Last night “Faithfuls” Sebastian (Bash) Croft and Romesh Ranganathan won the Celebrity Traitors, and both players said that they would be donating their winnings (£41,500 each out of the prize fund of £83,000) to refugee charities.

Bash told host Claudia Winkleman his £41,500 was “going to Choose Love, which is an organisation that I used to volunteer at. The money will be going to refugees and displaced people, but predominantly queer refugees and displaced people. And they are just the best organisation.”

Romesh followed: “I am playing for the Refugee Council, helping displaced people who need help, and it’s a cause that’s very close to my heart”.

Ranganathan became patron of the charity in September this year, “because he was increasingly concerned by the hateful way refugees are sometimes spoken about.” Could that be anything to do with the news stories about rapists and killers from Afghanistan and other parts of the world?

As I posted about last night, these celebrities couldn’t have chosen better funded and promoted charities; in short, the types that don’t exactly need extra publicity from one of the most popular shows in the UK (despite it being very boring to watch this year).

The British Refugee Council received £41,588,000 from taxpayers between 2021-25. Below you can see one of its many posts on Instagram:

It is on my list of taxpayer-funded asylum and migration charities, which stands at £316,679,329 (and counting) across the last five published tax years:

Choose Love (formerly named “Help Refugees”) doesn’t receive taxpayer funding, but it is very well funded, with its total gross income standing at £12.59m for 2025:

Its US arm - “Choose Love, Inc” - has received $2,025,000 from the Open Society Foundations (the philanthropic arm of George Soros) between 2021-23:

Choose Love is incredibly popular with celebrities. Recently Davina McCall (see the video below) helped promote a jewellery collection to raise funds for the charity. It’s clear the charity is a very fabulous thing in the celebrity world, and any association with it shows you’re a good sort who deserves to be invited to parties:

Like many asylum and refugee charities, Choose Love and the British Refugee Council are not only handsomely funded but political - which is completely allowed by the useless Charity Commission.

Last year I visited the Choose Love pop-up store on Regent Street and discovered the trans flag (in other words, the endorsement of gender identity)…

… which had been put into an ugly mural on the first floor…

… as well as the children’s books “What is racism?” and “Migrant”:

More here:

Then there’s the British Refugee Council, which campaigned against the Rwanda Plan…

… a lot…

… and has appeared to reject a cap on refugees:

… as well as hosting the ghastly Emma Thompson this year…

… who is the president of the Helen Bamber Foundation, which received £1,194,270 from taxpayers between 2021-25, and partners with Asylum Aid, which received £1,150,070 from taxpayers between 2021-25.

It never ends!

And yesterday’s Traitors means £83,000 more in taxpayer funding going towards this de facto open-borders industry.

This post is free to read. Fund my independent journalism by taking out a subscription or making a donation on Buy Me a Coffee. Thank you to everyone who has funded my work.

More:

On Saturday (10 October) it was World Homeless Day, and Asylum Aid had an important message about “non-British nationals” (aka foreigners).

“MOST PEOPLE DON’T KNOW THIS ABOUT HOMELESSNESS…” it posted on Instagram…

… before explaining that “Over half of rough sleepers in London are non-British nationals.”

I don’t know about you, but I’m not surprised at all; in fact, I wonder if the figure is much higher. It makes sense when Sadiq Khan is constantly telling the world that “London is open” - aka “please move here” - and increasing numbers of Councils/ Boroughs are signing up to City of Sanctuary’s scheme (effectively open-borders through the backdoor).

Then there’s the large amounts of taxpayer funding is going towards asylum and migration charities. Take Asylum Aid, which received £1,150,070 from taxpayers between 2021-25 and is part of the Helen Bamber Foundation Group, which received £1,194,270 from taxpayers for the same period.

And that’s not all…

To end the “vicious cycle” of homelessness among “non-British nationals”, Asylum Aid is also going to be working with Refugee and Migrant Justice, which received £3,196,440 from taxpayers between 2020-24. Together the charities will work to give people access to:

- Medical support
- Suitable accommodation
- Work and educational opportunities

If that’s not enough incentives for everyone to move to the UK, yesterday The Daily Mail reported that “Nineteen council areas are accommodating more than ten times as many asylum seekers as households of homeless people”.

Again, it doesn’t surprise me - but it’s good to have the data.

