Glasgow has one of the UK’s most developed refugee and asylum-support NGO ecosystems.
THE SCALE

• 15 major organisations audited
• ~£13.8M combined latest reported annual income
• ~£13.78M combined expenditure
• 100+ trustees/leaders identified
• Scottish Government funding traced
• Glasgow City Council funding traced

1 minute ago, FinChin67 said:

I call that BS. It's not working at all. Boats still coming and getting bigger.

There should be NOBODY coming and remigration / deportations in effect.

A drop in numbers of 43% to 44% is not BS.

This is how it works bannork we do not believe the numbers are true and the figures are distorted same as TAT officials inThailand. The government specially labour are hiding the truth from us. They admitted they do not know how many have slipped through and disapeared into the major citys in the UK. To compound it even our own Security Services have admitted Al-Qaeda and Hezbollah Operatives have entered using claims of Asylum claiments. This is the reality.

5 minutes ago, BarraMarra said:

This is how it works bannork we do not believe the numbers are true and the figures are distorted same as TAT officials inThailand. The government specially labour are hiding the truth from us. They admitted they do not know how many have slipped through and disapeared into the major citys in the UK. To compound it even our own Security Services have admitted Al-Qaeda and Hezbollah Operatives have entered using claims of Asylum claiments. This is the reality.

This thread is talking about migrants who arrive by boat. These numbers are verifiable, especially as 95% want to give themselves up to claim asylum.

Regarding possible entry by other means, hiding inside lorries, etc, that could be a topic you could start your own thread on.

At this rate progressive darlings DeGeneres/Rossi all cosy and safe in their 100% white Cotswolds enclave are about to get a cold hard reality lesson on "diversity".

Tbf Coldswolders who voted for this progressive BS should be swamped by it. Unsafe to leave their homes, esp their children. Although I accept it is sad to see England commit harikari so spectacularly like this.

5 minutes ago, bannork said:

This thread is talking about migrants who arrive by boat. These numbers are verifiable, especially as 95% want to give themselves up to claim asylum.

Regarding possible entry by other means, hiding inside lorries, etc, that could be a topic you could start your own thread on.

Do you live in the UK bannork or do you get your info from the Net ?

On 8/12/2026 at 9:59 AM, FinChin67 said:

Credit to this goes to Charlotte Gill.

charlottecgill.co.uk

List of taxpayer-funded charities (asylum and migration)

Below accounts for 28 (and counting) taxpayer-funded asylum and migration charities.
For context, there are 171,516 charities on The Charity Commission for England and Wales (at the time of writing) - a bit of a mission to comb through. I will be going for ones I deem the most problematic, in terms of exacerbating this country’s societal and economic woes (for instance, pushing open borders).

I have added the total I’ve accounted for £701,156,359

I'm not aware of British laws, tax practices or regulations. But charities, to my knowledge, are never subsidised by govt. They raise their own funds and don't have to pay taxes on it. £700M!!! I call <deleted>!

On 8/12/2026 at 1:02 PM, FinChin67 said:

230 PEOPLE. ONE DINGHY. BUT LOOK AT THE MACHINE SURROUNDING THE CHANNEL.

On 10 August, a single inflatable carried a record 230 people across the Channel to Britain. The previous record was 165.The average load has gone from roughly 7 people per boat in 2018 to around 63 today. But the dinghy is only the part everyone sees.

NGO database maps 126 organisations operating across the British asylum, migration and refugee sector, northern France and Europe. And when you look at Calais and the wider support network, the scale is remarkable.

CARE4CALAIS
🇬🇧🇫🇷🇧🇪 UK, France & Belgium £1.45 MILLION annual income £1.89 MILLION annual expenditure
25 employees Around 2,100 volunteers Direct aid and social support.

