to think that if you donate money to stop people drowning, you shouldn't have an issue if aome of that money is used to stop people drowning in poorer countries

[chomalungma]

Yes - the RNLI

They have been spending 3% of their income on supporting projects in poor countries to help prevent people drowning - even though it has had to lay some staff off.

They give a project to buy burkinis so women in Zanzibar can learn water safety skils.

They help support a creche because children are often left unsupervised as their parents have to work and many children drown each day. The creche project has helped reduce drowning deaths by 82%.

I can see that some people would be annoyed that a tiny percentage of their donations is going towards supporting poorer people in foreign countries and reducing their chances of drowning at a time when the RNLI lay off staff.

But it's a good thing to teach people water safety even if they are not in this country, isn't it?

Some people who donate to charity are racists.

It would be interesting to know whether they are in line with general donations to charity, or more or less likely to donate to charity ? Would any racists here be willing to do a survey ?

It's not necessarily the case though that all charity money spent is doing good. Plenty of well meaning charities in developing countries do more harm than good by undermining the local economy, making people dependent, propagating an unhelpful image of white men needing to tell local people how to live, causing corruption, religious bigotry etc etc. I can see a strong argument for the rnli sticking with UK work to avoid this problem. At least UK only charities are probably not making things worse.
However, it's better to give regularly in a planned way, having researched the causes that you want to support. Anyone who chucks a pound in a bucket labelled 'charity' without checking what that charity does is irresponsible.
DM complainers only have themselves to blame.
(I only give to overseas charities - but carefully chosen ones)

So long as the people who choose to donate elsewhere are prepared to make their own arrangements in the event of needing help

Really? So what about those who don't donate at all?

This is sort of hyperbole nonsense people who claiming to be against one sort of injustice and taking the moral highroad come out with.

If I saw a proven racist drop down on the street I would still run over and assist as I'm sure the brave volunteers of the RLNI would someone who previously used to donate. Try getting them not to help. Of course people who used to donate have a right to expect help as their funds have been used in the past to help others. Why on earth should they expect less?

As for it's on their website, it doesn't matter as they probably know full well that contributors do not really do much research beyond the initial spiel. Chuggers for all the big charities use similar tactics relying on volunteers only to buy into the initial presentation. Same with the charities advertising on TV. If I see a charity use the term 'National' I expect national, yet supposedly I should check if it reeeaaally is so, like the fine print under the terms and conditions of a Credit card.

Perhaps as suggested they ought to be more transparent (something a lot of charities could be better at) and change it from RNLI to RILI. Then this problem doesn't arise.

but what other cost-effective charity with a narrower remit does what the RNLI does?
What has this got to with anything?

most people that donate via bucket collections won’t be looking at the annual report. If they think their money is going to their local lifeboat then I can see why they might not be happy. For what it’s worth, I grew up near the sea and really value the RNLI. I know lots of people that would give money on an ad hoc basis assuming it is going to their local station

If you care that much about the nationality of people they help, it probably is down to you to inform yourself - especially given that the information is so easy to find.

so we now have to check all charity web sites before donating?
Yes, if you want to know how your money is spent!
As it's only 2% of donations going overseas, it's not dishonest for it to be called a national charity. Not all the money goes on lifeboats either. It's not possible to cover everything in a name.

Not all the money goes on lifeboats either.

Which is another massive problem in itself. If “Lifeboat” isn’t true, and “National” isn’t true, then all you’re left with is “Royal” and “Institution”!

CatherineOfAragaon, you've completely misunderstood my point. Of course the RNLI should be and are prepared to help everyone, irrespective of how foreign/bigoted/anything else they might be. The point is, of course, that people who make such a big deal of refusing to donate to the RNLI because they dare to use a tiny proportion of their funds for help internationally need to reflect on how hypocritical it would be to take that stand but still expect the RNLI to use their funds to rescue them if they get into difficulties.

Sure, not many people look at charity websites before they give. However, if they are as fussy as they claim to be about who benefits from their donations, why wouldn't they? You can't expect everyone shaking a tin to say "Hang on, before you put your £1 in, I need to make you aware that 2p will go to help outside the country, 10p will go to admin, 6p will go to manufacturing stuff we sell in the shops, 12p will go to fuel suppliers, 1p will go to buy tea and coffee, etc etc, are you sure you still want to give?"

As for the question about the alternative charity, you were the one who said that donors who don't like what the RNLI do could donate to a more cost-effective charity with a narrower remit.

Jeez! I had seen some of these international projects advertised on my Facebook feed maybe a year ago and not really given it a huge amount of thought, so it's not new news but it rankles that some DM "journalist" has thought that "exposing" this shocker (transparent and available in public domain anyway) would be good clickbait.

Off to set up a small direct debit if they're losing a gammon contingent of donors!

"And it’s just disgusting that the international project picked is burkhinis in Africa."

Having Friends from different parts of Africa (and so was my Father etc) the rise of extremist Muslim ideas and the murders of those that don't comply, is terrifying for them. Some have had family members, raped, murdered etc. This is new in some parts, or rather the type of 'Islam' being demanded is. Should we aid and abet this?

I've got mixed feelings about just throwing money at what seems like a good cause, but is actually perpetuating a very dangerous/harmful way of life and one that isn't wanted, but forced.

The help in Bangladesh, i don't have issue with. They are fighting a hard battle to get out of extreme poverty. But I don't think the money should come from the RNLI. However large numbers of children in Bangladesh die because of a lack of supervision, drowning is just one type of accident.