Sorry to depress everyone but I’m back with EVEN MORE examples of asylum and migration charities, which I have added to my lists:

The total for every taxpayer-funded charity I have calculated (92 so far) is £2.6 billion (across the last five published tax years), with £316,679,329 of this going towards 55 asylum and migration charities.

What a complete mess! Without further ado:

Positive Action for Refugees and Asylum Seekers (PAFRAS) (£439,400, 2021-25)
PAFRAS “aims to end destitution, increase access to social justice and advocate for the rights of refugees and people seeking asylum in Leeds”, adding “We resist the hostile environment and strive for systemic change.” It helps asylum seekers find legal representation and to understand the asylum system. Like most charities (not just in the asylum and migration space), it is very vocal about politics. In April 2024 it posted on X that “THE RWANDA ACT IS INHUMANE AND VIOLATES BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS”:

Refugee Roots (£137,130, 2021-25)
The charity “helps asylum seekers and refugees build relationships and navigate the complexities of building a new life in the UK”, according to its website. Its “empowerment initiatives include befriending, accompanying asylum seekers to appointments, information, advice and guidance, as well as supportive groups and activities, such as free English conversation classes.”

Read more

By radical I am including:

• Refugee and asylum support - which drives open borders

• Anything that entrenches identity politics

Without further ado, here are 10 radical grants funded by Children in Need.

Thanks Pudsey!

Anti Racist Cumbria - £50,000.00
“This project will empower Black children and young people from Cumbri…

Read more

The total funding accounted for below, courtesy of the National Lottery, is £10,179,091.

NB. Yesterday I made an error and forgot to add Suffolk Refugee Support in - so I had £7,822,856 as the total. Apologies.

Notes:

• The grants below are all from the National Lottery Community Fund, apart from Refugee Action, which also received funding from the National Lottery Heritage Fund.

• There are no timelines for funding (as I do with taxpayer funding eg. 2021-25) as they are quite broad on 360 Giving (the site I extracted the data from).

Without further ado… Here are five asylum and migration charities funded by the National Lottery:

Suffolk Refugee Support - £2,356,235 across 6 grants

The charity offers “quality independent advice and support” on “education, employment, access to immigration advice, health, housing, utilities, welfare benefits etc”. It has been critical of government policies, including “the passing of the UK government’s Illegal Migration Bill” and the Safety of Rwanda Bill, which it said it was “appalled” by.

Read more

It really beggars belief but Comic Relief awarded £340,000 to the charity Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID).

The £340,000 is comprised of two grants worth £300,000 and £40,000, as you can see below:

BID doesn’t beat around the bush about its aims. Its website explains:

BID is an independent charity that exists to end immigration detention in the UK.

We dream of a world free of immigration detention, where people are not deprived of their liberty or deported from their home.

We aim to end immigration detention in the UK through the provision of legal advice, information and representation alongside research, policy advocacy and strategic litigation.

On Instagram it is very vocal about its beliefs…

… and proposes that immigration detainees should get “automatic legal advice within 48 hours”:

Shockingly, this charity also received £10,000 from the National Lottery Community Fund, which I will be writing about next week. A preview below:

BID’s other funders constantly come up when I am looking into other asylum and migration/ left-wing charities. These are:

• AB Charitable Trust

• City Bridge Foundation

• John Ellerman Foundation

• Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust

• Paul Hamlyn Foundation

• The Tudor Trust

• Trust for London

You can read a bit more about some of these here:

“Do you know an Ed Sheeran?” reads the subject line of a newsletter sent out yesterday by “Hannah” at Refugee Action:

Refugee Action is a charity I’ve been banging on about a fair bit - including on GB News on Sunday evening.

It received £16,765,000 from taxpayers between 2021-25…

… and is very radical, recently lobbying Andy Burnham to scrap the Immigration and Asylum Bill:

In its latest email it wrote:

Dear Charlotte,

Ed Sheeran has been making headlines these last few weeks. In case you’re not following the story, he’s been widely criticised for the decision to remove his support act Macklemore from his American tour, after Macklemore said ‘free Palestine’ at one of their shows.

Ed Sheeran’s response was criticised by many as ‘sitting on the fence’.

It got me thinking about the people in my life who take a back seat when it comes to difficult conversations.

They might feel like they don’t know enough about a situation to speak up about it, or they might be worried that by doing so, they’ll be rocking the boat or upsetting someone.

These conversations can be hard to navigate, but as one of our incredible supporters, you know just how big of an impact they can have.

Being apolitical is a luxury for people whose lives do not depend on those with power taking action.