UTOPIA 56
🇫🇷 Eight operating branches including Calais, Grande-Synthe and Lille €2.97 MILLION income*
41 salaried staff Around 3,500 volunteers

In northern France in 2024 alone:
→ Approx. 1,950 outreach rounds
→ 900 tents distributed
→ 6,650 blankets/sleeping bags
→ Around 680 incidents involving failed Channel crossings
→ At least 16,600 people assisted
→ Nearly 700 distress-at-sea calls
→ A 24/7 emergency telephone line

L’AUBERGE DES MIGRANTS
🇫🇷 Calais / Dunkirk
Runs a shared Calais warehouse used by seven associations.
Its operation includes:
→ 900+ meals at a time, three times weekly
→ Clothing and blanket distribution
→ Firewood
→ Multilingual information
→ Device charging
→ SIM cards
→ Phone-credit support

It reports roughly 118,000 volunteer hours a year.

REFUGEE COMMUNITY KITCHEN
🇬🇧🇫🇷🇧🇪 Calais, Dunkirk, Brussels & London
£586,000 annual income
19 employees
Around 320 volunteers
Its core operation is preparing and distributing food and providing access to essential services.

CHOOSE LOVE
🇬🇧🌍 Operates as a grant-maker across 25+ countries, including France.
£12.59 MILLION annual income £8.22 MILLION expenditure
29 employees 365 volunteers

Its disclosed funding network includes major international foundations and philanthropic vehicles. Historically, L’Auberge des Migrants says Choose Love financed up to 70% of the associations operating from its shared Calais warehouse before withdrawing from Calais in 2021.

Then look at the giants whose work is much broader than Channel migration:

SECOURS CATHOLIQUE / CARITAS FRANCE
€152.6 MILLION annual income
910 FTE staff 58,000 volunteers
It operates nationally, including a Pas-de-Calais operation supporting people in exile.

MÉDECINS DU MONDE FRANCE
€148.6 MILLION annual income
Hundreds of staff Thousands participating across its wider operation
Its public funding alone was approximately: €73.8 MILLION
including EU, French, German, Canadian and UN funding.

And on the British side:
BRITISH RED CROSS £287.1 MILLION annual income
3,286 employees 10,200 volunteers

Its refugee services are only ONE PART of that enormous organisation, so that £287m must not be misrepresented as Channel spending. This is the scale people need to understand. The record 230-person dinghy is one boat.

Behind the Channel issue sits an ecosystem involving:
Thousands of volunteers. Hundreds of employees. Warehouses. Food distribution. Tents. Blankets. Transport. Phones. SIM cards. Charging. Legal assistance. Emergency lines. Foundations. Corporate donors. Government funding. EU funding.

And we have now mapped 126 organisations involved in the wider ecosystem. The next job is not rhetoric. It is ACCOUNTING. Which organisations operate where? Who funds them? How much money reaches northern France? Which services directly intersect with Channel crossings? Which organisations receive public money? Which are privately funded?

230 people fitted onto one dinghy. Now imagine the size of the infrastructure surrounding the route.

I think it's wonderful to have such an effective support network in place to relieve the suffering of migrants. But I guess you're not a Xian. What is that religion which believes we should murder the poor and homeless?

13 hours ago, FinChin67 said:

LABOUR MP ADMITS PLAN TO DUMP ILLEGAL MIGRANTS IN EXPENSIVE HOUSING TO SPREAD RUIN EQUALLY!

The mask has completely slipped on the Labour Party. 🤡

A Labour MP has admitted their new policy is to dump illegal migrants into expensive housing, arguing that all British communities should suffer equally!

Hardworking taxpayers who saved for years to buy a home are now being forced to fund luxury leases for illegal arrivals!

Prime Minister Andy Burnham is not fixing the border crisis, he is engineering the total destruction of our citizen built society. No one voted for this!

This thread certainly brought the racist paranoids scuttling out of the baseboards. You keep prattling about "fighting age males". Okay, so who, exactly, are they fighting? Are you saying that these migrants want to war on Britain? (Rhetorically, are you nuts?)

Would you be happy if these young men brought their wives and children with them? I'm sure such a programme could be arranged.

My most thumbs-down of any post on AN ever! What a rabble of pinhead cretins.

Who live in Thailand! Opinions are like...you know.

Edited August 13Aug 13 by unblocktheplanet
add

1 hour ago, BarraMarra said:

Do you live in the UK bannork or do you get your info from the Net ?

The MOA rhetorical questions. I like it!

