Daily Mail, on UK Politics, 4 November 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Revealed: Charities that called for Mahmood's immigration U-turn

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.3 findings

Charities that lobbied the Home Office to water down tougher immigration rules received more than £1billion in taxpayer cash, it can be revealed. The sector faces criticism for after Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood's U-turn on those who can gain Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). Research has found that 38 of the charities that lobbied politicians and responded to the consultation received an eye-watering £1billion in taxpayer-funded contracts and grants in their last financial year.

Left out here: Drops what it reported before

The article ties the charities' lobbying to the U-turn in its headline but never says that the Mail's own earlier reports, and other outlets, put the climbdown down to a backlash inside Labour, from Angela Rayner and backbench MPs. Without it a reader may believe the charities drove the change.

How we know

The biggest earner on the list was Mencap, a learning disabilities charity, which took more than £200million in contracts and grants in 2024-25, and told MPs that ministers should 'retain the five-year [ILR] pathway in place for social care workers'. Children's charity Barnardo's, which took £192million in contracts and grants in the same period, told peers it 'does not support the principles of earned settlement... as a basis for determining whether children can live safely and securely in the UK'.

Migrant and refugee charity Praxis received nearly £1million in contracts and grants in the year ending March 2025, and argued it rejected the concept of earned settlement 'entirely'. It also provided a guide for the public, saying illegal arrivals should face no penalty when applying for settlement. Alongside other charities, Praxis also brought more than 500 people to Parliament in March to lobby around 100 MPs against the proposals.

Charities that called for Shabana Mahmood's immigration reforms to be watered down received more than £1billion in taxpayer cash The Home Office's analysis of its consultation, published on Monday alongside Ms Mahmood's announcement, revealed that 66 per cent of the 560 'third sector' – ie, charities – responses said illegal arrivals should face no penalty before settling for good in Britain. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp told the Daily Mail: 'It takes some brass neck to take millions from British taxpayers and then spend it campaigning against Britain controlling its borders. 'These charities seem to think the public purse is there to bankroll their political agenda, whatever the public wants.'

John O'Connell, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, added: 'While charities have an important role to play in community services, Britons don't expect their taxes to be funding organisations who are pushing political agendas.' A Government spokesman said: 'The law is clear that charities must exist only to further their charitable purposes. When government provides grant funding to charities, there are strict rules preventing taxpayer money from being used on lobbying or political activity.'

A Barnardo's spokesman said part of its role 'is to speak out on behalf of the children we work with across the UK, sharing insight into their experiences, and always based on evidence from our hundreds of services across the country'. Jon Sparkes, chief executive at Mencap, said amid a significant workforce crisis, 'maintaining a route to settlement helps provide stability for both workers and employers, while protecting the continuity of care that people with a learning disability depend on'.

Praxis was approached for comment. READ MORE: Migrants who are handed settled status thanks to Labour's immigration U-turn will face having it cancelled, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch vows

Read the original article on dailymail.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (3)

The Daily Mail puts the £1billion in contracts and grants paid to 38 charities, much of it for care and children's services, beside their lobbying, and its headline drops the word contracts. The Mail says the sector faces criticism for using public money to push an anti-borders agenda, which takes the opposition's charge as given, while its own quoted Government spokesman says grant rules forbid lobbying. It never repeats its own earlier reporting that the U-turn followed a backlash inside Labour.

  1. Uses figures that mislead

    Minor

    “received more than £1billion in taxpayers' cash”

    Why this matters
    The headline puts 'received more than £1billion in taxpayers' cash' directly after 'called for Mahmood's immigration U-turn'.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes the charities were handed £1billion of public money linked to, or spent on, their campaign against the immigration rules.
    The context
    The body shows the sum is the total of all contracts and grants across 38 charities in one financial year, mostly payment for services such as Mencap's learning disability care. The headline drops 'contracts' and the number of charities.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“38 of the charities that lobbied politicians”
    • Elsewhere in the article“Mencap, a learning disabilities charity, which took more than £200million in contracts and grants”

    Show it in the article

  2. States one side's claim as fact

    Minor

    “using public money to push an anti-borders agenda”

    Why this matters
    In its own voice the Mail says the charities used 'public money to push an anti-borders agenda', presenting only the fact of criticism as a hedge.
    The impression it gives
    A reader believes it is established that taxpayer money funded the charities' lobbying and that they oppose border control.
    The context
    That is the charge made by Chris Philp of the Conservatives. The article offers no evidence that any public money was spent on lobbying, and its own quoted Government spokesman says strict rules prevent it. The charities' own stated reasons concern care workers and children's safety, not borders.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“spend it campaigning against Britain controlling its borders”
    • Elsewhere in the article“strict rules preventing taxpayer money from being used on lobbying or political activity”
    • Elsewhere in the article“maintaining a route to settlement helps provide stability for both workers and employers”

    Show it in the article

  3. Drops what it reported before

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article ties the charities' lobbying to the U-turn in its headline but never says that the Mail's own earlier reports, and other outlets, put the climbdown down to a backlash inside Labour, from Angela Rayner and backbench MPs. Without it a reader may believe the charities drove the change.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Daily Mail

  1. 4 NovKemi Badenoch attacks Labour's 'student union government' as Tory leader brands conversion therapy ban 'unworkable' and a 'waste of time'3.0
  2. 4 NovQUENTIN LETTS: From the slavery row to the EU, our Mr Bean of a Foreign Secretary is a national liability0.0
  3. 4 NovDAILY MAIL COMMENT: It's Brexit betrayal humiliation for Andy Burnham... as he tugs his forelock to Brussels AGAIN0.0
  4. 3 NovMahmood's '£10billion migrant climbdown': Home Secretary abandons tougher residency rules after backbench revolt6.0
  5. 3 NovReform council chief who wanted women fired first quits3.0

Everything we scored from Daily Mail