RNLI - Overseas Expenditure. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Agree with everything apart from the last sentence.
It has been a time-proven , World class life saving at sea Service. All that without government intervention.

A caring, community people power has fueled it and manned it for 7 or 8 generations.

Why would that benefit from the scum that inhabits the HoC ?
Good point, but the time must come when we trust them (again?). Incidentally, the laudable ambitions of the founder to extend the service to the farthest corners of the world were made during a time when Britain extended its political, economic and military reach to those corners. We no longer do so; only the earnest desires of our Social Justice Community do, and with my money.
 

Wightsparker

War Hero
Bearing in mind the RNLI's founder had a vision of extending "drowning prevention" further afield than our own immediate coasts, it would be interesting to find out whether the RNLI had actually been involved in "overseas expenditure" for many of the intervening years.

This could be useful for the organisation's PR team in countering any suggestion that it is a relatively recent innovation brought about by "woke" new management keen to justify rather large salaries.
 
The RNLI maintain a reserve fleet as well as the 350 boats at stations around the coast of the UK and Ireland. I believe it was some of these boats sent out to the med.
I take it that a reserve fleet has a purpose to serve in UK waters ?

I hope no lives were lost here when they were elsewhere.
 

windswept398

Old-Salt
Since some RNLI pen pushers decided to sack a bloke from the front line over a mug, I've stopped donating to their outfit.
Pity, cause I truly believed and was inspired by their mission. Always intended to join them once my reserve days were over before 'Muggate'.
 
Bearing in mind the RNLI's founder had a vision of extending "drowning prevention" further afield than our own immediate coasts, it would be interesting to find out whether the RNLI had actually been involved in "overseas expenditure" for many of the intervening years.

This could be useful for the organisation's PR team in countering any suggestion that it is a relatively recent innovation brought about by "woke" new management keen to justify rather large salaries.
See some of my response directly above yours. ...another 'incidentally' coming up...
I send a direct-debit to ZANE (Zimbabwe- a National Emergency). I am able to direct my contribution to those who I feel need my help most; the old Rhodesians who saw all their assets devalued to nothing, and were unable to move out; a great many committed suicide and the remainder were either able to make a plan or had to live on such scraps as they could gather. I knew a former senior C Sqn SAS officer when I was there who had had to come out of retirement in his 70s to make ends meet.

I do not contribute to 'community projects', there or elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Good point, but the time must come when we trust them (again?). Incidentally, the laudable ambitions of the founder to extend the service to the farthest corners of the world were made during a time when Britain extended its political, economic and military reach to those corners. We no longer do so; only the earnest desires of our Social Justice Community do, and with my money.
Its going to take a seismic change in British political structure for me to ever have some faith in our Parliament.
Point taken about the place in time this brilliant Institution was set up.
 
I'd like to know how this expenditure falls within their charitable charter.



Oh & the CEO of the RNLI is paid more than the Prime Minister (£188,000).

Time to reconsider my support.
''We thank you for every pound you donate. Every penny that remains, after salary and office building outgoings are paid, will feed that starving child in our expensive prime-time tv ad."
 

Awol

LE
The RNLI responds. Apparently there's been a surge in donations...

If the RNLI are so sure that this revelation has caused a 'surge in donations', can we now expect their collecting boxes to loudly proclaim the fact that they send our donations abroad?

If not, why not?
 
[
That sounds a bit too convenient to me. I suspect that RNLI PR have been scrabbling around for a way to defuse the controversy, and that is what they've come up with, especially as no one is going to ask them to name the donor.
If the donor's contribution amounted to 2% of the total of all income (c.£148m) they quote, that's perfectly fine. But I suspect that it wasn't.

(Edit: and £189,000 salary for the Chief Exec? No. Really, no.)
 
Last edited:
Since some RNLI pen pushers decided to sack a bloke from the front line over a mug, I've stopped donating to their outfit.
Pity, cause I truly believed and was inspired by their mission. Always intended to join them once my reserve days were over before 'Muggate'.
There was more to that story than a mug, abuse and harassment came into it as well.
 

rifleair

War Hero
If the donor's contribution amounted to 2% of the total of all income (c.£148m) they quote, that's perfectly fine. But I suspect that it wasn't.

(Edit: and £189,000 salary for the Chief Exec? No. Really, no.)
If the donor was able to specify that he wanted it to go that programme then surely it was already up and running for him to see it?
His money might have been a good amount of that years funding but how long has it been going?
So I'm out.
 
Alternative view - the RNLI is Britain's competent body regarding sea rescue and drowning prevention, and as such gets involved in international drowning prevention schemes. These schemes might involve trying to stop children from going into the sea, and dealing with cultural barriers to safety.

The is probably an influence/soft power benefit too.

Or perhaps RNLI boats rescuing anyone found just outside of UK territorial limits should break their arms and throw them back in....
Soft power benefit for non contributors and non residents or visitors to these shores? The only signal there is
...- .. .-. - ..- .
 
There was more to that story than a mug, abuse and harassment came into it as well.
Please dont tell me someone called someone else's pint a poof ?

Or someone else's first rescue caused them PTSD ?

Or there was'nt a 'Safe Space' in the Lifeboat Station ?

Or there wasn' t a transgender toilet, or baby-changing facility in the Station ?

Or just that someone was so precious that when real life, the pressures and tragedies of people letting off steam, were too much for him/ her ?

Shouldn't have been lead to believe they were the ' right stuff' for that line of volunteering.
 
Give us some references and I'll do so. Not from the Guardian.
Here's the RNLI take:


Here is the view of one of the crew involved :

 

philc

LE
It is not their place to spend money raised by voluntary donation on overseas projects, which is why I and many others have ceased to support them through their HQ.

Two wolunteers were sacked over the mugs episode:

I have doubts about the 'surge' in donations; whenever there's publicity of any sort some people will register their feelings by firing out some money. I very much doubt that the leadership will last very long, and there will be a reorganisation soon.
It was a little more than page 3 girls on Mugs, as has been pointed out much noise from the sacked parties, only they paint a slightly different picture than the truth.
 
@solomon88 This was the Pornographic representation objected to:
Clipboard01.jpg


I'm deeply shocked. And Offended, too. (As the DM published it. If, of course, there was a full-on Kant-shot with chuffy's face burrowing in toward the G-spot, the Manager might have had a point when she told them to remove them from public sight. Does anyone know where you can buy such items?)
 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Top