Last week 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 is now live, describes “a torrent of Right-wing 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.”
The gist is that “a Right-wing blogger” (yours truly) sparked a “media storm” over City of Sanctuary’s “Schools of Sanctuary” scheme, and that the charity sector is subsequently 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, was encouraging children to make Valentine’s cards for asylum seekers.
Understandably, following my reporting, there was 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 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 the 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 and asylum seekers – is not alone in acting like a victim in response to legitimate scrutiny of its activities.
Last week I received a newsletter update from “Tim” at Refugee Action, a charity that received £16,765,000 from taxpayers between 2021-25 and millions in funding each year:
The subject of the email was “A difficult update from me” 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.
Charlotte Gill regularly publishes about the use of taxpayers’ money to fund Left-wing causes and Left-wing researchers in Woke Waste, her Substack. You can subscribe here.
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I doubt that anyone would oppose supporting genuine refugees. However, the idiots holding up ludicrous “refugees welcome “ placards are very unlikely to either live next door to any of the illegal boat people that they purport to support, nor are they likely to offer any of them a room in their houses.
These refugee charities and NGOs seem to expand by the day. How many are there? The sector must provide a comfortable living, courtesy of large dollops of taxpayer funding, to have expanded so rapidly. All you have to do is to invent a name which has something to do with ‘refugee’ and away you go.
Keep up the good work exposing the globalist funded network facilitating the destruction of our country.
It’s disgusting that government should fund any charities. I should be able to choose which charities I want to fund, the government and local authorities, shouldn’t be sending my tax money bailing out charities I would not give money to.
Don’t buy Lottery tickets. Don’t donate to Children in Need or Comic Relief. The “good causes” your money is going to are not the kind of “good causes” you might imagine. You are funding organisations which are encouraging criminal migrants to force their way into Britain.
Oh, and check the accounts very carefully of any Charity before you donate. If the bulk of their money comes from the Treasury and their CEO is “earning” a six figure salary, they’re NOT a charity.
We only donate to small local charities for that very reason.
It seems that anyone to the right of the far left, liberal, Corbynites is actually far right, and any facts they produce are propaganda.
Treat it as a badge of honour Charlotte!
I think that every single person who works for or who raises money for these charities should be made to take at least 1 Migrant illegal or otherwise, into their homes, they should be held responsible for that persons behaviour, they should provide for that persons needs in terms of food, clothing etc. This they should do from their own pockets. It is their choice to encourage and to then expect tax payers money to provide all of the above. I as a tax payer did not vote for this, and I certainly do not want my money being given to charities so if the individuals in these organisations want these people so much, let them pay for and look after them, and be accountable for their behaviour.
I wonder how many of them will be happy to do that.
Btw no welfare or payments made to them for doing this act of their own choice.
Some young people I know approached one of these demos with clipboards and asked for addresses of those willing to take in refugees. They thought it hilarious that no one had sufficient space or resources. People of all ages are quite alert to scams these days and Agenda 2030 is a scam.
Ahh but Shabby Mahmoud is going to be asking for people to take in those coming on newly opened safe and legal routes. In practice it won’t be Tarquin or Lucinda but Mohammed sponsoring his extended family. ..and the boats won’t stop either. So, the invasion continues.
a publication funded by Ecotricity, the Gates Foundation, George Soros’s Open Society Foundations and Quaker foundations (Joseph Rowntree),
A Who’s Who of Far Left funding scum.
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”:
Well, that’s put a smile on my face. Oh, the poor darlings. Funny how the Far Left don’t like a taste of their own medicine. Just imagine if we ‘bashed back’.
She couldn’t have come up with a better description of over-educated, divorced from reality snowflakes if she’d tried.
I think it is important for these charities to showcase individuals and families that they have helped with specific information about how they have met their targets for inclusivity and integration, bearing in mind that integration is about the incomers integrating into our society, not our society changing to accommodate the incomers.
We want specific examples not warm, fuzzy words.
These “charities” support the invasion of colonisation of Britain – i.e. The Great Replacement. In order to mask their real activity, they label themselves as full of “love and kindness”. But for some reason, this “love and kindness” never extends to the vast numbers of our children raped and abused by the invaders and colonisers. Is this because these “charities” are in fact staffed by low-level apparatchiks of our globalist Regime?
They ignore the mass rape because it is just the invaders’ culture and should be encouraged or at least tolerated.
Indeed. I think this sums it up;
”An accurate visual representation of “Modern Britain”.”
https://x.com/TRobinsonNewEra/status/2076249746763653180
Fraser Nelson and his ilk think all cultures are equal. And I’m sure that level of elite virtue signalling would survive right up to the moment his precious girls were gang-raped by a group of “poor, deserving and culturally equivalent criminal migrants.”
Fraser Nelson is a snake. He was the reason I cancelled my Spectator sub. How it can describe itself as a conservative, centre right mag with him as editor I do not know.
Keep up the good work. All these grifters in the ‘charity’ sector must fear the gravy train pulling out of the station and endangering their cushioned existence….. sorry I meant their vital work!
No registered charity should receive money from taxpayers. I do not consent to my taxes being distributed to registered charities – is there a legal declaration I can make and if not, why? When I think of what the worthy charities I support could do with nearly £17 million quid I despair.
I hope you wear your ‘far right misinformation’ badge with honour?
Well, more power to your elbow, as far as I’m concerned… the list of those funding the organisation tells me just how interested it is likely to be in proper investigative journalism.