UKBA 35% increase in boardings!!!!

[Tranona]

I can't see why any one would have a problem with a boarding at the end of the day tons of drugs, weapons, and illegal immigrants are being smuggled into this country.

I have been boarded twice in Holland by the dutch authorities and once had the UKBA come alongside in the wash. As long as they are not boarding the same yacht 3 or 4 times a season and it is done in a professional manner whats the problem?

We all complain about crime and illegal immigrants this is a good way to combat it. I realise the number of yachts used for illegal purposes is very small but surely if they do board a number of yachts its a deterrent if nothing else. I'm always please when my van is searched at ferry ports as it makes me feel as they are doing there job.

There is no evidence that UKBA can produce that shows their policy is effective in catching smugglers - which should be easily quantifiable. As has been pointed out since February 2009 they have not publicly claimed any successful prosecutions of smuggling involving yachts (but plenty using lorries, individual carriers etc).

How can random boarding of innocent yachts at the current low level (in relation to the number of movements) be considered a deterrent. Smugglers are smart people and chose low risk methods, preferrably imnvolving third parties who are disposable. Using a small private yacht that the owner is sailing back from a weekend in France is not a suitable carrier. So who is likely to be deterred by random boarding?

 

[Keen_Ed]

I can't see why any one would have a problem with a boarding at the end of the day tons of drugs, weapons, and illegal immigrants are being smuggled into this country.

Because I don't want the state to do things just because is feels like it. They should have to justify their actions - if they want to conduct random boardings, they should show that random boardings yield results at the very least. (It would be nice if they could show just cause for each boarding.) At the moment, they have yet to produce any such information.

 

[timbartlett]

I can't see why any one would have a problem with a boarding at the end of the day tons of drugs, weapons, and illegal immigrants are being smuggled into this country.

You are assuming that the policy of random boardings of yachts has some connection with the prevention of smuggling. This is precisely what UKBA would like us to believe.
If they were able to offer any evidence at all to support their argument, most yachtsmen would be happy to accept it and many would probably become enthusiastic supporters of the policy.
Yet they have failed to offer a shred of evidence to support an assertion whose flaws are blindingly obvious.
Moreover, when they have been directly asked for evidence, they have come up with fatuous excuses to avoid giving it.

 

[maxi77]

I can't see why any one would have a problem with a boarding at the end of the day tons of drugs, weapons, and illegal immigrants are being smuggled into this country.

I have been boarded twice in Holland by the dutch authorities and once had the UKBA come alongside in the wash. As long as they are not boarding the same yacht 3 or 4 times a season and it is done in a professional manner whats the problem?

We all complain about crime and illegal immigrants this is a good way to combat it. I realise the number of yachts used for illegal purposes is very small but surely if they do board a number of yachts its a deterrent if nothing else. I'm always please when my van is searched at ferry ports as it makes me feel as they are doing there job.

The problem is that all the effort expended on boarding innocent vessels is effort that is not applied to dealing with those who are not innocent. There is substantial suspicion that UKBA is expending considerable effort, effort that should be being expended on intelligence led investigations, on high profile public show actions which have little or no return in terms of discovering wrongdoers.

Yes we all want better prevetion against people and drug smuggling, but UKBA does not seem to be able to justify it present methods as effective in terms of return for effort

 

[chanelyacht]

They should have to justify their actions - if they want to conduct random boardings, they should show that random boardings yield results at the very least.

Isn't that a bit Kafka-esque?

On the one hand you're saying there shouldn't be any random boardings unless it can be shown random boardings find drugs, i.e. that people are putting drugs on boats because they think they'll get away with it, as they think they are unlikely to be boarded and checked.

On the other hand, you say no finds means random boardings are pointless. Or could it just be that random boardings find nothing / very little because smugglers don't think its a good tactic due to the risk of being found?

The only thing you'll prove by conducting no boardings is that nothing is found - you won't know if smuggling increases massively due to the threat of boarding being removed - because you won't be boarding to find out!

 

[deuc02]

Isn't that a bit Kafka-esque?

