RNLI Rescue of Peterhead

[Mark-1]

I used to. Then I worked for them and the money they waste is obscene.

I still have great respect for the frontline crews - at least most of them.

PW

In their defence they don't choose to waste it, they're legally required to spend it to maintain charitable status. It's a shame they can't be given permission to save up enough to move to an endowment model, but I suppose if you let one charity hoard they all can.

 

[PilotWolf]

In their defence they don't choose to waste it, they're legally required to spend it to maintain charitable status. It's a shame they can't be given permission to save up enough to move to an endowment model, but I suppose if you let one charity hoard they all can.

No trust me £ are wasted. I’ve seen it personally and then crews are expected to pay for crap out of their own pocket.

PW

 

[fien397]

No trust me £ are wasted. I’ve seen it personally and then crews are expected to pay for crap out of their own pocket.

PW

Not wishing to turn this into a pros and cons of the RNLI, but id love to know what you think crews have been asked to pay for personally?

 

[PilotWolf]

Not wishing to turn this into a pros and cons of the RNLI, but id love to know what you think crews have been asked to pay for personally?

I was asked to buy my own paint brush for starters. Clothes that the cox thought were suitable.

PW

 

[fien397]

Ok, a paintbrush is not exactly a large purchase, and if it was for a job on station, you could certainly have claimed it back in expenses. Not sure about clothes, there is absolutely no requirement for anyone to buy anything to wear on a lifeboat or station, I'm a bit lost with that one.
Don't get me wrong, the RNLI have wasted shit loads of money over the years, but they've also spent a lot wisely.
I am a tad biased, but your post isn't a fair reflection of the facts.

 

[caiman]

Anyone know how much they paid for Clayton Engineering?

Excellent job at Peterhead.
Cheers

 

[fien397]

Anyone know how much they paid for Clayton Engineering?

Excellent job at Peterhead.
Cheers

No idea, I would have thought it was a no brainier purchase though, given how much of the plant around the coast was made by them. It's probably in the annual accounts somewhere.

Edit. Just found this in the annual statement
On 7 January 2019, the RNLI acquired 100% of the ordinary share capital of CEL Holdings Limited and its wholly owned subsidiary Clayton Engineering Limited for a cash consideration of £2.95M. The goodwill of £0.2M arising from the acquisition is attributable to the expertise and experience of the workforce. The estimated useful life of this goodwill is considered to be 10 years.

 

[caiman]

fien397- Thanks for that.I agree it was a 'no brainer' .IMHO £2.95M was a bargain.
Cheers

 

[Sybarite]

fien397- Thanks for that.I agree it was a 'no brainer' .IMHO £2.95M was a bargain.
Cheers

What about £10m for the boathouse at St David's?

What about the £2.5m for a 44' Shannon? A few years ago they were announced at £1.6m and then it went up to £2.1m and now £2.5m..... Cost control?
And what about that monstrosity of a beach launcher first quoted at £800k and now £1.5m....??

It's not that inflation was gallopping during that period.

The new 60' SNSM AWB, a superb design with the same engines as the Shannon, costs £1.1m.

I have commented many times in the past on what I think of bringing the lifeboat construction in-house (Cost : £28m....!!!) basically because this means that you are putting fixed costs at a very high level. This makes you vulnerable in the case of an economic downturn.

But I was told that this would never happen...... would it?

Will the public continue to support the RNLI at previous levels which were greatly buoyed up by legacy donations?

NB As usual absolutely no criticism of the brave front-line volunteers.

 

[fien397]

What about £10m for the boathouse at St David's?

What about the £2.5m for a 44' Shannon? A few years ago they were announced at £1.6m and then it went up to £2.1m and now £2.5m..... Cost control?
And what about that monstrosity of a beach launcher first quoted at £800k and now £1.5m....??

It's not that inflation was gallopping during that period.

The new 60' SNSM AWB, a superb design with the same engines as the Shannon, costs £1.1m.

