steve_cronin
regular
Reged: 16/05/2001
Posts: 4187
|
|
It has been suggested that the RYA’s response to any proposed legislation to restrict or even regulate boating activities - something which the RNLI’s Director of Operations is on record as calling “...unnecessary and trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist” is more likely to be:-
“Oh yes Mr Government minister Sir, we’ll agree with your proposals (although we reserve the right to make a few insignificant cosmetic amendments) so long as we’re allowed to police and regulate it in the final event”
rather than the more appropriate - and infinitely more popular with boating folk:-
“This is entirely unreasonable and the RYA will oppose such an imposition at every stage since it is entirely contrary to the interests of our members”
Isn’t this really the way the RYA goes about things and the main reason why your staff at the Boat Show were taking so much flak and why we, the members should have little faith in how you will put OUR interests first, which is what you are supposed to exist for?
Steve Cronin
|
rhinorhino
regular
Reged: 14/09/2002
Posts: 518
|
|
Why does the RYA insist on putting itself forward as the "Governing body" of sailing when it is no such thing?
All my other posts critical of RYA have been moderated off so far....
|
kimhollamby
Administrator
Reged: 16/05/2001
Posts: 3847
Loc: London (at work)
|
|
I haven't moderated anything off so far...the problem is keeping up to moderate everything on and I have tried to concentrate on getting the widest spread of comments.
There is an answer to Steve's post coming shortly.
kim_hollamby@ipcmedia.com
|
**DONOTDELETE**
|
|
Two questions disguised as one here!
The quote about 'unnecessary and trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist' is lifted from our formal response to the Government's proposals to bring in breathalysers at sea. Our full position can be seen on our website (www.rya.org.uk click on Legal and Government. In short, we see no need for any new regulations here; most harbour authorities (where problems can arise) already have specific byelaws in place and there is no evidence on record that these are insufficient.
The hidden question suggests that we are posturing against compulsory driving licences for boat owners, but preparing to profit from the requirement if it comes about.
The policy of the RYA is absolutely to support 'Education not Legislation', and we respond robustly against each and every move by officials at every level whenever it comes up; which is a lot!
|
**DONOTDELETE**
|
|
What really intrigues me about a regulatory future is, who's benefit is it for?
Driving a car is regulated for the good of the general public, pedestrian, land owner, car driver, motorcyclist, cyclist etc.etc. Oh, and the Exchequer!. A car driver can though effect many others en-route.
Boating is pretty soliatary - there aren't many pedestrians out there, so self- regulation, or better no regulation BUT guidance, training and a better image instead is whats needed. (The Exchequer gets his bit already from VAT!)
Both the RNLI and the RYA have the SAME view I think - they just need to co-ordinate their ideas more - it's easier for the RNLI, whom I fully support, because who's going to ciritcise the comments of life savers, but they don't help when their own statistics don't bother to relate occurances of incidents to the size of local boat parc or similar - with a factual, but whole picture angle! (PR)
How many times have you been appalled at the carnage of a plane crash only to be told in the same day that flying is safer than going by car - thats PR!
|
Observer
regular
Reged: 21/11/2002
Posts: 1166
Loc: Bucks
|
|
There is a gulf between the two camps. There are those (Steve and Bigmart to name two) who believe that every proposed regulation or even mooted regulation or even discussion of mooted regulation should be fought with tooth and nail from the first moment it is mentioned or, probably, even thought about. The argument (sorry if I put words in your mouth) is that "if we don't stand up and fight and shout, the bureaucrats will tread all over us, and tax us out of existence to boot."
There are others, like me, who accept, with some reluctance and resignation, that creeping regulation is an unfortunate fact of life and that it is better to work with and try to educate those who seek to impose regulation, ameliorating the least harmful, ill-judged aspects etc.
The RYA is clearly in the second camp and, without knowing a lot of detail about how effective they are, I think they're doing an OK job. Could always be improved but what can't?
On the central question, regulation is aready a fact. It must be better for the RYA to be involved as part of the regulation process - at least they have people who have some background in and sympathy with leisure boating - than shouting foul from the sidelines.
The preferred position is, to me, self-evident.
|
rhinorhino
regular
Reged: 14/09/2002
Posts: 518
|
|
Kim,
Sorry if I wrongly accused you of moderating out some of my replies. I accept it may well be a speed issue, although wether there is a difference between failing to moderate on within two hours and moderating out might be a subject for healthy debate.
|
kimhollamby
Administrator
Reged: 16/05/2001
Posts: 3847
Loc: London (at work)
|
|
I was cherry picking to try and get maximum questions and answers. Hence delay - I made some choices to skip posts in order to cover the ground.
Now started the process of reviewing the whole board and I'll look at all the missed comments.
kim_hollamby@ipcmedia.com
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