On the one hand you're saying there shouldn't be any random boardings unless it can be shown random boardings find drugs, i.e. that people are putting drugs on boats because they think they'll get away with it, as they think they are unlikely to be boarded and checked.

On the other hand, you say no finds means random boardings are pointless. Or could it just be that random boardings find nothing / very little because smugglers don't think its a good tactic due to the risk of being found?

The only thing you'll prove by conducting no boardings is that nothing is found - you won't know if smuggling increases massively due to the threat of boarding being removed - because you won't be boarding to find out!

Or maybe he's just saying that this part of the public sector should be accountable to the public. And how do they do that. Provide statistics that back up their claims. ie distinguish between commercial and private marine activity. Publish accurate figures regards number of boardings vs seizures made in each particular sector. Justify operational costs in relation to the private yachting sector.

ie work in the same way that the private sector might.

Personally I object to random boardings, especially when the boat is moving between 1 uk port and another as this type of boarding is nothing more than a kneejerk reaction from a government that is hellbent on removing citizens rights. And unfortuantely they want to do this at any cost, because someone else is paying for it ie you and me

 

[johnabbott893]

You are assuming that the policy of random boardings of yachts has some connection with the prevention of smuggling. This is precisely what UKBA would like us to believe.
If they were able to offer any evidence at all to support their argument, most yachtsmen would be happy to accept it and many would probably become enthusiastic supporters of the policy.
Yet they have failed to offer a shred of evidence to support an assertion whose flaws are blindingly obvious.
Moreover, when they have been directly asked for evidence, they have come up with fatuous excuses to avoid giving it.

Dispite the UKBA having no credible reason for random boardings of yachts, there are a good number of thinking individuals that still seem to support the policy. Why? Would they support the Police if they were beating up old grannies?

The UKBA have inherited too much power and are now abusing it. It seems impossible to stop them because they wave the Guns, Drugs, Terrorists and illegal immigrants card and then the vast majority lose the power to think.

If the UKBA want my support to combat the flow of Drugs, Guns and darkies into the UK then they had better adopt a better strategy than to piss me off. There is an increased risk of a 'Dirty' bomb being exploded in the UK. A suicide yacht up the Thames in 2012 would seem an ideal opportunity. The UKBA needs our help and a proper strategy. Random yacht searches are a stupid way for them to be spending their time and our money.

 

[rjp]

Documentation? What documentation?

..... If we complain I am sure they will be more thorough in checking documentation and finding infringements to justify their existence.

Just to pick up on this. If I haven't travelled from abroad I'm not going to have my passport with me. I'm not legally obliged to have my yacht registered or even insured. I certainly won't have a bill of sale on board and I make a point of never carrying my driving licence. I suppose I should have a radio licence on the boat (if equipped). Perhaps an operator's licence (but I'm not sure). Exactly what documentation could the UKBA object to my not having on board?

John

 

[deuc02]

As far as I'm aware you need to carry no documentation with regards to personal identification when moving with the UK. They however do if they wish to board your boat.

And why play ball if they do board. Subservience has never acheived anything

 

[Major Catastrophe]

As far as I'm aware you need to carry no documentation with regards to personal identification when moving with the UK. They however do if they wish to board your boat.

And why play ball if they do board. Subservience has never acheived anything

Subservience works with the French style of judiciary but it is sure as hell not an attitude I would would adopt with UK law enforcement. Remember, in the UK they uphold the law with OUR consent.

If I am stopped by the police, I will comply with them but will still want to know why I was stopped and would expect to be on my way with the minimum of delay.

I have been stopped twice in my life for a 'routine check'. Both times I identified myself and asked why I was being inconvenienced. One said, "Because I can", which resulted in a letter to his chief constable and a letter of apology by return.

Ironically, if I was using the tidal Thames, I would expect to be stopped by the river police and would be asking why if I had not been stopped.

Even more ironically, in NI I spent most of the day stopping, searching questioning people, which is probably why I am very sensitive to any abuse of power. But then, I did have a gun.

