rnli

[koster]

Why is sea rescue paid for by donations and provided by volunteers, and not the tax payer?

I mean, the police, fire, and ambulance services are funded by the tax payer, so what's the logic in not funding sea rescue (the RNLI)?

[dot.hawkes]

Does the Queen not stump up a few quid?

[Ethel]

The taxpayer already pays for the coastguard.

http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga-hmcg_rescue/ coastguard_operations.htm

[kempie]

...but Ethel, if the Coastguard was adequately funded/manned/equipped for the job in hand there would be no need for the RNLI (a charity) to take up the shortfall.

Similarly the St. John's Ambulance Service is a charitable association.

We do not expect the Police and Fire Service to have a token force propped up volunteers.

[Grunty]

I am not a member of the RNLI, but I have heard some members say that they prefer to raise the money from donations. Apparently they think that the government would otherwise want to get involved in the running of their organisation, and probably mess it up. Now what could have put that idea into their minds?

[Ethel]

Kempie - the police have Special Constables who are volunteers, and the fire service has volunteer fire fighters too:


3.45 Although whole-time and retained firefighters make up the majority of the Fire Service, there are also a few volunteer and auxiliary stations, made up of entirely unpaid individuals who maintain basic fire cover for the good of their community. Most of these volunteer stations are on the West Coast or in the Highlands of Scotland, where they provide a cost-effective service. In addition, in England, North Yorkshire and Cambridgeshire have some volunteer Fire Services.


I think it is core part of humanity to want to do this sort of work on a voluntary basis. And very grateful to them I am too!

[kempie]

I think the fundamental point you have overlooked is the ratio of professionals to volunteers.

Special Constables and Volunteer Firefighters certainly contribute to their respective services but are dwarfed in number by their professional colleagues.

The RNLI operates 233 stations with more than 4,800 crew, 300 lifeguards and numerous shore helpers all of whom facilitated the rescue of 7,507 people and the assistance of 9,041 others in 2004 alone.

http://www.rnli.org.uk/

btw MCA/HM Coastguard have a staff of 1,165 supported by over 3,250 volunteer Auxiliary Coastguards.

[SaxyJag]

The fact still remains that Special Constables and volunteer firefighters are government funded, whilst SJAB and RNLI are funded entirely by donation.

The Coastguard have a mammoth job to do. They don't just deal with rescue work, but have to take on many policing tasks too. The RNLI frees them up to do more of these duties. The advantage is that RNLI crew are the most familiar with their local waters and the people who use them, and are therefore better equipped to 'organise' an emergency.

It does gall me that they're prepared to give their lives for little more than the comradeship and social life it gives them, and the government don't contribute anything.

[shaneystar2]

It galls me too. My dad was a volunteer lifeboatman ..many years ago now...perhaps because he spent most of his life at sea anyway he saw it as doing his bit for his fellow mariners.
We have a great team of lifeboatmen along the stretch of coast where we live and people are continually fundraising .
Sir William Hillary founded the Royal National Lifeboat Institution for the Preservation of Life from Shipwreck 1824.
There has been a reduction in the number of coastguard stations which are government run but the charitable status of the RNLI lets them decide what to do with the money raised .Far better that than letting GB get his hands on it and syphoning it off and paying extortionate amounts to beancounters and the like.

[kempie]

Who else sees the irony in the millions of pounds of taxpayer money which could fund these charities being used to ensure the protection and safety of a handful of Government Ministers and minor Royals.

How fast would things change if their safety was dependent on charitable contributions?

[lightoftruth]

the major reason for the succes of the RNLI is the lack of beuraucrachy. It has long been my belief that if we got rid of the seemingly endless amount of comitee's etc the NHS would be a lot better off. As is the case with the RNLI. if they became government funded they would be inudated with paperwork and government targets. The RNLI is a lot better off standing on its own feet

[kempie]

Government funding does not mean Government control.

No-one is advocating the nationalisation of the RNLI.

[SaxyJag]

It would help just to have a government grant from time to time. When you see some of the useless projects that do get grants you wonder the money couldn't be put to better use saving lives and educating the public.

[Paul22118]

My understanding, in its simplest term is that if the RNLI was government funded they would never give them the money requried to deliver the superb service that they do.

Essentially they do much better from donations and bequeaths than they ever would from Gordon.

They are very much the exception though.

[shaneystar2]

Have you ever seen the government fund anything that they do not want to control ? They throw money around like a man with ten arms for ridiculous things like Millenium domes that stand empty ,use public services for their own ends ,waste money on cockeyed reports and public enquiries into various things with no specific outcome....a one off tax free grant in the budget for these sort of organisations now and again wouldn' t come amiss.Then they could have a clear conscience while they throw the rest of our taxes at lost causes.