I have commented many times in the past on what I think of bringing the lifeboat construction in-house (Cost : £28m....!!!) basically because this means that you are putting fixed costs at a very high level. This makes you vulnerable in the case of an economic downturn.

But I was told that this would never happen...... would it?

Will the public continue to support the RNLI at previous levels which were greatly buoyed up by legacy donations?

NB As usual absolutely no criticism of the brave front-line volunteers.

Well I guess your reply was predictable if nothing else. I'm fully aware you think the SNSM does a better job of running its services than the RNLI, that's fine.

I agree the St David's boathouse cost was eye watering, but I'm guessing that if there was a super cheap alternative that didn't affect coverage and service it would have been chosen. The RNLI are actually pretty ruthless in their 5 yearly coastal reviews, just ask any of the stations that have had thier ALBs replaced with Atlantic 85s.

I haven't been on or seen in the flesh the new SNSM lifeboat you mention, however to compare it to a Shannon class based on it using the same enigines is a tad bizarre. The Shannon is a truly incredible piece of kit, I'd go as far as to say I don't think you will find anything built to that level of spec anywhere in the world. Perhaps you might argue it's overkill, but that's a different debate.
The supercat launch vehicle is a thing all of its own. Try and find anything similar that can launch a vessel of that size over such a mix of terrains, and most importantly allow the vessel to then re-launch into the sea, bows first, without any other piece of equipment.

I do agree with you regarding legacy donations, and it's a point I've raised in the past. I think the days of people leaving 7 figure sums will be a thing of the past, I certainly can't see many people of my generation being in that position. I'm not sure id agree with the way you word it though. I think lack of large legacy donations will be due to lack of funds and not to a lack of support for the RNLI. Even after all the years I've been involved, it never ceases to amaze me the affection and support people show us.

let's not turn this into another RNLI vs SNSM debate. It's a tad pointless. They do a fantastic job as well.

 

[NormanS]

Seeing that this thread is now focusing on the RNLI, I will say that although I still give my annual contribution to them, I am having some mixed feelings about the way they are heading. When it was purely a life saving organisation, funded entirely by donation, fine, it needed all the money it could get. Now I see a semi commercial organisation, providing life guarding services on beaches, paid for by taxpayers, services to foreign countries, and an unhealthy centralisation of resources, grandiose buildings etc, and I feel slightly uncomfortable.

 

[Sybarite]

I haven't been on or seen in the flesh the new SNSM lifeboat you mention, however to compare it to a Shannon class based on it using the same enigines is a tad bizarre. The Shannon is a truly incredible piece of kit, I'd go as far as to say I don't think you will find anything built to that level of spec anywhere in the world. Perhaps you might argue it's overkill, but that's a different debate.

I only mentionned the engines as one aspect but perhaps it is the hull shape that is the most significant difference. The 1300hp drives the 61' SNSM boat at at least 25 knots and gives it a 350mile range at maximum speed compared with 250miles for the Shannon. The pantocarene wave-piercing hull gives 40% less vertical movement than the traditional Shannon type hull.

• Un nouveau Canot Tous Temps pour la SNSM Sète ! - YouTube
• (1) Pilot 2000 WP - YouTube

The Shannon is an evolution of the Camarc hull design and I think you can see the difference in performance in the waves.

(1) Camarc Design Pilot Boats Overview 2015 - YouTube

There is a pilotage company working in the Thames estuary who claim that their new pantocarene hulled boats save them £50000 per year in fuel costs per boat.

The supercat launch vehicle is a thing all of its own. Try and find anything similar that can launch a vessel of that size over such a mix of terrains, and most importantly allow the vessel to then re-launch into the sea, bows first, without any other piece of equipment.