That’s why we’ve been working on tools to help you speak out about refugee rights.

We’ve got tools to answer questions like ‘why can’t refugees stay in the first safe country they reach?’ or ‘why are there so many refugees in the UK?’.

If you want to feel more informed, more up to date and more able to have those tricky conversations, you can read our resources here:

And if you have a friend like Ed who might need some persuading, you could share this email with them, or maybe share this explainer sheet on your social media:

We might not have a platform as big as Ed Sheeran’s, but we all have a voice, and we know when we speak up together incredible things are possible.

Please help us spread the message.

With thanks,

Hannah - Campaigns Team

Refugee Action

The gist is that, if you know someone who isn’t standing up for Palestinians/ refugee rights, you can use the charity’s tools to educate them, including its ridiculous activist pack, which I’ve written about here:

Unfortunately for the charity, many people aren’t apolitical and simply want to defund it and many others of its kind.

What are the sources of Refugee Action’s income?

Refugee Action: Income from charitable activities (grants from public authorities) Year ended 31 March 2025, with 2024 comparison

Note: This section is assisted by Claude AI

The five charities below have been added to my taxpayer audits. You can find the latest totals in each link:

The bill for the following is £1,940,120:

Asha North Staffordshire (£861,080, 2021-25)
“We provide support and promote social inclusion for asylum seekers and refugees”, reads the website of Asha, which says it helps more than “900 people from 74 different countries” each year. Asha offers asylum guidance, English lessons for asylum seekers and a children’s club, as well as partnering with taxpayer-funded Refugee Action for “access to Legal Aid, housing and benefits.”

Asylum Justice (£622,040, 2021-25)
Asylum Justice is “the only organisation in Wales and one of the last remaining in the U.K. to provide specialist immigration advice and representation, up to and including court level, to asylum seekers, refugees and vulnerable migrants.” This includes legal support to “Challenge unjust decisions and avoid wrongful removal or destitution.”

In addition to its taxpayer-funded grants, the service has had support from the Paul Hamlyn Foundation, Tudor Trust, Lloyds Bank Foundation, AB Charitable Trust and the National Lottery Community Fund.

Caras Community Action for Refugees and Asylum Seekers Ltd (£170,350, 2021-25)
Caras describes itself as “a leading refugee charity in South West London” that provides “firm foundations for new-arrival asylum seekers to build happy and successful lives.”

It runs ESOL programmes, a weekly computer class and an employability programme, in addition to a coffee afternoon in partnership with Tara Theatre. Tara Theatre, which has blocked me on X, received £573,000 from taxpayers between 2021-25.

DASH (Destitute Asylum Seekers Huddersfield) (£177,990, 2021-25)
The DASH website (listed on the Charity Commission) no longer works, and the charity is now called Immigration and Asylum Support Kirklees (IASK). In 2025 IASK posted on Instagram “Over the past year, we’ve provided legal advice and consultations over a thousand times, assisting clients with their asylum, appeals and immigration matters.”

It offers a wide range of support for asylum seekers including an “in-house Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) Level 2 and IAAS Accredited case worker” and a “highly trained team” to assist clients with welfare support, as well as asylum guides. Check out the full list here.

Migrant Empowerment Group (£108,660, 2021-25)
MEG works “to adequately address the awareness on migrant’s issues and helping those from marginal groups such as Asylum Seekers and Refugees for their integration within their local communities and in the UK’s society.”

It offers ESOL classes (“and French sessions course”), “short term individual, relationship or couple counselling sessions”, “Art, Culture and Heritage Sessions” and many other services. Its projects include “Miss Humanity Cameroon” (not sure what that’s all about!)

Here’s another of its pages:

More:

With inflation ever increasing, it’s no wonder that some charities need a pay rise… Right?! Righttttt?

Take Asylum Aid, which received £1,150,070 from taxpayers between 2021-25, an increase of £313,070 since my last audit (£837,000 between 2020-24).

It’s not even a big figure when compared to other asylum and migration charities (and the charity sector as a whole). Consider the fact that Migrant Help received £194,462,000 from taxpayers between 2021-25, an increase of £40,870,000 since its total of £153,592,000 between 2020-24.

You can see all the figures below. NB. I need to add some updates to the latest one, including Asylum Aid.

Asylum Aid says it delivers “high quality legal representation to some of the most vulnerable people seeking asylum in the UK”.

You have to wonder if that will include men abandoning toddlers.