They are either overseas getting their "news" from mainstream msm, or they are in an area yet to see the hordes of slovenly (or outright hostile) young muslim males.

Burhams new plan ought to wake them up.

2 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

The MOA rhetorical questions. I like it!

They are either overseas getting their "news" from mainstream msm, or they are in an area yet to see the hordes of slovenly (or outright hostile) young muslim males.

Burhams new plan ought to wake them up.

Oh how desperate the anti-Muslim posters on AN are for there to be unrest in the UK!

The UK is currently undergoing its fifth heatwave this summer and apart from Thetford there have been few anti-immigrant disturbances.

If the Brits were going to riot it would be now in the heat.

Yet anti-migrant marches turn out derisory numbers, outnumbered by the Left.

Come on Bangrak ( or are you American?) and crew. Get back to Blighty to help your fellow Brits afraid to walk the streets, lol.

If the immigrant count is rigged:

• Didn't Tories rig it too? Or were they too honest to do that?

• Or is Labour better skilled at rigging it than Tories?

😃

The tiny village of Linton-On-Ouse is about to receive 1200 illegal migrants, all males.

This means women in the village will be outnumbered by men at a ratio of 6 to 1

When Andy Burnham was asked for comment he said they would have to "play their part" in housing asylum seekers

Even pro-immigration Labour MP for York Rachel Maskell has stepped in suggesting this may be 'unsuitable'

An American living in the UK reveals how dangerous and Third World Manchester has become.

6 hours ago, bannork said:

A drop in numbers of 43% to 44% is not BS.

It's nothing, it's BS to me and the muslim lady has nothing to do with it.

On 8/11/2026 at 11:53 AM, beautifulthailand99 said:

Time to dig up Roy Castle and get the McWhirter brothers out to boot. But the 'RA (© N.Farage) offed one of those back in the day.

That's an "AI can you make this boat bigger please" image

"Small boat crossings plunge – but the real reason Is far from clear"

I think the reason is most likely the endless "Broken Britain" narrative being pedalled by the far right in the UK and the USA, and possibly amplified by Russian bot farms. The migrants are starting the think they're better off not taking the boat.

Edited August 13Aug 13 by Stocky

I spent months getting my wife a uk visa

My son's girlfriend was refused a visa

Next time I might have to buy a dinghy

We would get free accommodation when we arrive .

24 minutes ago, FinChin67 said:

It's nothing, it's BS to me and the muslim lady has nothing to do with it.

If you think a drop in arrival numbers of 43% is nothing you need to go back to school and resit Maths

35 minutes ago, kwak250 said:

I spent months getting my wife a uk visa

My son's girlfriend was refused a visa

Next time I might have to buy a dinghy

We would get free accommodation when we arrive .

Keep them there. We don't want them here either.

5 hours ago, bannork said:

Oh how desperate the anti-Muslim posters on AN are for there to be unrest in the UK!

The UK is currently undergoing its fifth heatwave this summer and apart from Thetford there have been few anti-immigrant disturbances.

If the Brits were going to riot it would be now in the heat.

Yet anti-migrant marches turn out derisory numbers, outnumbered by the Left.

Come on Bangrak ( or are you American?) and crew. Get back to Blighty to help your fellow Brits afraid to walk the streets, lol.

Don't think they're anti-Mjuslim they 're just the 'miserable in Thailand with no way back to Blighty so hope it burns' crew. The ones with the 500 yard stares scraping buy and doing their best to survive the perm scorching heat in that God forsaken country.

As for rioting, it's 33 degrees here so tooo hot to riot (for non black or browns).

22 degress is probably optimal rioting conditions for whites so maybe September?

Resistance is futile though as the police have weapons and have been brainwashed with DEI BS.
Why protest if the politicians and their jackbooted thugs are in the pockets of globalists?

7 hours ago, bannork said:

A drop in numbers of 43% to 44% is not BS.

Official statement much? Are u still hoping to find those WMDs?
UK Govt LIES ABOUT EVERYTHING.
Only retards take their statements at face value 👀

15 hours ago, BarraMarra said:

The NGO'S if English in France are helping the invaders so they should brought back to the UK and charged with aiding and abetting a crime helping them to unlawfully enter the UK.