But many of the African states are not poor. Nigeria is a prime example. I think you can question giving to countries that have no Women's and Children's rights and have no sense of collectiveness and which runs on corruption. Whilst Charities provide help, the people don't push for change from within. They go with the flow, happy with the sticking plaster that's been put on.

Swimming lessons in the UK in deprived schools aren't enough and the private cost is out of many people's reach. It isn't racist to ask why that isn't on a Chariry's radar, but an overseas project is.

“So long as the people who choose to donate elsewhere are prepared to make their own arrangements in the event of needing help”

Eh? I don’t donate to any charities and still expect to be rescued if I need to be. If charities didn’t step in and provide these services the government would have to which is why I dont donate- we’re just giving the government a get out. I’ll still use their services though, especially when they provide life saving services. What a daft post. You reckon someone drowning in the channel is going to refuse rescue on principle because they haven’t donated?

The RNLI does far more than lifeboats

They provide lifeguards on some beaches

They also respond to flood emergencies when requested

Some lifeboats/stations don't get called out for weeks/months. Does anyone begrudge the £ spent on their boat maintenance or volunteer training?

Volunteers in land-locked locations provide educational talks and handouts to schools and water-leisure groups.

The head office needs to pay the electricity bill.

I make myself aware of how they operate and the work they do. The percentage of any donation made they gets spent on frontline services is very good, compared to other charities.

I trust the charity to spend any donation I make in whatever way they see fit.

Conversely, I would give to a charity that I feel spends too much of their income on back office costs or, worse, isn't transparent about where their income is spent.

It doesn't annoy me that much (well I don't donate to them anyway) but I do have different budgets for local/far away (and medical) charities. Mostly because I believe that a lot of money is sent overseas anyway but the local charities need funding as well and I want pay for my community as well.

Potentially outing but I live near several RNLI Lifeguarded beaches and a Lifeboat station. My kids are both trainee surf lifesaving lifeguards. Their club works with a club in Bangladesh who are trying to help do the same there where very few kids get the chance to learn to swim and they're making a particular effort to get girls involved. 2 of the guys running it did a session on what they do there and it was so inspiring and worthwhile. I don't understand how anyone could grudge this kind of work to be honest.

I only give to Air Ambulance despite feeling it should be funded by government. They never seem to have a problem getting police helicopter up night or day. Id be a bit miffed if it started flying to Bangladesh to help out though, perhaps i need to check the website to see whats in its remit.

Echoing what previous posters have said really, but I would say it is true that past advertising campaigns aimed at getting donations have always focused on the local aspect - often with photos of your local boat and (volunteer, unpaid) crew. If the majority of their income is from the older population then yes, it is going to be a surprise to find that it's not funding Bessie the lifeboat on their local beach.

I used to have links to a small charity, one person there had ideas to extend the outreach in an area I thought was both unrealistic and not financially viable. A National charity like the RNLI looking to extend themselves into the International arena in the way that they are would make me wonder about the people at the top of it, purely from my experience. Some are driven by a genuine desire to help out, others by empire building at the financial expense of others

With the cuts in the Coastguard service it would be a shame if this impacts greatly on the RNLI and I think it might.

The point is, of course, that people who make such a big deal of refusing to donate to the RNLI because they dare to use a tiny proportion of their funds for help internationally need to reflect on how hypocritical it would be to take that stand but still expect the RNLI to use their funds to rescue them if they get into difficulties.

Ok I understand your point better, however it still doesn't make sense to me.

Because people would prefer their hard earned cash to go solely on national projects (in a country which is itself home to the some of the most ethically diverse communities in the world who fall under the umbrella of national) and not to international interests, they have no right to expect to be saved if drowning? Even if they previously used to donate and some of those funds were previously spent helping others abroad?

You say it would be hypocritical for them to expect help but I don't see the hypocrisy. Unless you mean if they were drowning abroad? But even there I am not sure your argument holds water, excuse the pun.

I don't understand how anyone could grudge this kind of work to be honest.

I find it hard to understand too but then I see all humans as being of equal importance. Others see people born with different coloured skin and in cultures that are very different from their own as less than human. If they aren't as human as we are, they are expendable.

I suspect there would be a lot less fuss if the RNLI was training lifeguards in a country like New Zealand or Canada.

I was in the benefit of the doubt camp but I’ve just checked twitter and there are some truly vile posts. I’m quite shocked really. I still don’t think (or hope) they are representative but I can see now why some posters on here have been v passionate in their defence of the RNLI.

But why do they need to train lifeguards in Africa, Bangladesh or Canada or New Zealand ? No disrespect to lifeguards but I’m struggling to understand what’s so complex about the training that you need a team from thousands of miles away to come and show you. It all seems a bit imperialist, and as I and a PP said this sort of white man swooping in charitable acts is really going out of flavour now.

I have raised & donated money to RNLI
I thought they were a UK/Irish charity

I will never donate again to RNLI again

My money was not for over seas

Yes, I donate to overseas too occasionally

False advertising / information by the charity !

I find it hard to understand too but then I see all humans as being of equal importance.

Thank goodness successive governments have implemented laws to ensure people like you can be tracked, located and lined up for re-education ready for the UK to take it's place leading the world again. It's pinko lefties like you that have ruined the world for the rest of us.

(Still quite cross, and now sarcastic )

"All humans are equal" FGS" ! You'll be saying the colour of skin doesn't matter next. And then where would we be ?

BEST TITLE CROP EVER.

Still cross, but smiling

@SerendipityJane

I shall wear this badge whenever I leave the house so people may be warned of my weird extremist views.

Timandra

Looks just the ticket. If you could make the effort to wear it over your heart, we could save a few bullets ....

(Do we really need a sarky icon ?)