Interestingly, in 2020 Asylum Aid partnered with the Helen Bamber Foundation, whose president is Dame Emma Thompson.

This outfit received £1,194,270 from taxpayers between 2021-25:

That’s a lot of taxpayer funding together. Meanwhile, the UK’s national debt stands at over £2 trillion.

Oh well!

The HBF describes itself as a “human rights charity”, which gives “survivors of trafficking and torture the strength to move on.”

However, its Instagram looks like that of any other asylum and migration charity…

… with posts about male clients…

… and women only too happy to lobby on behalf of asylum seekers (aka thousands of fighting-age males entering the UK).

For that reason, the Helen Bamber Foundation will be going onto my next update of asylum and migration charities, which currently stands at £312 MILLION:

At least it’s Friday and you can now justify a stiff drink after reading this article.

To see the latest bill for 44 (and counting) taxpayer-funded asylum and migration charities, click here:

To see the latest bill for every charity I’ve covered, click here:

New entries include:

Lewisham Refugee and Migrant Network (£1,967,580, 2021-25)
LRMN “exists to empower refugees and other migrants and to bring about systemic change to remove the challenges they face”. In August it signed an open letter to the Prime Minister for “a fairer and more humane approach to asylum accommodation and housing” and bemoaned the “hostile environment faced by migrants, refugees and people seeking asylum”.

Lewisham, incidentally, is the UK’s first recognised “Borough of Sanctuary” (“a welcoming place to all sanctuary seekers – refugees, people seeking asylum and migrants”). In May the Green Party took over Lewisham Council,

Read more

Although there are many things I find interesting to research, I believe tackling asylum and refugee charities is something of a national emergency. They have given us de facto open borders! Thus I am spending more and more time focussing on this area (which I also find very interesting).

So far I have calculated £304,873,379 spent on 34 asylum and migration charities (across five last available tax years), but the final figure could get much higher considering that there are over 170,000 charities on the Charity Commission for England and Wales alone. It’s an insane number.

Today I thought I’d give you an insight into what researching this area looks like. Normally I discover new charities when I am researching a charity and it lists partner organisations/ promotes another charity on social media. They are often very symbiotic in nature. Take the charity “Migrant Action” in Leeds, which has created this sprawling map of its partners and collaborators:

However, you can also simply go to the Charity Commission for England and Wales and search for charities. If I search for “refugee”, it yields 1,764 matches:

At a glance, you can’t tell which charities have had taxpayer funding, so there’s a bit of trial and error involved. I tend to click on charities whose income is anything from hundreds of thousands to millions of pounds, as big figures sometimes indicate a charity has had taxpayer funding:

For instance, today I tried Refugee Support Group (below),

Read more

ASSIST Sheffield (£433,390, 2021-25)
ASSIST Sheffield helps “some of the most marginalised people living in Sheffield”, which it defines as including “people who have been unsuccessful in their applications for asylum” (one wonders why). ASSIST Sheffield is one of many charities that refers to asylum seekers as “people seeking sanctuary” (the new trendy term), writing “Our vision is for all people seeking sanctuary in Sheffield to live life with dignity and hope for the future.”

On its website it has published an “anti-racism statement” and writes “No human being is illegal”. It also links to other support networks, such as The Asylum Journey (which provides information on legal advice, financial support and housing and accommodation, among other things) and Right to Remain, which offers a toolkit covering “different stages of the asylum and immigration process”:

Asylum Link Merseyside (£95,550, 2021-25)
“We offer practical help, trusted advice, and a welcoming community to people seeking asylum, while helping build understanding and connection across Merseyside”, says Asylum Link Merseyside on its website. The charity offers free advice on “asylum processes, housing support, help with accessing essential services, social activities, and advocacy.” In July its staff marched at Pride Liverpool where they held a sign reading “NO BORDERS BETWEEN US”…

… as well as posting the trans/ asexuality flag:

Borderlands (South West) Ltd (£225,290, 2021-25)
Bristol-based Borderlands is a charity “that exists to work with refugees, asylum seekers and other vulnerable migrants to help them from exclusion to belonging.” Its website caters to many different languages:

The charity boasts that in 2024-25, “509 referrals were supported through our English classes” and “150 gathered at Borderlands each week for a hot, nutritious meal”. Last year the charity took part in a protest “to call on the Government to focus on compassion not cruelty.”