Tony Bliar changed the law so treason is no more punishable by death.

Coincidence?

Bible has no record of prisons. Treachery is best solved by death.

2 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Official statement much? Are u still hoping to find those WMDs?
UK Govt LIES ABOUT EVERYTHING.
Only retards take their statements at face value 👀

Come on T2, stop writing depressing drivel otherwise I'm going to have to put you on my ignore list.

By the way, didn't you say you were going to put me on your ignore list a week or two ago? What happened there? lol.

8 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Well done for just making perfectly clear your ignorance and the fact that you have never read that document, you just looked at the title. I feel for you.

Gay.

Evidence of the Great Replacment in this please (and save your woke for someone else please as i'm not gay): https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/unpd-egm_200010_un_2001_replacementmigration.pdf

If by “evidence of the Great Replacement” you mean evidence that policymakers explicitly studied large-scale immigration as a way of offsetting declining native/low-fertility populations, then yes, this UN document is genuine and is strong primary-source evidence for that narrower proposition.

I read the document you linked. It is the UN Population Division's Replacement Migration: Is It a Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations?, published in 2000/2001. The UN itself describes its purpose as calculating the international migration required to offset population decline and ageing.

What the document actually says

The terminology is unusually explicit.

The report defines “replacement migration” as international migration to offset:

1. declines in total population;

2. declines in the working-age population; and

3. population ageing.

It examines France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Russia, the UK, the US, Europe and the EU.

And it doesn't merely say “immigration might help.” It constructs mathematical scenarios asking how many immigrants would be required to achieve particular demographic outcomes.

For Europe as a whole, the report calculated approximately:

Objective, 2000–2050	Immigration required
Maintain total population	95.9 million
Maintain working-age population	161.3 million
Maintain the 1995 worker/elderly ratio	1.357 billion

The corresponding annual figures were approximately 1.92 million, 3.23 million, and 27.1 million immigrants per year, respectively.

The last scenario is particularly striking. The report itself describes it as an extreme/unrealistic scenario; maintaining the 1995 support ratio through immigration alone would eventually require migration on an enormous scale.

The part that is especially relevant to your argument

The report explicitly calculates not merely immigrants but “post-1995 migrants and their descendants.”

For example, under its UK scenario designed to maintain the 1995 potential support ratio, it calculated:

• 59.8 million migrants between 1995 and 2050;

• an average of more than 1 million per year;

• a projected UK population of 136 million in 2050;

• of which 80 million, or 59%, would be post-1995 migrants or their descendants.

For the EU, the extreme support-ratio scenario produced an even more dramatic result: the UN calculated that roughly three-quarters of the EU's 2050 population would consist of post-1995 migrants and their descendants.

So if someone tells you “the UN never discussed using immigration to replace a declining population”, that would simply be false. The document is literally called Replacement Migration, and that is precisely what it mathematically investigates.

But here's where the evidence needs to be described accurately

There are three different propositions, and the document establishes them to very different degrees:

A. “The UN explicitly studied replacement migration.”
Yes. Absolutely. This is directly documented.

B. “The UN considered substantial immigration a potential mechanism for compensating for low fertility, population ageing and declining working-age populations.”
Yes. Absolutely. That's the central subject of the report.

C. “The UN had a coordinated plan to deliberately replace white/European populations with non-white populations.”
This particular document does not establish that.

That's because its demographic categories are primarily countries, regions, migrants and descendants, not “white” and “non-white” populations. It doesn't say that Europeans should be ethnically replaced, nor does it present immigration as a racial objective though it could be seen as implied.

There's also an important irony in the report

The UN's own calculations demonstrate a problem with the idea that immigration can permanently solve population ageing.

Because immigrants themselves age, maintaining a particular worker-to-retiree ratio indefinitely requires progressively larger immigration. That's why the extreme scenarios explode into hundreds of millions or even more than a billion migrants.

For Europe, for example, the report goes from 95.9 million migrants to maintain population size, to 161.3 million to maintain the working-age population, to 1.357 billion to maintain the 1995 potential-support ratio.

That's actually one of the most interesting things about the report: it doesn't demonstrate an easy demographic solution; it demonstrates how mathematically difficult permanent demographic replacement through migration becomes.

