Nationalise the RNLI?
in the Marchioness report, a dedicated life saving service for the thames was recommended. The Port of London authorities, police, fire service, MCA & RNLI were asked to put forward proposals. None wanted it other than the RNLI who did, but not with volunteers. It had to be funded by the City of London.Julian wrote:I do think they have no business in ... the Thames politico position they appear to have adopted.
It might have been political but more likely, I would have thought, that the exposure in the centre of London would help fundraising?
-
Windfinder
- Master Mariner
- Posts: 200
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:54 pm
Yes
And a further question on those lines must be to what extent can you teach seamanship by going to sea a few hours a week compared to a man who has been going to sea since his teens to earn his living all day every day.
I take nothing away from the skill and courage of the lifeboat crews but they are different from the traditional professional seamen who used to do the job.
Perhaps the management of the service has to change to reflect this. and to their credit they do seem prepared to embrace change. Certainly the technology available has changed substantially, as has the nature of the services they are called upon to deliver. When you read of some of the rescues of 50+ years ago where merchant ships stranded and sank and were overpowered by weather, where the likes of Henry Blogg drove their boats onto the decks of stranded ships to take crewmen off, it is not a thing that happens today. Don't have the numbers to hand but I guess merchant shipping is only a small proportion of the RNLI's clientele, with "leisure" boats making up a much higher proportion.
Maybe the question will have to be asked - should they start to replace the big all weather lifeboats with helicopters, perhaps backed up by cheaper less capable boats to tow in broken down yachties.
And a further question on those lines must be to what extent can you teach seamanship by going to sea a few hours a week compared to a man who has been going to sea since his teens to earn his living all day every day.
I take nothing away from the skill and courage of the lifeboat crews but they are different from the traditional professional seamen who used to do the job.
Perhaps the management of the service has to change to reflect this. and to their credit they do seem prepared to embrace change. Certainly the technology available has changed substantially, as has the nature of the services they are called upon to deliver. When you read of some of the rescues of 50+ years ago where merchant ships stranded and sank and were overpowered by weather, where the likes of Henry Blogg drove their boats onto the decks of stranded ships to take crewmen off, it is not a thing that happens today. Don't have the numbers to hand but I guess merchant shipping is only a small proportion of the RNLI's clientele, with "leisure" boats making up a much higher proportion.
Maybe the question will have to be asked - should they start to replace the big all weather lifeboats with helicopters, perhaps backed up by cheaper less capable boats to tow in broken down yachties.
Yes
And a further question on those lines must be to what extent can you teach seamanship by going to sea a few hours a week compared to a man who has been going to sea since his teens to earn his living all day every day.
I take nothing away from the skill and courage of the lifeboat crews but they are different from the traditional professional seamen who used to do the job.
Perhaps the management of the service has to change to reflect this. and to their credit they do seem prepared to embrace change. Certainly the technology available has changed substantially, as has the nature of the services they are called upon to deliver. When you read of some of the rescues of 50+ years ago where merchant ships stranded and sank and were overpowered by weather, where the likes of Henry Blogg drove their boats onto the decks of stranded ships to take crewmen off, it is not a thing that happens today. Don't have the numbers to hand but I guess merchant shipping is only a small proportion of the RNLI's clientele, with "leisure" boats making up a much higher proportion.
Maybe the question will have to be asked - should they start to replace the big all weather lifeboats with helicopters, perhaps backed up by cheaper less capable boats to tow in broken down yachties.
And a further question on those lines must be to what extent can you teach seamanship by going to sea a few hours a week compared to a man who has been going to sea since his teens to earn his living all day every day.
I take nothing away from the skill and courage of the lifeboat crews but they are different from the traditional professional seamen who used to do the job.