Refugee Support (Devon) Ltd (£488,850, 2021-25)

“NO HUMAN IS ILLEGAL”, reads a post on the website of Refugee Support Devon, whose “mission is to better support the evolving needs of our clients by strengthening our organisational resilience.” It is “proud to be part of the South West Immigration Alliance” (funded by the Justice Together Initiative), which “aims to develop a more coordinated, collaborative, and sustainable legal advice ecosystem that better supports people needing immigration & asylum advice” and is “funded through to 2029.”

In March it was in Westminster for what it called “the Mass Lobby for Migrant Rights”:

Task Force Trust (£144,390, 2025)
Task Force is the charity behind “the Action Asylum project; a national initiative connecting asylum seekers with local communities, volunteering together to improve their neighbourhood and the environment.”

Action Asylum says it connects “people seeking asylum with local communities – through environmental volunteering”:

Earlier this month charity staff attended “Rooted Resistance, Collective Power, a two-day movement-building summit for groups working at the intersection of climate, migrant and racial justice.” Action Asylum also held a Parliamentary launch in June, “bringing together volunteers, Ambassadors, Project Leads, refugee and environmental sector partners, MPs and peers to mark the project’s expansion to ten cities.”

It also receives funding from the National Lottery Community Fund.

Total taxpayer funding going towards these five charities over the last five available tax years =

£1,387,470

For full audits, click here:

Another day, another asylum charity being subsidised by the taxpayer.

Today’s example is “Refugees Rock”, “a free climbing club” that “welcomes anyone seeking sanctuary” (the new trendy way to describe illegal immigrants/ asylum seekers).

Refugees Rock registered as a charity last year, which it described as “a major achievement” - as though it had won a prize. “Getting registered means we can apply for funding, benefit from charitable status and operate as an independent organisation”, wrote staff member Megan Murray at the time.

According to a post by partner charity Migrant Help (which received £194,462,000 from taxpayers between 2021–25), it and Refugees Rock’s “Boulders Beyond Borders initiative” is funded by (debt-ridden) Birmingham City Council.

Refugees Rock was founded in Liverpool in 2021 and has established groups in 10 locations (“and counting!”):

It has a large number of partners, from “founding partners” to “climbing walls” to “charities”.

Founding partners include The British Red Cross (which received £417,960,000 from taxpayers between 2020-24) and Action Asylum (which a project by “The Task Force Trust”, a registered charity that received £144.39k from taxpayers between 2021-25).

Other charity partners of Refugees Rock include Migrant Help and a few others whose funding I now need to nose into, as well as the ghastly Care 4 Calais.

I have already spotted that at least two - Heart4Refugees and Action Asylum - have had funding from the National Lottery Community Fund. Yet more reason not to buy a Lottery ticket.

Last week I added up taxpayer funding for 66 charities and it stood at £2.6 billion (across the last five tax years)…

… with the bill for asylum and migration charities is £261,897,909 and counting.

Reminder: the UK's public sector net debt stands at approximately £3 trillion.

More:

With a record 230 people (mostly men) crossing the Channel in one small boat earlier this month; water supplies running short; and housing ever-more scarce, you’d think politicians might want to halt new arrivals in the UK and reduce pressure on our infrastructure (never mind preserve our civilisation).

If anything, the opposite is happening, particularly in boroughs taken over by Greens, which are only too happy to encourage the world to move here. Case in point, the newly Green-led Hackney Council has announced its first ever Migrant Champion to “ensure migrant needs are represented.”

Read more

At the beginning of this month, I learnt I was to be mentioned in an article by “The Bureau of Investigative Journalism” (TBIJ), a publication funded by Ecotricity, the Gates Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Foundations and Quaker foundations (Joseph Rowntree), among others.

The piece, which was published on July 6, describes “a torrent of rightwing hate and misinformation” directed at City of Sanctuary UK, a charity TBIJ says “promotes compassion for asylum seekers and refugees.”

Ahead of publication I was offered the opportunity to respond (which I didn’t take up) to points that would be raised in the piece, spelt out in an email whose subject was: “Right of reply: Misinformation and abuse targeting City of Sanctuary”. Full email below:

Dear Ms Gill,

I am a reporter for the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and I am investigating the threats and misinformation that has been directed towards the charity City of Sanctuary.

We believe these matters to be firmly in the public interest in light of the sustained and often false coverage targeting the charity, the way these allegations have been spread by members of the far right and the subsequent threats and harassment the charity has received.

