The MCA is planning on scaling back the number of marine offices.

Does this segue back to the familiar topic of lifeboats mean that Sybarite has realised that closing the MCA's distributed bureaucracy in fact has zero impact on safety and no significant relevance of any other kind to yachtsmen?

Pete
 
Tranona said:
These are all legitimate questions. However if I understand correctly all your ramblings on this in the past you claim to draw firm conclusions to the effect that the RNLI waste money, are inefficient, pay their staff too much money, have too many staff etc - and of course the French do everything perfectly.
Click to expand...

Of course I don't know everything. But I know enough to ask questions. It was the same when I went into a company on an audit. After a month there I (or any typical auditor) was able to tell the directors things that they didn't know about their company. For example I had never audited a bank before but I wrote a procedures report that a banker, who had got first place in the Institute of Bankers exams, qualified as "brilliant". (OK.... it was me Dad...:rolleyes:) .

Another example is the Atlantic RIB 85. I looked up the price of some 20 other similar sized RIBs and the RNLI one was more than twice as expensive as the next most expensive one. There may be a very good reason for that, but it leads yet again to a question and as all the questions tend in the same direction, a picture tends to emerge.

As for the French; the fact that they have the largest yacht manufacturers in the world and their shipyard order books are full (with higher unit labour costs) suggests to me that they know a thing or two. How are the UK yards doing?

As you have found out, this view does not meet with much approval from people on this forum who live in the UK, many of whom know far more about the subject than you (or I).
Click to expand...

Do they? Perhaps they have not subjected the situation to the same critical appreciation as I have.
 
Last edited:
prv said:
Does this segue back to the familiar topic of lifeboats mean that Sybarite has realised that closing the MCA's distributed bureaucracy in fact has zero impact on safety and no significant relevance of any other kind to yachtsmen?

Pete
Click to expand...

See post #36.
 
dogleg said:
Well it took a video clip to show that when the Shannon hit a large wave it stopped dead.


I have mentioned before that the clip you refer to was of the first Shannon going through the Portland Race under trials, not even fully fitted out as a operational lifeboat, indeed I think if you view the clip it does not have an operational number ( in this case 13-01 ) on the bow. The stopping dead as you put it was part of the trials to test angle of inclination of bow etc in rough weather, it had various instruments on board as part of the trials. We have a Shannon near us which certainly does do 25 knots + in bad weather. On its delivery voyage to station it visited two French ports where the French LB crews were very impressed. I think I can safely say that the coxswain of that boat initially somewhat wary of it would not go back to his previous boat.

I remember you said in a previous discussion in reply to my question that you have not been on board a Tamar, Shannon or Severn class RNLI lifeboat. I have as well as French boats, the level of equipment on RNLI boats is possibly superior. Until you have been on both RNLI and French LBs and seen for yourself you are possibly not best qualified to judge.

However you probably know more about accounts than I do, since you seem so convinced that you are right I suggest you write to the Chairman of the RNLI Trustees, a former boss of an international company ( who probably also understands accounts) who I am sure will be happy to answer any valid complaints you have. If you have such confidence in your case I am surprised you have not already done this.
Click to expand...

Thank you for that information. Can you suggest a clip which shows a recent Shannon in heavy weather at speed?
 
The RNLI receives no tax payer help and does not charge to rescue boats or people. If people are not happy about the amount they are spending on their equipment and boats then they are fully entitled not to donate to them.

The SNSM apparently are very efficient and have super boats at a fraction of the cost of the RNLI, have lower management costs but in comparison to the RNLI they charge to rescue boats (not people) and have to have money from the local authorities to balance their books. That is fine with me, it is their system, but something does not seem to add up. If they are so efficient and their boats cost so little why do they need to charge to rescue boats and having charged why do they need public subsidy. Is it because the French are less charitable, do they feel that as they are charged anyway they do not need to contribute. Are the people in charge of the SNSM just not very competent and find it hard to raise money. Having said all that it is for French people and residents of France to find out if they are bothered, but would be interested in the answers,

Taken overall I prefer the RNLI system, but vive la difference
 
Sybarite said:
As you have obviously been researching the subject could you please indicate the thread where I said that the French SNSM were criticizing the RNLI. I don't remember so doing, but if I did I would like to see the context.
Click to expand...

Well Sybarite, we’ve certainly been around the hills on this thread: you opened on the MCA, shifted to the cost of new Shannons, a quick swerve into that vessel’s seaworthiness and finally an attack on the inshore lifeboats. No point in any more diversions, especially as we can finally agree upon something!

