscribe.

The RNLI's activities are not constrained by lack of funding. More money would not equate to more lives saved. It costs about £18,000 per life saved (their stats). Though there are exceptions (like the people in flooded homes) most of them are knowingly taking part in a risky activity. Meanwhile, £15 a month buys food, shelter and education for an Indian orphan who's circumstances are no fault of his own - seems much better value from a charitable donation.

I know a lot of people consider their RNLI sub to be a sort of insurance policy, rather than a charitable donation, and that's up to them, but I don't believe giving money makes a significant difference to the probability of my life being saved.

I don't really disagree with you, the whole point of charitable donations is that they are voluntary. But of course if no one gave anything to the RNLI it would not exist. That is why I am a member (shoreline) and just for the record I give more to other overseas and environmental charities.

The point that many of those rescued are voluntarily taking part in a leisure activity does not mean they don't need rescuing, surely being rescued by a charity is better than using government resources? Personally I do think the way the RNLI is funded does make it one of the best sea rescue services in the world but that is just my own POV.

I realise that historically the RNLI received donations because they were rescuing "Seafarers in Peril" and indeed still do, but yes the majority of those rescued are undoubtedly engaging in leisure and that change is I think affecting donations, so if you do put to sea for fun maybe you should think about how much you can afford, in the same way as if you may one day need an organ transplant some of us think it right to carry a donor card, but in both cases it must be personal choice and whatever your personal decision is, it won't (and should not) affect how you receive aid when you need it.

 

[reginaldon]

Yes - an offshore member, but that does not preclude me from seeing that there is quite profligate spending, including a rather top heavy and very expensive admin.
Having made that statement, I have little doubt that this will trigger a massive reaction, similar to the one I have witnessed on another thread - it's as though we had made personal
remarks about their mothers.

 

[PilotWolf]

I also believe that there was a case a few years back on the IOW where a local lady and avid supporter of the independent Freshwater lifeboat. She left a fairly substantial amount to the 'lifeboat' in her will. I understand that the RNLI challenged the will saying that it was obvious that she meant the money to go to them. Locals and her family were clear that it was meant for the Freshwater boat. I believe that the RNLI won the court case...

I was told this by an old local boatman and ex-RNLI crew. How close to the truth it is I don't know but it wouldn't surprise me in the least having seen some of the internal 'stunts' that are pulled in the RNLI.

PW.

 

[sighmoon]

But of course if no one gave anything to the RNLI it would not exist.

If they were cash strapped to the point that service would be affected, I would donate. At the moment though, I have the impression (rightly or wrongly) that giving them more money would not result in a better service.

if you do put to sea for fun maybe you should think about how much you can afford, in the same way as if you may one day need an organ transplant some of us think it right to carry a donor card,

If you're going to follow that line of reasoning, then where do you stop? You don't know in what way you'll need rescuing, and from what, in the future. It's depressing to think about it, but there are all sorts of ailments one might get as one gets older, and they all have a number of associated charities. For me though, that's not charity.

For me, charitable giving is about other's genuine needs, right now, rather than an investment in my imagined needs in the future.

 

[glashen]

If you're going to follow that line of reasoning, then where do you stop? You don't know in what way you'll need rescuing, and from what, in the future. It's depressing to think about it, but there are all sorts of ailments one might get as one gets older, and they all have a number of associated charities. For me though, that's not charity.

For me, charitable giving is about other's genuine needs, right now, rather than an investment in my imagined needs in the future.

I think you are seeing it in rather black and white terms, it isn't that I only support the RNLI because I might need rescuing in the future anymore than you should only support charities you will never benefit from. My own view is that the RNLI do a good job in promoting sea safety, rescuing professional seafarers, and rescuing leisure boaters. As someone in the latter category I realize that much of the RNLIs wealth as come from donations for the middle category so am happy to support them myself through shoreline to slightly redress that balance. Yes there may be more deserving other charities but as a potential user I feel happy to put in my few quid. I'm not actually saying anyone else should, that is for them to decide.

 

[Sans Bateau]

Please, dont forget that top heavy management and extremely well paid directors is not restricted to just the RNLI, ALL charities are guilty of this, all charities have big posh offices and expense lifestyles for their CEO and board.