 

[Tidewaiter2]

But these statistics do exist -- at least, they did when it suited UKBA for them to exist, when they wanted to quote 80%. But they mysteriously became unavailable when they were asked to justify the claims that had been made.
************************************************************************
Tim, given my known views on the current SCS(see my prev. posts), i bet someone plucked them from the air during that RYA/UKBA meeting- a transcript/ copy of the notes of that mtg might be revealing?

I think we should distinguish between a journo who is "naive" and one who knows that he is going to get an obstructive or misleading answer but gives the interviewee the opportunity to come clean.
And it is particularly important to be quite clear about the meaning of "patriotic". The interests of the civil service are not necessarily -- in fact I would say they are not usually -- the same as the good of the country as a whole.

*************************************************************************
Tim, as posted, I call it 'naive or unpatriotic' when they want patrol locations, times and dates in advance-

At days end, since we as a Society have decided to criminalise Class A's, and Class B's to a certain extent/quantity still, instead of treating them like those other two addictive substances, alcohol & nicotine and 'controlling' and taxing their use, thereby too, defusing the vast criminal profits, then, if you are a Policeman or Civil Servant tasked with carrying out Society's wishes, you have to catch smugglers/vendors- it's what you are paid for and you do your duty the best you can.

If as the result of an FOI release, the Newspapers/Local Radio/ Journo blogs are telling everyone where you are GOING to be 'lurking', it not only lets in the drugs, trafficked souls, guns, bio and rad weapon components, it lets out the stolen cars, plant, VAT fraud goods, etc, etc.
Or your unarmed Team gets met with Uzi fire or worse, and we are back to the 18th Century again.

To me,and I was an "old school" junior Civil Servant, it made and makes sense to keep good detailed stats, so you can show how well you, your Team, and your Dept have done their job and used the UK's tax money entrusted to you to carry out Parliament's wishes.

Also definitely publicise your actual nicks and their locations as a deterrent(if anyone other than the local Press or All At Sea will give it an inch on page 5, compared to some Celebs latest domestic).

That sort of thing, however, does not suit a certain breed of 'manager' who now increasingly exists in both public and private sector, in my experience.

Detailed stats tend to reveal shortcomings in resources, training, leadership, 'boots on the ground' which would have to be addressed/ fail to deliver year on year budget cuts/ and horror of horrors; affect their bonus/ career.

In the private sector, the firm goes belly up/gets bailed out by Govt., usually just after they've departed with a golden goodbye and hello, in the public sector, the grunts are usually left with a **** it system and a furious public, while they advance up the ladder towards KCMG.

'Bad Money drives out Good' and UK plc has become full of a very egocentric, 'I want what I want and want it now' people.
I'm rather glad my parents, teachers, and first bosses brought me up to understand there is no 'I' in "Team".
They made sure I did my best to do a good job, and most of my colleagues were the same. The Laws were and are passed by Parliament/adopted from the EU(we could not gold plate them?)- (SI's and Orders in Council-now those are creeping dictatorship!), at the grass roots we applied them as humanely and fairly as we could- end of.

Anyway, enough of 'paranoia & conspiracy', the UK Civil Service is incompetent according to the Redtop Press,so all the IT for 'Big Brother' will be late, overrun, and then cancelled by the next Minister/ Government.

Rejoice, it's Friday, the sun is shining again, I'm for a bit of boat cherishing and the Fitting out Supper on Saturday!

 

[chanelyacht]

Dispite the UKBA having no credible reason for random boardings of yachts, there are a good number of thinking individuals that still seem to support the policy. Why? Would they support the Police if they were beating up old grannies?

Please detail who has been beaten up during a boarding, or are you just resorting to hysterical nonsense?

 

[Searush]

Please detail who has been beaten up during a boarding, or are you just resorting to hysterical nonsense?

You're just dragging it deeper into farce aren't you? Can we just move on please?

 

[johnabbott893]

Please detail who has been beaten up during a boarding, or are you just resorting to hysterical nonsense?

I have no evidence that Police are beating up old grannies similarly the UKBA have no credible reason for their random boardings. Unlike some, I don't support either. Some get all hysterical when drugs, guns and illegal immigrants are mentioned. Hence, they start spouting nonsense!

 

[PhilipF]

I find quite amazing the divergences of opinion expressed on this subject.