Initially I found it curious that despite being furnished with appropriate contacts within the RNLI and Charity Commission you did ….well nothing. Imagine for example that I railed endlessly against XYZ company, its products, its hopeless management and the millions of pounds it fritters away each year. Now imagine I was scheduled to meet the chairman one day. It would be time to “deal or squeal “, right?

And this was your time to “deal or squeal”, yet what did you do? A nasty punt at the UK’s largely lost boatbuilding industry, which you cast against France’s commendable achievements in this area. Vive la France for sure, although one must not entirely forget that UK unemployment is at 5.1% less than half of France’s and per-capita GDP is higher.

But now I’m digressing. It was a squeal alright Sybarite, from which one can deduce that you either lack the balls to press your arguments home, or you feel that the RNLI and/or Charity Commission would tear them apart if you ever came up against them in open theatre. My sense, no more than that, is that is that you’d risk quite a lot to achieve your fifteen minutes of fame, which leads me to conclude that deep down you realise that you simply don’t possess the commercial, legal or administrative knowledge of charities and endowments to press such an attack home.

You would suffer your own little mini-Waterloo and you know it. At least we can agree upon that!
 
Last edited:
dom said:
Well Sybarite, we’ve certainly been around the hills on this thread: you opened on the MCA, shifted to the cost of new Shannons, a quick swerve into that vessel’s seaworthiness and finally an attack on the inshore lifeboats. No point in any more diversions, especially as we can finally agree upon something!

Initially I found it curious that despite being furnished with appropriate contacts within the RNLI and Charity Commission you did ….well nothing. Imagine for example that I railed endlessly against XYZ company, its products, its hopeless management and the millions of pounds it fritters away each year. Now imagine I was scheduled to meet the chairman one day. It would be time to “deal or squeal “, right?

And this was your time to “deal or squeal”, yet what did you do? A nasty punt at the UK’s largely lost boatbuilding industry, which you cast against France’s commendable achievements in this area. Vive la France for sure, although one must not entirely forget that UK unemployment is at 5.1% less than half of France’s and per-capita GDP is higher.

But now I’m digressing. It was a squeal alright Sybarite, from which one can deduce that you either lack the balls to press your arguments home, or you feel that the RNLI and/or Charity Commission would tear them apart if you ever came up against them in open theatre. My sense, no more than that, is that is that you’d risk quite a lot to achieve your fifteen minutes of fame, which leads me to conclude that deep down you realise that you simply don’t possess the commercial, legal or administrative knowledge of charities and endowments to press such an attack home.

You would suffer your own little mini-Waterloo and you know it. At least we can agree upon that!
Click to expand...


So, what I take away from your diatribe is that yet again for at least the 5th time you refuse to justify an allegation that you make (post #31) because you know you cannot.

Here is what I wrote last year :

I can understand you not wanting others to see that exchange.

BTW last year you accused me of criticizing the RNLI crews. I told you that if you could justify that remark I would retire forever from the forum. I'm still here.
Then above you referred to faulty accounting pseudo-facts. I asked you to give one example.
You are now accusing me again of lying and when you did the same thing last year, I recommended then that you should not do it in my presence.

So there are three accusations on the board. Now either put up or shut up.


As far as contacting the RNLI is concerned I have already made my position clear on that point (several times) but I would be very surprised that they have not been made aware of these threads and as far as I am concerned they would be very welcome to participate and if appropriate refute my position. Why don't they?
 
Sybarite said:
As far as contacting the RNLI is concerned I have already made my position clear on that point (several times) but I would be very surprised that they have not been made aware of these threads and as far as I am concerned they would be very welcome to participate and if appropriate refute my position. Why don't they?
Click to expand...

And what exactly is your position, "deal" or "squeal" that is? It's kind of a binary question, no need for lots of words.

Oh and you don't seriously expect the RNLI or Charity Commission to come on here and engage with the factually barren grudges you bear against the RNLI, or do you? :confused:
 
Last edited:
Sybarite said:
Support comes in the form of PM's. Many people do not like to stick their heads above the parapet.
Click to expand...

Well, perhaps the discussion is better held in private. it is pointless if only part of the discussion is held in public on this forum if some are so unsure of their arguments that they are not prepared to explain them in public.

Should make you happy if you find people who agree with you.
 
dom said:
And what exactly is your position, "deal" or "squeal" that is? It's kind of a binary question, no need for lots of words.

Oh and you don't seriously expect the RNLI or Charity Commission to come on here and engage with the factually barren grudges you bear against the RNLI, or do you? :confused:
Click to expand...