Perhaps the management of the service has to change to reflect this. and to their credit they do seem prepared to embrace change. Certainly the technology available has changed substantially, as has the nature of the services they are called upon to deliver. When you read of some of the rescues of 50+ years ago where merchant ships stranded and sank and were overpowered by weather, where the likes of Henry Blogg drove their boats onto the decks of stranded ships to take crewmen off, it is not a thing that happens today. Don't have the numbers to hand but I guess merchant shipping is only a small proportion of the RNLI's clientele, with "leisure" boats making up a much higher proportion.
Maybe the question will have to be asked - should they start to replace the big all weather lifeboats with helicopters, perhaps backed up by cheaper less capable boats to tow in broken down yachties.
-
Windfinder
- Master Mariner
- Posts: 200
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:54 pm
Or even better stop designing and building bespoke rescue vessels and just buy off the shelf heavy weather self righting rescue vessels.Olivepage wrote:Maybe the question will have to be asked - should they start to replace the big all weather lifeboats with helicopters, perhaps backed up by cheaper less capable boats to tow in broken down yachties.
Mind you it's the RNLI's cash to do as they please with.
when you compare the costs of the SNSM (frog equivalent @ £10m annual cost with usual caveat abt dodgy french accounting) there's a huge difference even allowing for recovering costs for towing in broken down yachties.Olivepage wrote:Maybe the question will have to be asked - should they start to replace the big all weather lifeboats with helicopters, perhaps backed up by cheaper less capable boats to tow in broken down yachties.
Some part of this disparity must be the less expensive french boats.
But, I would argue that the purpose of the RNLI is to save lives and the sea temperatures around the UK are a lot colder than most of France and therefore picking said yachty out of the water in all weather quickly and with boats built for the task matters.
The state does have an interest in this in a rather oblique way. With 1m working for the NHS, million or two in other public bodies, and most on permissive pension arrangements, a death at sea of a public employee is eye-wateringly expensive - typically £1m for a 35yr old doctor - so anything the RNLI can do to prevent this happening would be ... erm .. welcome!
If I were a cynical man I might suggest that would be money well spent - but I won't.
Agree about the cold water issue, which was one reason I suggested helicopters may be the way forward - they are much faster and 1 helicopter can cover much more sea than any boat - no matter how fast.
That of course leaves the question of abandoned yachts littering the coastal waters. The RNLI aims to save lives - does it have any duty to save property?
Is there an argument that salvaging a yacht is done to prevent a second accident when someone else hits the thing.
Is saving a yacht different from saving a fishing boat - which is someone's livelihood?
Starts to get a murky when you dig a bit deeper.
I know little about the French situation other than stories of people being presented with a bill for services rendered. Which itself raises a question.
Agree about the cold water issue, which was one reason I suggested helicopters may be the way forward - they are much faster and 1 helicopter can cover much more sea than any boat - no matter how fast.
That of course leaves the question of abandoned yachts littering the coastal waters. The RNLI aims to save lives - does it have any duty to save property?
Is there an argument that salvaging a yacht is done to prevent a second accident when someone else hits the thing.
Is saving a yacht different from saving a fishing boat - which is someone's livelihood?
Starts to get a murky when you dig a bit deeper.
I know little about the French situation other than stories of people being presented with a bill for services rendered. Which itself raises a question.
If I were a marine insurer, i'd be a lot happier knowing that the RNLI will, as likely as not, tow the yacht back. My insurer, Bishop Skinner, offer a discount if the insured is a member of the RNLI.Olivepage wrote:That of course leaves the question of abandoned yachts littering the coastal waters. The RNLI aims to save lives - does it have any duty to save property?
On the other hand, whilst participating in the ill-fated UK Dart 18 catamarran championships at weymouth some years ago a storm appeared and blew over 80+ cats. The cox of the lifeboat summoned to pick us all out of the water as we were driven, generally upside down, toward France was plaintively asked by one if he'd mind towing the cat back. We're here to save lives, he said as he trundled off to pick another up ..
-
Windfinder
- Master Mariner
- Posts: 200
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:54 pm
Julian
Have a read of Para's post
I was posing a question, and after all the title of the thread is "Rationalising The RNLI"
Unless one considers a range of options then any rationalisation or any progress is unlikely to occur.
