RNLI takes down its website after suspected hacking attempt

[motorbiking]

Legacies were £122.5M 2018 down 8.5m on the previous year, The Tory government (that you hate some much)'s furlough scheme accounted for around £4M in 2020. The guardian thought the 2019 accounts were also good news: https://www.theguardian.com/society...tory-criticism-work-overseas-lifeboat-charity

I've read enough Financial Accounts to spot a Press Release focusing on the Good. The point I was making is they get most of their money from Legacies, so increases in donations of 3000% no matter how optimistically measured, wont help them get their deficit down.

I do think offering a coordinated collection service working with the French Border Authorities doesn't help discourage crossings, that said, its not safe for anyone to cross the channel in a poorly equipped dingy this time of year so they are stuck between a rock and hard place. The issue the RNLI face, is likely to be another year where spending is greater than income. I don't know what their exposure is, but it looks like 3-4 years of -£5M. IMO they should not be cutting back on National services (which they are) because they are choosing to fund international operations. That would appear to go against their charter.

I don't think I'm ready to accept the Guardian's view that the RNLI have had record funding increases on the back of their work collecting migrating people.

 

[AngleEyes]

That headline doesn’t quite match the body of the article. Most of their funding comes from legacies and the Guardian posted similar good news stories in 2019 and 2020. Yet the accounts didn’t match.

Legacies were £122.5M 2018 down 8.5m on the previous year,

You're widening your horizons to find a year to match your assertion.

https://register-of-charities.chari...ilsPortlet_priv_r_p_organisationNumber=209603​

None of that fits with your claim that income is down due to your promotion of the anti-immigrant philosophy, as championed by Nigel Farage.

The Tory government (that you hate some much)'s furlough scheme accounted for around £4M in 2020. The guardian thought the 2019 accounts were also good news: https://www.theguardian.com/society...tory-criticism-work-overseas-lifeboat-charity

It's going to be a lengthy and pointless discussion if we search through past financial records to find some detail to fit our narrative.

I've read enough Financial Accounts to spot a Press Release focusing on the Good. The point I was making is they get most of their money from Legacies, so increases in donations of 3000% no matter how optimistically measured, wont help them get their deficit down.

The legacy funding, I suspect, is not influenced by yours and Nigel Farage's narrative. I'm sure that legacies have a much longer, broader and global outlook than yours and Nigel Farage's.

I do think offering a coordinated collection service working with the French Border Authorities doesn't help discourage crossings, that said, its not safe for anyone to cross the channel in a poorly equipped dingy this time of year so they are stuck between a rock and hard place.

An undeniable conclusion based on a false narrative.

The issue the RNLI face, is likely to be another year where spending is greater than income. I don't know what their exposure is, but it looks like 3-4 years of -£5M. IMO they should not be cutting back on National services (which they are) because they are choosing to fund international operations. That would appear to go against their charter.

I don't see anything referring to UK territorial waters in the Charter. Do you?

“THE ROYAL NATIONAL INSTITUTION FOR THE PRESERVATION OF LIFE FROM SHIPWRECK”, and which title was altered in 1854, and the said Society is now designated ”THE ROYAL NATIONAL LIFE-BOAT INSTITUTION, for the Preservation of Life from Shipwreck”, and of which Society We have become Patron.
https://rnli.org/about-us/how-the-rnli-is-run/royal-charter-and-bye-laws
​

Nor anything in their philosophy that restricts them to UK waters. Do you?

Our purpose
The RNLI is the charity that saves lives at sea.

Our vision
To save every one.

Our values
Our Values reflect the way we work. As one crew, we strive for excellence and are:

Trustworthy

To hold the trust of the public, our volunteers, supporters, partners and staff.

Courageous

To have the courage to take on the most demanding challenges.

Selfless

To put the needs of others first.

Dependable

To be reliable, consistent and authentic.
https://rnli.org/about-us/our-strategy/our-philosophy​

I don't think I'm ready to accept the Guardian's view that the RNLI have had record funding increases on the back of their work collecting migrating people.

Of course you will disagree with any view that suits your anti-immigration argument. You've made that crystal clear.

 

[motorbiking]

You're widening your horizons to find a year to match your assertion.

No I'm answering the question, I thought you asked:

A fairly static £165M (ish) every year apart from 2018 and removing the one-time government subsidies (5.4M). They have a funding shortfall. i.e. they spend more than they earn. it would appear to be £6M - 20M annually. The press is full of RNLI "service cuts", "job losses" etc. they are easy to find. The guardian's good news stories in 2019 and 2020 don't seem to match their annual accounts.

I don't see anything referring to UK territorial waters in the Charter. Do you?

Yes - as usual, you never seem to read the detail. Read Section 4.

4 The work of the Institution shall be primarily but not exclusively carried out in and around the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland.

So I pose this simple question: If you are spending more than you earn and need to cut back, should you A) cut back your domestic operations, smaller boats and beach patrols or B) your international operations?

At the moment they appear to have 2 of their most expensive assets dedicated to collecting Migrants at the halfway point in the English Chanel.

My observation is the Guardian's press release regurgitation does not match the annual reports. I hope this year I'm wrong, as the RNLI are likely to face another year of falling incomes which will lead to cut backs of vital UK coastal services.