You are really not worth discussing with. I have called you out many times on the lies you have told and you studiously refuse to justify yourself.

I think people will draw their own conclusions.

Incidentally per capita GDP is higher in France.

And incidentally I did contact the RNLI wrt the size of waves a Shannon launch could cope with. I was told that they had been tested in 2m waves.
 
Last edited:
Sybarite said:
Incidentally per capita GDP is higher in France.

And incidentally I did contact the RNLI wrt the size of waves a Shannon launch could cope with. I was told that they had been tested in 2m waves.
Click to expand...

Re your first point, you can take that up with the Eurostat (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statis...onsumption_per_capita_and_price_level_indices)
...and if you want contemporaneous forecasts scroll to Page 1 of the European Commission's 2016 Winter Forecasts: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/eeip/pdf/ip020_en.pdf

But let's not go off on yet another tangent: this RNLI bashing nonsense has finally and thankfully reached the end of the road. You now have the doors wide open to take your grievances either to the RNLI, or directly to the Charity Commission.

The question is do you have the bottle to walk though either of these doors? ...to which your answer seems to be
...erm no I don't!!

Edit: Have you ever seen this clip per chance? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQlCOmXuHM&nohtml5=False
 
Last edited:
Here we go again

I see no point in yet another round of discussion about Shannon or the governance of the RNLI. Sybarite has his pet viewpoint which hardly anyone else agrees with

However I will pick up on one key point from this go-around because it may mislead people ...

Sybarite said:
IAs the RNLI works hand in hand with the MCA on marine safety it would be no skin off their nose to come up with such a paltry sum (£400k) for them.
Click to expand...

As Sybarite knows full well, since he has been involved with UK charity accounts he tells us, the RNLI can do no such thing. It would be outwith the powers of the trustees as defined by the Articles of Association (which state what the charity can and cannot do) and the trustees would be in all sorts of legal bother if they authorised it

The Articles could, theoretically, be amended to permit the RNLI to provide finance to a government department but I very much doubt that the voting members would approve such an amendment, as they would have to do and it would be interesting to see what the Charity Commissioners made of it as their approval would be required also and they have, in the past, been unhappy with charities changing the focus of their core operation (the core operation of the RNLI is to "save lives at sea" as the tag line has it. Ancilliary and support operations in support of that will generally meet with the CC's approval, supporting an unrelated government department would not)

There are all sorts of wider social and financial issues with transferring essential operations from the first sector (government) to the third sector (charity) but I've better things to do today than spend hours expanding on them (you'll be pleased to hear!)

One thing I will say ... as usual Sybarite is picking the wrong target. There is an already burgeoning third sector organisation which has taken over a key function formerly provided by a first sector body. I refer, of course, to the National Coastwatch Institution.

I would like to see the RNLI channel some of it's resources into supporting the NCI (whether by becoming its parent organisation or whether by forming a partnership or even by simply making grants). This too would require an amendment to the RNLI Articles but it would be one that would likely meet with the members approval and which the Charity Commissioners would be happy to accept
 
prv said:
Does this segue back to the familiar topic of lifeboats mean that Sybarite has realised that closing the MCA's distributed bureaucracy in fact has zero impact on safety and no significant relevance of any other kind to yachtsmen?
Click to expand...

Sybarite said:
See post #36.
Click to expand...

Post #36 being, essentially, "I took the loudmouthed Union rep at face value, but now accept that maybe he's a posturing idiot and this is a non-story"?

Ok.

Pete
 
Sybarite said:
And incidentally I did contact the RNLI wrt the size of waves a Shannon launch could cope with. I was told that they had been tested in 2m waves.
Click to expand...

Cleverly disingenuous again

What they said was that Shannon had been, at that stage, test launched into 2m waves

They did not say that 2m waves were an operational limit nor even that Shannon can only be launched in waves less than 2m

This was pointed out the last time you tried to imply that Shannon is a less capable lifeboat than the cheaper French boats

You had some good and valid points way back in the early days of these repetitive discussions with regard to the sometimes profligate spending on non-core activities (although, as has also been pointed out, the current management and trustees have taken significant steps in that area) but you lose the plot, and any likely support from all but a handful of people, when you repeatedly decry the provision of the best possible kit at the sharp end regardlessv of expense

Most RNLI supporters, myself included, are perfectly happy. I don't care if Shannon cost double what it did if the RNLI can afford it. And they can so they should

And I note you've yet to produce evidence of a cheaper alternative than can do what Shannon does. (You can't, of course, because the beast doesn't exist. That's why the RNLI had to develop Shannon from scratch and that was always going to be an expensive approach.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top