Because it is "not a business" does not mean that it cannot operate in a businesslike manner. In fact its status as a registered charity imposes a legal requirement upon it to do exactly that.
Have a read of Para's post
I was posing a question, and after all the title of the thread is "Rationalising The RNLI"
Unless one considers a range of options then any rationalisation or any progress is unlikely to occur.
Because it is "not a business" does not mean that it cannot operate in a businesslike manner. In fact its status as a registered charity imposes a legal requirement upon it to do exactly that.
Julian wrote:Yes, sorry, I did not mean to come across so aggressively. I do get fed up with this attitude that things must somehow only create value, a rescue or tow should be justified in some way, a statue is a waste when it can buy 4 hospital beds, a park can buy a sub post office etc.Olivepage wrote:Julian
Have a read of Para's post
I was posing a question, and after all the title of the thread is "Rationalising The RNLI"
Unless one considers a range of options then any rationalisation or any progress is unlikely to occur.
Because it is "not a business" does not mean that it cannot operate in a businesslike manner. In fact its status as a registered charity imposes a legal requirement upon it to do exactly that.
What a miserable accountants dream we would live in if everything had to make sense.
Here is an example, if you were out in the boat and found a liferaft.. A helo was on the way and the sea to rough to promise a safe pick up with your available crew. The helo asks for a smoke to guide them in and you throw in your floating orange.
Would you expect the crew in the liferaft to pay you back for the flare you used? Just interested, anyone can answer this..
Now this would depend on which side of the border you were from!
Err No
I'd light my tar barrel - You don't expect a Yorkshireman to use a flare if there's an alternative.
But seriously - I obviously haven't made my meaning clear.
I wasn't looking at the question in terms of payment I was thinking about priorities.
No question the first priority is to save life
But what then - The RNLI take many more calls for assistance that are not directly life threatening.
Now putting that into the context of my other post where I had raised the idea of replacing boats with helicopters.
Clearly a helicopter cannot salvage a boat. So where does that leave the RNLI in terms of what its role is. If they rescue the crew of a boat should they then send out a lifeboat to salvage the abandoned vessel?
To do so adds to the cost of the service as well as adding to the risk to the crew. What risk would you or I ask a crew to take to salvage our boats?
What risk would the crew be prepared (or be allowed) to take?
Would that risk be different in the case of a leisure vessel that would be insured and so have little financial loss to the owner, than it would be for a fishing boat which may be insured but would represent a considerable loss in terms of earnings to its owner.
Really a question of how they look at priorities and balance them against risks.
My view for what its worth is that I like the situation as it is and would not wish to change it, but one has to accept that it may not be possible to maintain the status quo - hence we float a few ideas about to look at the options.
I hope this helps you understand where I was going with the argument.
I'd light my tar barrel - You don't expect a Yorkshireman to use a flare if there's an alternative.
But seriously - I obviously haven't made my meaning clear.
I wasn't looking at the question in terms of payment I was thinking about priorities.
No question the first priority is to save life
But what then - The RNLI take many more calls for assistance that are not directly life threatening.
Now putting that into the context of my other post where I had raised the idea of replacing boats with helicopters.
Clearly a helicopter cannot salvage a boat. So where does that leave the RNLI in terms of what its role is. If they rescue the crew of a boat should they then send out a lifeboat to salvage the abandoned vessel?
To do so adds to the cost of the service as well as adding to the risk to the crew. What risk would you or I ask a crew to take to salvage our boats?
What risk would the crew be prepared (or be allowed) to take?
Would that risk be different in the case of a leisure vessel that would be insured and so have little financial loss to the owner, than it would be for a fishing boat which may be insured but would represent a considerable loss in terms of earnings to its owner.
Really a question of how they look at priorities and balance them against risks.
My view for what its worth is that I like the situation as it is and would not wish to change it, but one has to accept that it may not be possible to maintain the status quo - hence we float a few ideas about to look at the options.
I hope this helps you understand where I was going with the argument.