VMR v Coast Guard

[Lucky_Phill]

Here's a poll I'd like folks to cast a vote in.

cheers

[CT]

I'm for amalgamate but don't want to loose the level of service I get now. Would be happy with a staged membership. Currently local CG has three stages, PWC, boats to 50 km and boats to 100 km. I'd be happy to pay an extra amount to be a member of another group where I holiday BUT at a lower cost than a full membership.

In my mind, if there's no reciprocals or staged membership for multiple locations there is little point in amalgamation.

[Noelm]

Have to agree there, be a bugger to be a paid member somewhere, go on holidays and have to join again to get coverage, or even worse if you are on a long boating holiday and launch at dozens of locations and have to locate someone and pay for some kind of casual membership.

[chris69]

Yer id pay a fee to be covered all the way up the cost then the funds help everyone were theres only a few boats so everyone got the same gear to rescue anyone anywhere.

[Out-Station]

I automatically thought amalgamate but then wondered what would happen to some of those "localised" vmr services in smaller or remote coastal fishing centres under the amalgamated model. I'm a bit underdone in terms of background on the goods and bads of the options so ill watch on for a minute!

[Ronje1]

Tried to send you a pm to save this thread for polls but yr box is full.

wondered what would happen to some of those "localised" vmr services in smaller or remote coastal fishing centres under the amalgamated model.

They'll disappear as they will be seen a by the Qld Fire & Emergency Services district manager as over-servicing and unjustifiable expense


Examples to mind are:

Rockhampton CG - basically the Fitzroy River
Keppel Sands CG - mouth of Fitzroy/bottom bit of Keppel Bay
Woodgate - between Hervey VMR and Bundaberg VMR.

These were all put in to access govt funding and to stop opposite group from establishing close by.

There'll be others further south in higher boating density areas.

Look at the blue water report.

The CG and VMR prime task was saving themselves and general boating public came second.

Av joe boatie's interest were represented by the Qld Recreational Boating Council (whoever they are).

I've asked them for a copy of their submission to the review on our behalf but nothing forthcoming so far.

[Noelm]

It kind of reads you might have an iron in the fire on this, what's your stand on the idea?

[Ronje1]

Re: Queenslanders and VMR....Coast Guard, What's doing ?


Noelm

Read the above thread from post #32 onwards and read the "Blue Water Report" on this link https://www.qfes.qld.gov.au/Pages/Review-VMR.aspx

THAT'S what's happening in Qld in volunteer marine rescue service circles as we speak.

There WILL be an amalgamation of the services that each provides and the new policy WILL be run by the Commissioner for Fire and Rescue Services in Qld.

It will NOT be an amalgamation of the AVCGA and Volunteer Marine Rescue bodies themselves.

They will be invited to participate but under the conditions arrived at by Qld Commissioner QFRS's review recommendations. (Read the review on that link).

Each QFES district (or police district depending on which district model they follow), will be run by a QFES district manager and the AVCGA and VMR units within that district will be invited to participate.

Note that not ALL of the units might be needed. Some will probably close/disband depending on the operational/funding model the review arrives at.

There WILL be a shake-up and the ability of the AVCGA/VMR units to make their own decisions about operations will be severely curtailed. Some "rescues" currently undertaken by both groups are not real rescues at all. Out-of-fuel, aground, non-lifethreatening incidents may simply be referred to a commercial towing service etc (a standard policy arrived at by the QFES.

It won't be perfect initially. AVCGA or VMR might not be willing to participate under those conditions.

Some of the vollies in both organisations might not like the new arrangements where they feel like they're not being valued or feel wanted and simply pull out.

Basically, you can't make omlettes without breaking eggs.

The boating community complained about the inconsistency between volunteer rescue groups policies (and there was indeed inconsistency).

Will the boating community be happy with the model that the govt intends to thrust upon them? Who knows. Depends on how the changes are sold to the boaties.

SOMEBODY will have to pay (by levy or similar) for the extra govt costs involved in providing a new structure.

Probably half a dozen new public service positions PLUS a couple of new permanent positions by VMR and AVCGA management staff on the public payroll as well. They'll be jockeying for position at the moment.

Look on that other thread.

[Noelm]

My worry would be the second people know there will be paid positions, armchair Admirals will come out of the woodwork!

[Out-Station]

Thanks Ron,

Seems like a similar setup to how the localised bushfire brigades were brought under gov't type control ??

Better get myself a set of twins so i can get myself home!!

[Ronje1]

And the ambos.

To me , the Qld Govt never picked up the ball with maritime services in Qld. They were happy to save money. NOW they want to shoehorn themselves into the system 35 years after they should have.

Until suitable "tow-truck on the water" businesses are set up, the volunteer units will probably provide the service but on a full cost recovery basis managed by the QFES.

I'm reading between the lines about some of this but I've worked with ALL of the organisations involved both at state and federal level for a long time.

Also don't forget that MSQ (Maritime Safety Qld) is still a player in this and needs to be accommodated somewhere in here.

MSQ recently surrendered its role in commercial shipping matters in Qld to the Fed Govt and reverted to recreational boating.

MSQ is currently contained within the Qld Dept of Transport (a huge organisation). Now MSQ have inspection staff at a loose end and are looking to expand. MSQ currently mainly look after navigation aids at ports (like Gladstone and Rocky).

MSQ outsourced its recreational boating inspection role to Dept Agriculture and Fisheries years ago under a Memorandum of Understanding arrangement so that's why QB&FP people have been inspecting rec guys for lifejackets etc at boat ramps.

Cost shedding exercise by Qld govt.

Simply put, MSQ was a maritime organisation without boats and always has been.

QB&FP had boats and so MSQ jumped on their back (as did other QLD Depts like Environment) as transport to undertake their duties but couldn't due to their lack of water transport.

Dept Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (DAF) received budget money to provide transport to other Govt organisations who didn't have boats under the guise of "Joint Operations". Whole thing has been a bit of a "wank" for years.

QB&FP staff spend 50% of their time NOT doing what they're supposed to be doing in exchange for money at Departmental level not personal officer level (most of these guys are OK but with occasional d/heads. Like most ).

That's why fisheries in Qld is in a mess.

88 field staff in Qld but only 44 are working on fisheries matters at any given time. Something has to suffer.

NEVER get between a bureaucracy and a chance for it to expand its influence and size.

Sorry, Phill. Did what I didn't want to do on this thread.