 

[IT Minion]

So I pose this simple question: If you are spending more than you earn and need to cut back, should you A) cut back your domestic operations, smaller boats and beach patrols or B) your international operations?

Which cut will result in more lives lost?

 

[motorbiking]

How can anyone know.

If you cut the taxi service, will the number of crossing attempts decrease? If you increase the taxi service will they be overwhelmed?

 

[IT Minion]

How can anyone know.

If you cut the taxi service, will the number of crossing attempts decrease? If you increase the taxi service will they be overwhelmed?

There was supposed to be a report on "pull" factors for migration to the UK. It might shed some light if it has been published.

My guess is that forbidding the RNLI to help any boats in the Channel that don't look like fishermen or nice middle class yachtsmen wouldn't reduce the amount attempting to cross but would result in more deaths.

But I suspect the RNLI has done a qualitative assessment of the relative risks and decided on the current level of resourcing. We'll have to see for next year.

 

[motorbiking]

You wont find nice middle class yachtsmen, they usually like to shout "Water" and "starboard" or "no overlap" and "bl@@dy Powerboat idiot" at each other

Like it or hate it the new government Bill is aiming to address the Pull factors. One common fact, seems to be a lot of failed claimers from other European states seem to be successful here. Either they get better at saying the right things or we are softer than our neighbours.

 

[IT Minion]

You wont find nice middle class yachtsmen, they usually like to shout "Water" and "starboard" or "no overlap" and "bl@@dy Powerboat idiot" at each other

Like it or hate it the new government Bill is aiming to address the Pull factors. One common fact, seems to be a lot of failed claimers from other European states seem to be successful here. Either they get better at saying the right things or we are softer than our neighbours.

Well you say that, but the last I heard was that the Pull factor assessment hasn't been published yet and isn't going to be until after the bill.

I suspect that the Government is just going to make some arbitrary harsh rules that'll please their base, make all asylum seekers lives harder and make no real difference to the number of people seeking shelter here. But maybe I'm just cynical.

 

[motorbiking]

Its available to read. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/58-02/082/5802082_en_1.html

It seems to do several things:
- Create a 2 tier refugee system
- Allow deals to be struck to send people elsewhere
- close the loopholes with the loss of Dublin convention
- tightly scope the work NGOs et al can do to assist.

 

[IT Minion]

Its available to read. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/58-02/082/5802082_en_1.html

It seems to do several things:
- Create a 2 tier refugee system
- Allow deals to be struck to send people elsewhere
- close the loopholes with the loss of Dublin convention
- tightly scope the work NGOs et al can do to assist.

The Bill is, the pull report isn't.

And it's more of a theoretical two tier system as we take so few refugees through official channels.

 

[Notch7]

Like it or hate it the new government Bill is aiming to address the Pull factors

The available evidence says the primary pull factors are language and family.

Im not sure how the government will address those

One common fact, seems to be a lot of failed claimers from other European states seem to be successful here

I believe the UK takes just a third of the asylum claims compared to the major EU countries, so it can’t by be many.

 

[Notch7]

close the loopholes with the loss of Dublin convention

in practice that seems to mean it would break international law.

Create a 2 tier refugee system

Seems to be govt spin.

it means: more security rights and entitlements to those that arrive by legal means….which is basically zero

then prevent the others the right to claim asylum.

 

[AngleEyes]

Yes - as usual, you never seem to read the detail. Read Section 4.

4 The work of the Institution shall be primarily but not exclusively carried out in and around the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland.

At the moment they appear to have 2 of their most expensive assets dedicated to collecting Migrants at the halfway point in the English Chanel.

I'm glad you read it, especially this bit: "in and around the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands and the Republic of Ireland."
I reckon that includes the Channel, don't you? After all it's about 100 miles to NI from England. but only 20 miles across the Channel.
They also state that it will not be exclusively around those waters. That's also crystal clear to me.
You're just grasping at feeble excuses to promote your political narrative. You even have the audacity to phrase it as 'collecting migrants' rather than rescuing migrants.
Your political philosophy is clouding your moral and ethical judgement.

It would seem prudent to arrange the available equipment where and when it can be put to best use, irrespective of how the victims found themselves in need of rescuing. Don't you think so? It is after all the busiest shipping area.

 

[AngleEyes]

- Create a 2 tier refugee system

I understand that to be in violation of the UN Charter.
One minute you're arguing for non-existent issues in the RNLI Charter, then you demonstrate a willingness to violate a UN Charter.
You demonstrate a pick and mix attitude to Charters.

- Allow deals to be struck to send people elsewhere

I understand that option to be available already. The problem is no-one wants to make any deals with UK.

 

[motorbiking]

It would seem prudent to arrange the available equipment where and when it can be put to best use, irrespective of how the victims found themselves in need of rescuing. Don't you think so? It is after all the busiest shipping area.

I agree, they should station the rescuers nice and close to the source of the migrants and take them to the nearest safe port, rather than track them in their peril for 2-3 hours until they enter UK waters and then taxi them to dover.

A couple of fast B class vessels based out of Northern France should be capable of getting anywhere in the risk zone below in under an hour. Cost 180K each vs £2.5M each for the more expensive vessels currently doing 4 hour round trips. One in cap griz-nez and the other sangatte. If only there were vessels there already?

After all it's about 100 miles to NI from England.

Pretty sure that Scotland is still part of the UK and its barely 15Nm