I suggested an alternative which would be much much cheaper: an Italian made remote controlled caterpillar tracked travel lift.[/QUOTE]

 

[fien397]

Seeing that this thread is now focusing on the RNLI, I will say that although I still give my annual contribution to them, I am having some mixed feelings about the way they are heading. When it was purely a life saving organisation, funded entirely by donation, fine, it needed all the money it could get. Now I see a semi commercial organisation, providing life guarding services on beaches, paid for by taxpayers, services to foreign countries, and an unhealthy centralisation of resources, grandiose buildings etc, and I feel slightly uncomfortable.

I agree entirely with you regarding grandiose buildings. I couldn't quite believe the size of the new HQ building when I first saw it. Totally outrageous.

I have to say i find it a tad sad when people moan about "services it provides abroad"
The statistics are pretty grim.

" drowning is the third leading cause of unintentional death worldwide, and for children (aged 1 to 14), the issue is most acute in countries like Bangladesh, where 43 per cent of all deaths in children aged 1 to four relate to drowning"

That's a lot of lives cut short, needlessly. A bit of education goes a long way.

If they were white kids on our shores, I'm sure the debate would have taken a different direction.
Just look at the uproar when one surfer went out in bad conditions in the first lockdown, when he knew no RNLI lifeguards were on duty.

Also remember the RNLI's mission statement doesn't say it's services are exclusive to our own coastline. I'd say that spending a little of its income ( less that 2%) in some of the poorest parts of the world to prevent children drowning was a pretty worthy cause. I'd like to think that most would agree that's a better use of funds than towing jets skis that have run out of fuel or some of the typical bullshit jobs we get.

 

[Bajansailor]

I agree entirely with you regarding grandiose buildings. I couldn't quite believe the size of the new HQ building when I first saw it. Totally outrageous.

I started working at the RNLI HQ in 1989 - everything then happened in the (relatively) small 3 story original shoebox shaped building.
Soon after I joined, they started building the extension on the east side - this effectively increased the available space by 100%, and we were wondering how it would be filled, but it got filled up very rapidly.
And I think that everything has expanded so much more in the past 30 years.

 

[Mark-1]

Everyone above is looking for cunning ways for the RNLI to limit/reduce costs which is
a afundamental misunderstanding of their situation. They don't have a shortage of funds they have a surplus of funds. Rightly or wrongly charities are not allowed to hoard large amounts of unspent donations, so the RNLI has to find over engineered solutions for pretty much everything.

The RNLI do not need to find efficiencies, quite the opposite.

 

[Kurrawong_Kid]

Everyone above is looking for cunning ways for the RNLI to limit/reduce costs which is
a afundamental misunderstanding of their situation. They don't have a shortage of funds they have a surplus of funds. Rightly or wrongly charities are not allowed to hoard large amounts of unspent donations, so the RNLI has to find over engineered solutions for pretty much everything.

The RNLI do not need to find efficiencies, quite the opposite.

As a voluntary trustee of a small charity I can confirm that this is the case. Our Treasury likes money to be spent now, not in the future, hence the 7 year gift rule for inheritance tax. Saving up for a rainy day is not what they want you or the RNLI to do!

 

[NotBirdseye]

I'm waiting for the Fishermen to come on and say they didn't actually want to be rescued and they had everything in hand...

 

[dom]

I have to say i find it a tad sad when people moan about "services it provides abroad"
The statistics are pretty grim.

" drowning is the third leading cause of unintentional death worldwide, and for children (aged 1 to 14), the issue is most acute in countries like Bangladesh, where 43 per cent of all deaths in children aged 1 to four relate to drowning"

That's a lot of lives cut short, needlessly. A bit of education goes a long way.

If they were white kids on our shores, I'm sure the debate would have taken a different direction.
Just look at the uproar when one surfer went out in bad conditions in the first lockdown, when he knew no RNLI lifeguards were on duty.