We want to give you the opportunity to respond to the following which we intend to publish:

1. You have published more than 20 posts about City of Sanctuary or its activities on your Substack.

2. In August 2025 you published a series of articles and videos about the Schools of Sanctuary programme, saying it was encouraging children to write Valentine’s letters to asylum seekers.

3. City of Sanctuary has said you have never contacted the charity to check your facts or to get their side of the story, as is standard journalistic practice.

4. Following an investigation the Charity Commission has found that the allegations against the charity were part of a “misinformation campaign” and at no point had any child written to an individual asylum seeker. You have dismissed the findings of the Charity Commission investigation and said the regulator is “not fit for purpose”.

5. Your coverage was then picked up by outlets including the Daily Telegraph, The Daily Mail and GB News. It then spread online among several far right accounts with large followings.

6. Following this coverage the charity was inundated with threatening and abusive calls and emails.

7. You also shared the names of schools involved in Schools of Sanctuary online and some of these schools were subsequently harassed online or by far right groups.

If you wish to contest any of the above points please specify which you are contesting and provide supporting documentation.

In the interests of fairness, accuracy and balance, we would like to offer you the opportunity to respond to these findings by 4pm on 1 July.

Kind regards,

Emiliano Mellino

The gist of the article is that “a rightwing blogger” (yours truly) sparked a “media storm” over City of Sanctuary’s “Schools of Sanctuary” scheme, and that the charity sector is being subjected to the Far Right and misinformation.

To recap, last year I wrote about the fact that City of Sanctuary, via its Schools of Sanctuary programme, was encouraging children to make Valentine’s cards for asylum seekers.

Following my reporting, there was understandably a public outcry and some people complained to the Charity Commission. However, in April this year the Commission decided that City of Sanctuary UK had faced a “misinformation campaign” and that the cards were merely “heart-shaped general messages of welcome for refugees”.

Ever since the Commission concluded its case, City of Sanctuary UK has been complaining about how hard things have been for it. Its CEO told TBIJ that staff at City of Sanctuary “were experiencing panic attacks [and] had to have therapy”, because of the far-right media storm, and how she had ended up with “high blood pressure”:

Obviously I condemn anyone who is abusive or threatening to charities or otherwise. At the same time I’m concerned that fair reporting and criticism of City of Sanctuary are being increasingly lumped together with “the Far Right” in a way that threatens free speech.

For instance, TBIJ’s piece explains how Richard Donaldson (“a conspiracy theorist”) and I “were among those who posted lists of the schools that were part of the Schools of Sanctuary programme.”

Although the article’s author, Emiliano Mellino, adds that “Neither called for their followers to send abuse to any of the schools, but some on the list ended up being targeted”, the subtext is that we shared information that put schools at risk.

In reality, City of Sanctuary was “proud” to post a “List of Schools of Sanctuary” on its website (in a now deleted page that I archived), linking to some schools’ own websites “or an article showing some of their work towards the award”.

The charity, and schools associated with the scheme, were clearly happy to share that information publicly. That’s until it didn’t lead to the reaction they wanted.

City of Sanctuary - which has been enormously successful at turning the UK into a series of “Sanctuary” administrations, meaning they go out of their way to welcome refugees/ asylum seekers - is not alone in acting like a victim in response to legitimate scrutiny of its activities.

Recently I received a newsletter update from “Tim” at Refugee Action, a charity that received £16,765,000 from taxpayers between 2021-25 and gets millions in funding each year:

The subject of the email was “A difficult update from me” (Tim) and it described how Refugee Action was “facing financial challenges”, adding: “The growing demonisation of refugees in the politics and the media, alongside wider pressures on the charity sector, has made fundraising harder. At the same time, the government has reduced funding for some of our services.”

The message is clear: we are all supposed to feel sorry for these poor little charities.

Actually, they are extremely successful at lobbying and very well funded, hence why it’s never been more important for journalists like me to continue reporting on them.

Yesterday The Telegraph broke the news that school children are “being fed pro-migrant messaging through schoolbooks” via the Schools of Sanctuary network, a scheme run by the open-border charity City of Sanctuary UK.

City of Sanctuary was quick to whinge on Instagram about how The Telegraph was “attacking schools”, and used the piece as an opportunity to ask for more donations.

It’s typical of this charity, which always acts the victim when it receives scrutiny from the press.

As readers will know, I regularly write about City of Sanctuary - so I know this from experience.