So, is this evidence for “the Great Replacement”?

The document isn't, by itself, evidence that a secret or coordinated racial conspiracy existed to replace white Europeans.
To establish that much stronger claim, you'd need additional evidence showing intent, coordination, racial objectives and implementation (eg, financial incentives (free weekly spending money), free phone, free hotel room, prioritisation in access to public sector housing, free access to healthcare, dental care, schooling for children etc.

The UN really did publish a report called “Replacement Migration,” and its numerical scenarios really do encourage enormous immigrant populations and explicitly count their descendants.

I get it though, you're unintelligent (hence your disasterous life decisions) and hate being stranded in boiling hot and dangerous critter infested Thailand - which IS understandable. I realise that misery loves company so I won't hold it against you.
GL.

Here's a naive question from me:

Why do all these immigrants (illegal or otherwise) want to brave the English Channel to reach the UK when AFAIK France is not a dangerous country? What is it that attracts them so much to the UK? Is it the urge to improve their English skills? Possibly an aversion to learning French?

Just asking.....

A low value post has been removed:

13. Low-Value Posts - Posts that add no written contribution are not allowed.

    This includes emoji-only replies, very short comments, memes, GIFs, screenshots, or embedded social media posts without explanation or opinion.

An inflammatory personal attack post toward another member has been removed.

1 hour ago, Tourist2 said:

It's an invasion so why not kill them.
Boomers glorify the silent's WW2 efforts and try to steal their valour -
However, if the Nazis all invaded on small (or big) rubber dingys you'd have welcomed them in.
Seems either very stupid or very gay.

So which is it? Or are you just a bunch of stupid gays?

42 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Gay.

Evidence of the Great Replacment in this please (and save your woke for someone else please as i'm not gay)

Obsessed with childish insults.......and gays. Harris is the only poster I've put on ignore. I'm going to do it again, bye Harris.

Edited August 13Aug 13 by josephbloggs

59 minutes ago, simon43 said:

Here's a naive question from me:

Why do all these immigrants (illegal or otherwise) want to brave the English Channel to reach the UK when AFAIK France is not a dangerous country? What is it that attracts them so much to the UK? Is it the urge to improve their English skills? Possibly an aversion to learning French?

Just asking.....

Various reasons apparently, 1,2 and 5 look particularly attractive.

The specific group of migrants attempting to cross the English Channel in small boats choose the UK over France due to a combination of existing family ties, language skills, economic factors, and poor living conditions in northern French camps.

1. Existing Family and Community Networks

Many cross-Channel migrants choose the UK because they have family members, friends, or established communities already living there.

2. English is widely spoken as a second language globally, whereas very few cross-Channel migrants speak French.

3. Economic and Labour Market Factors

The UK's economic structure is often perceived as more accessible to new arrivals.

4 The Job Market: France struggles with relatively high unemployment rates for newcomers without institutional connections

5.The Informal Economy: The UK is perceived to have an accessible informal economy, offering immediate, under-the-table work opportunities to those waiting for asylum decisions or lacking documentation

5.National Identity Cards (which Starmer wanted to introduce)

Unlike France and most EU nations, the UK does not require citizens or workers to carry a compulsory national identity card, making it easier to blend into society without constant documentation checks.

6. Poor Living Conditions in French Camps

Migrants waiting in northern France (such as Calais or Dunkirk) face harsh, degrading living conditions. They often live in makeshift forest camps, mud, or abandoned buildings with minimal access to sanitation, food, or medical care. Frequent police clearances of these temporary camps further motivate migrants to leave France as quickly as possible.

59 minutes ago, simon43 said:

Here's a naive question from me:

Why do all these immigrants (illegal or otherwise) want to brave the English Channel to reach the UK when AFAIK France is not a dangerous country? What is it that attracts them so much to the UK? Is it the urge to improve their English skills? Possibly an aversion to learning French?

Just asking.....

Why do they want to leave France and take their chances in the UK?

Because the French are rude and eat frogs and snails. Also, the beer is terrible, the wine is overpriced, and public transport is always on strike.

Not to mention the toilets ...

/s