Jump to content

Another ridiculous lifejacket article


Recommended Posts

The problem MNZ have got is they want control of us and have the ability to dictate to us, that is bureaucracies ideal end game, they dictate our lives in detail. But they want to do that without taking any responsibility which is the last thing they want, gawd forbid they could be held responsible for their own actions or dictates, that would be the worst possible outcome they could possibly have.

 

So we will have this battle of bureaucracy with few clues trying to dictate to many who do have clues and also a small but very very highly important bit of both centuries worth of convention and a splash of real law, that being 'The skipper makes the full and final call'.

 

So unless MNZ remove the Skippers responsibility angle, which could leave MNZ wide open to a range of horrors and liabilities, all they can really do is threaten and bluster in the hope most will just fold to their will, which the vast majority will as a lot, but far from all, of what they say isn't silly and is common sense.

 

The exact same thing applies to YNZ as well. A lot of what they do relies on the good will of us boaters not on law as they would like us to think. Which is why I find it strange when they go out of their way to piss boaters off and in doing so make people think they (some) are just rude SOB's with a distinct lack of manners.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah....its as old as time. Just invoke the legislation little by little. As noted earlier, witness what they've done with swim pools,dogs,guns,et al. They can fail 100 times but only have to succeed once.Following advice on this forum I've acquired mouldy old kapok LJ's to carry on the tender.It's my anti $300 mechanism. Absolute nonsense legislation but you can bet your boots the LJ Nazis will be hitting us because they can identify us in the marinas and most can / will probably pay up. And the dickheads will still drown,LJ or no

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go down the cheap as LJ to avoid a fine route - what exactly is legal?

I would think all they have to be is Standards approved but I've seen a few lately with no reference to that so maybe they don't.

 

You can buy ones that will be in the lockers of most commercial boats, so are probably SOLAS approved, for $18-20 each. I'll ask my man what he can do, I'll be surprised if we can't buy a pile of PDF cheapies, that will be OK to actually use, for less than US$8-10 each. The SOLAS ones above I'd only offer to people I don't like, those are the type that almost killed my Wa.

 

i would almost rather take the hit and go to court just to say how bloody stupid this is.

If you get pinged I'll come with you and we'll find out which rule wins, the bureaucracy one or the one that's ruled the waves for centuries.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if you're paddling a super unstable 450mm wide but 6.2M long multisport kayak out in the middle of a large harbour you don't need to wear a PFD, but if you're going 150M in a sheltered bay, from a keelboat to the shore in an inflatable  dinghy, you do need to wear PFDs.   But this could all change depending on which region you are in 'cos the rules are regional, not national.  Knowing where the boundaries are  between regional councils is now an important part of safe navigation!  And the way the authorities will paper over the absurdities of their inconsistent "standards" is to just put the boot into peoples wallets.   Brilliant.  I spent 40 years in the aviation industry, and never once did I hear anyone advising that the way to achieve safety in an environment of complex decision making was to inconsistently apply badly written laws, in a punitive way.   But clearly the regional council staff know better.

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if a business feasibility study would be a more accurate name for it?

Yip.

 

Plus I reckon it's like that Chrisco crowd who 'make next Christmas easier' by taking money from you now. The harbour masters Christmas party piss up fund (or tidly winks/ what ever their type do for fun) will be empty by January, this will give it a great head start for next year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It seems bizarre that they are having a one week trial.

 

I wonder if a business feasibility study would be a more accurate name for it?

The trial part is MNZ funding the various Port Harbour Masters to get out on the water. Which is just pathetic really, that the Councils cannot fund their Harbour Masters to go out on the water and police activities. And correct me if I am wrong, but is MNZ funded by us the tax payer? which means that a Council, that takes both Rates and profits from Marinas and Port operations are being funded via our taxes to Police and fine us, which I assume will then be put into their own pot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

we'll see

 

how earnest they are

 

when they tackle the bull by the horns

 

and dish out $1000s in fines to waka ama paddlers at mangere bridge + okahu bay

 

4988476.jpg

 

nahh...

 

too hard

 

easier to ping the gin palaces + sailors

 

at bon accord

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup - so you need to precisely understand what the bylaw is in your body of water before you even put you toes in.

 

If you listen to the interview you'd have to have to conclude that they are just a bunch of revenue gathering beaurcrats!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...