Politics news and discussion on TalkFuse.
LGBT Migrant charity handed nearly £1m in Lottery funding despite claiming British state kills asylum seekers
Rainbow Migration, which helps LGBT people seeking asylum in the UK, received £952,000 in National Lottery funding over 2023 and 2024 for staffing and core operating costs. The grants have prompted criticism from Conservative politicians, who argue that public funding should not support the charity’s campaigns against government immigration policies.
The charity has criticised the UK’s treatment of migrants and campaigns to end immigration detention for LGBT asylum claimants, a campaign it says has support from 112 MPs. The article reports that LGBT-related asylum claims rose 90 per cent from 2021 to 1,400 in 2023, and notes that international law bars deportation to places where people risk persecution. The National Lottery Community Fund said it was proud of its grant holders’ work; Rainbow Migration was approached for comment.
In short
- Rainbow Migration received £952,000 in Lottery grants over two years.
- Conservative politicians criticised the funding of a campaigning charity.
- LGBT-related asylum claims reached 1,400 in 2023.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Public funding can reasonably support Rainbow Migration’s direct work helping LGBT people seeking asylum, particularly where they face persecution or detention-related risks. Its advocates may argue that campaigning to change policies affecting those people is part of effective support, and that the Lottery fund’s independence allows grants to serve community needs without endorsing every statement by a recipient.
The case against
Critics may argue that Lottery funding should be confined to services with clear public benefit and should not subsidise campaigning against the policies of an elected government. They may also see the charity’s language about the state as undermining confidence in public institutions, and contend that funding decisions should account for whether advocacy fits the fund’s remit.
Elections Health Medicine Politics UK World