Recently, for instance, it moaned about a “misinformation campaign” apparently instigated by journalists such as myself, which was no such thing.

Read more

Earlier this month, Helen Earner, Director of Regulatory Services at the Charity Commission, accused journalists like me of spreading “online misinformation” by accurately reporting on the activities of the charity City of Sanctuary UK.

To recap, in late 2025 I covered the fact that the charity had been encouraging children to make Valentine’s cards for asylum seekers.

After it received multiple complaints from MPs and others worried about the scheme, the Charity Commission launched a compliance case into City of Sanctuary’s activities – ultimately concluding that there was nothing to see here.

As a statement by the regulator put it, these Valentine’s Day cards were merely “heart-shaped general messages of welcome to refugees” (as if that’s any better) to be displayed in schools and at a “separate charity supporting refugees for display in its premises”.

Read more

Yesterday, Stella Creasy, the Silent Disco Queen and Labour & Co-op MP for Walthamstow, was thrilled to welcome Sir Sadiq Khan to her borough:

And not just any borough; Walthamstow is “a borough of sanctuary”, don’t you know…

Unfortunately this means it is working with the ghastly open-border charity City of Sanctuary UK.

Read more

“Regulator finds no evidence that refugee charity engaged in inappropriate activity”, read a press release by the Charity Commission for England and Wales yesterday, after it closed its compliance case into City of Sanctuary UK.

The Commission looked into “concerns… over the charity’s activities in schools, including the claim that school children were being encouraged to send Valentine’s Day cards to adult asylum seekers. This allegation had been circulating online and was also reported in the media.”

“Following a detailed review and a meeting with the charity’s trustees”, the Charity Commission said it “did not find evidence to support these allegations”, adding that City of Sanctuary UK had faced “a misinformation campaign, including threats to charity trustees and staff, in relation to the Valentine’s Day card allegations.”

I don’t know anything about these “threats”. But I dispute the idea that the charity “faced a misinformation campaign” - certainly not from me. I was first to write up the story, and my coverage was packed with screenshots and literature to evidence City of Sanctuary UK’s activities:

In my article above, for instance, I showed a screenshot of a Schools Activity Pack put together by City of Sanctuary UK (its Schools of Sanctuary Team and Together with Refugees). Here it is:

The screenshot makes clear that the charity:

• encouraged schools to “Show your heart for refugees on Valentine’s Day”

• described these as “cards” (“You can then display these cards at your school”; and

• laid out a method that meant cards could be sent to “people seeking sanctuary” (by which the charity means asylum seekers/ refugees): “You can then display these cards at your school or send them to your local refugee organisation to share with people seeking sanctuary.”

However, the Charity Commission gives a rather abridged interpretation of events, claiming the cards were merely “heart-shaped general messages” that may go up for display in a charity’s premises:

“Heart-shaped general messages of welcome to refugees were displayed in schools, with some sent to a separate charity supporting refugees for display in its premises. The trustees explained that at no point did children write cards to individual adult asylum seekers or refugees.”

Despite the Charity Commission’s abridged account, Helen Earner, Director of Regulatory Services at the Charity Commission, said:

“concerns about the charity’s work were fuelled by online misinformation, something charities are increasingly subject to and a concern for us as regulator. While we can’t fact check every concern about every charity, sometimes the high profile of allegations means it is right for us to set the record straight where allegations cannot be substantiated.”

But where is this online misinformation?

It is certainly not in my coverage.

What’s worse is that the Charity Commission concludes there’s no issue with children making “Heart-shaped general messages of welcome to refugees”, which “did not amount to a breach of charities’ obligation to remain independent of party-political bias.” Will parents around the UK agree? That’s if they even know about the extent of City of Sanctuary UK’s Valentine efforts, including children making Valentine’s cards for their MP.

The Commission’s futile review helps to explain why the charity sector is in such a mess.

Last week, the charity City of Sanctuary announced recipients of its “Sanctuary Awards programme”, which “recognises and celebrates the organisations and institutions who go above and beyond to foster welcome, understanding and opportunity”. One of these was the University of Cambridge, now an accredited “University of Sanctuary” – something that the institution has been keen to show off on its website.

On the surface, the accreditation makes Cambridge (and any others receiving a “Sanctuary Award”) look kind and compassionate. The university’s webpage about its award has a photograph of a handful of refugees, making the City of Sanctuary programme look as if it helps a manageable number of people, not (in reality) being designed to turn the UK into an open-border state.

Read more