Also remember the RNLI's mission statement doesn't say it's services are exclusive to our own coastline. I'd say that spending a little of its income ( less that 2%) in some of the poorest parts of the world to prevent children drowning was a pretty worthy cause. I'd like to think that most would agree that's a better use of funds than towing jets skis that have run out of fuel or some of the typical bullshit jobs we get.

This is the RNLI's line and it's complete a misrepresentation of what happened. Every sane person agrees that saving children's lives the world over is a worthy cause, especially the type of people who support the RNLI. Eyebrows were nevertheless raised when the RNLI chose to cosy up to and lend their credibility to foreign dictators during some of their foreign programmes, regimes which openly and seriously discriminate against women and younger girls, to the point of sometimes denying them an education. These were sensitive matters and I have no doubt that the RNLI staff on the ground had peoples best interests at heart - they always do and that's what makes it even sadder.

However, when questions were raised about this lack of engagement with local indigenous communities and about women's and girls rights in particular, the RNLI's new PR Team and its CEO Mark Dowie chose to invent a strawman in the form of imaginary white racist xenophobic Daily Mail readers it would rather be done with.

What the RNLI omitted to point out that much of the criticism emanated from non-whites - people like my mother - who was brought up a Muslim in Northern India and who was a passionate believer in women's and religious rights. Finally, can I just point out that the daily discrimination these women and girls face is infinitely worse than some bawdy comment written on a lifeboat crews mug.

 

[fien397]

This is the RNLI's line and it's complete a misrepresentation of what happened. Every sane person agrees that saving children's lives the world over is a worthy cause, especially the type of people who support the RNLI. Eyebrows were nevertheless raised when the RNLI chose to cosy up to and lend their credibility to foreign dictators during some of their foreign programmes, regimes which openly and seriously discriminate against women and younger girls, to the point of sometimes denying them an education. These were sensitive matters and I have no doubt that the RNLI staff on the ground had peoples best interests at heart - they always do and that's what makes it even sadder.

However, when questions were raised about this lack of engagement with local indigenous communities and about women's and girls rights in particular, the RNLI's new PR Team and its CEO Mark Dowie chose to invent a strawman in the form of imaginary white racist xenophobic Daily Mail readers it would rather be done with.

What the RNLI omitted to point out that much of the criticism emanated from non-whites - people like my mother - who was brought up a Muslim in Northern India and who was a passionate believer in women's and religious rights. Finally, can I just point out that the daily discrimination these women and girls face is infinitely worse than some bawdy comment written on a lifeboat crews mug.

Well, you may well be correct in what you say about the Rnli cosying up to dubious characters abroad, I honestly don't know about this.

The misteatment, discrimination and degradation of women around the world under the cloak of religion, particularly Islam and catholisism is utterly shameful, but is perhaps beyond the limits of thread drift, and not really in the spirit of the OP

 

[Sybarite]

I agree entirely with you regarding grandiose buildings. I couldn't quite believe the size of the new HQ building when I first saw it. Totally outrageous.

I have to say i find it a tad sad when people moan about "services it provides abroad"
The statistics are pretty grim.

" drowning is the third leading cause of unintentional death worldwide, and for children (aged 1 to 14), the issue is most acute in countries like Bangladesh, where 43 per cent of all deaths in children aged 1 to four relate to drowning"

That's a lot of lives cut short, needlessly. A bit of education goes a long way.

If they were white kids on our shores, I'm sure the debate would have taken a different direction.
Just look at the uproar when one surfer went out in bad conditions in the first lockdown, when he knew no RNLI lifeguards were on duty.

Also remember the RNLI's mission statement doesn't say it's services are exclusive to our own coastline. I'd say that spending a little of its income ( less that 2%) in some of the poorest parts of the world to prevent children drowning was a pretty worthy cause. I'd like to think that most would agree that's a better use of funds than towing jets skis that have run out of fuel or some of the typical bullshit jobs we get.

Over the last decade or so the average annual direct spend on lifeboats has been some 7 - 10% of income - or, about in line with the pension contributions.