Sorry to say I find myself with the minority of views, I consider the UKBA to be doing a damn good job, and very fully support whatever they feel the need to do, and whatever means and methods they feel they must apply.

Luckily, this evening, I heard of an event that underlines why their work is of such importance. True, this news was not as a direct result of the work they do, but it could so very easily have been so. Please read this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8536976.stm

 

[johnabbott893]

I find quite amazing the divergences of opinion expressed on this subject.

Sorry to say I find myself with the minority of views, I consider the UKBA to be doing a damn good job, and very fully support whatever they feel the need to do, and whatever means and methods they feel they must apply.

Luckily, this evening, I heard of an event that underlines why their work is of such importance. True, this news was not as a direct result of the work they do, but it could so very easily have been so. Please read this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8536976.stm

A brilliant example of why the UKBA should not be upsetting people with pointless random boardings. You won't stop a boat load of darkies by using random searches. It needs people like you and me to call them up and tell them there is a boat load of darkies, drugs etc. Right now I would turn a blind eye because I think they are abusing their powers; not to mention that they have got too much power to abuse anyway.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

and very fully support whatever they feel the need to do, and whatever means and methods they feel they must apply.

Give them an inch.....

What are you going to do when they decide to turn over your gaff 'just in case'?

You may feel comfortable with random searches, but in a civilised country with accountable 'law enforcement' they need to remain accountable and so far their response to the OP is far from being accountable.

If they are unable to answer the questions with even basic facts and figures, then they are entering the area of 'not with my consent'.

 

[Tranona]

I find quite amazing the divergences of opinion expressed on this subject.

Sorry to say I find myself with the minority of views, I consider the UKBA to be doing a damn good job, and very fully support whatever they feel the need to do, and whatever means and methods they feel they must apply.

Luckily, this evening, I heard of an event that underlines why their work is of such importance. True, this news was not as a direct result of the work they do, but it could so very easily have been so. Please read this:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/sussex/8536976.stm

No. All that does is illustrate how incompetent UKBA is. This was not the first time these two characters had used the same method and they were clearly not deterred by well publicised "random" searches. The performance of the UKBA spokesman on television only served to confirm what an imcompetent bunch they are. NONE of the the illegals has been caught - and they took a public bus to the station, despite the security man in the marina trying to prevent the bus from driving away. All on CCTV to entertain us!

If UKBA is serious about stopping illegal entry into this country it would do better to concentrate its efforts on effective policing rather than showing off - but then it is only reflecting government policy which is all about spin rather than substance!

I am sure that the troops on the ground would welcome a change in attitude and leadership to support them in doing their job. However we know that compromise and avoiding the issue is the preferred option - especially if it means huge expenditure on useless "information" systems that do not reflect the reality of what is going on..

 

[bazobeleza]

My mates boat was boarded in the Clyde as he was heading up past the sub base up there, apparently they were a little suspicious because it was the middle of the winter, and they were bored. All good natured though.

I wonder if the fact that its called the UKBA has something to do with some of the ire generated here. If it were HM Customs and Excise doing the boarding would people feel differently?

The fact that its called an 'Agency' therefore not a 'proper institution' smacks of privatisation and leads people to think any wannabe Rambo can probably join and that really they are just as bad as traffic wardens etc etc.

Don't know the answer and until I get boarded and as yet I have nothing to make a judgement on. I accept a need for policing borders, but the govt needs to be seen to be consistent in that policing, at the moment they are not.

 

[Searush]

PhillipF

I love your post. It is the first I have seen that relates to a yacht being caught in the last 12 months. From memory, there was also a big drugs bust in 2007 too - but they had been tracked across the Atlantic.

Now, let me see, is there anything that may have drawn attention to this lot? How about a 23 year old owning a 55' boat? How about landing 21 illegals in Brighton marina? It's not exactly the outcome of a random search is it? I'll bet that they set out from a French marina too, so there is a fair chance that putting the 21 illegals on board will have been noted & reported there.

If we only relied on random searches that lot would definitely have got away with it. Now can you see what a pointless & counterproductive waste of money it is to annoy families on holiday?