Footage was posted on social media of volunteers bringing a dinghy to safety in the Hampshire port city.

An RNLI spokesman said the Portsmouth Lifeboat Station has been “temporarily off service” since September 10.

The spokesman said: “We hope to have the lifeboat station back on service as soon as possible.

“Search and rescue cover continues to be provided through established contingency arrangements, including flank RNLI stations and other declared assets.”

The charity has another lifeboat station on Hayling Island and there is another lifeboat station independent of the RNLI in Gosport.

Hundreds of protesters blocked roads overnight on September 6 and vowed to stop migrants from leaving Portsmouth after they arrived in a dinghy across the English Channel.

The boat, reported to be carrying about 140 migrants, is thought to have made one of the longest journeys of any small boat, and landings as far west as Hampshire are rare.

The RNLI later issued security advice warning volunteers and staff not to wear the charity’s branding because of “unacceptable abuse”.

The charity’s chief executive, Peter Sparkes, has said abuse of RNLI volunteers was “wholly unacceptable in a civilised society”.

He said recent protests generated “deliberate misinformation and a misunderstanding about the RNLI, our purpose, our tasking, and particularly our lifesaving work in the Channel”.

Images of some RNLI crew members who were apparently involved in the operation off the Hampshire coast were published on social media with the accusation they were complicit in an “invasion” of the UK.

An RNLI spokesman said: “Given the unacceptable abuse our people have faced, and with protest activity taking place at RNLI locations, we have taken action to help ensure the safety and wellbeing of our volunteers and staff.

“As well as enhancing security at RNLI locations, we issued guidance to our people earlier this week on how to keep themselves safe.

“This guidance included how to manage potentially challenging interactions with members of the public, and where appropriate, choosing not to wear RNLI-branded clothing.

“Our people have been reminded that their safety comes first, and they are encouraged to report relevant incidents internally and, where appropriate, to the police.”

Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy told MPs she had spoken with tech companies about how the names, addresses and photographs of RNLI staff and volunteers were reportedly shared online.

The Wigan MP added she was “concerned” about the risks posed to adults and children from “doxxing”, which refers to when private information about an individual is shared online without their consent.

Criminologist at the University of Hertfordshire Dr Anna Tippett told the BBC how doxxing can create a “profound sense of vulnerability”, as the “boundary between online abuse and potential offline harm becomes increasingly difficult to judge”.

She added how doxxing “could discourage others from taking on these kinds of public-facing voluntary roles”.

RNLI Halts Service in Portsmouth After Anti-Migrant Protesters Confront Volunteers

The Royal National Lifeboat Institution has temporarily suspended operations at its Portsmouth lifeboat station after volunteers faced abuse and confrontation following a controversial Channel rescue involving migrants.

The decision has highlighted the increasingly difficult environment surrounding Britain’s small-boat crisis, with an organisation traditionally associated with saving lives at sea becoming caught in a wider political dispute over immigration and border control.

The Portsmouth station has been temporarily taken out of service since September 7 while the RNLI reviews the safety and wellbeing of its crew. The charity has stressed that the suspension does not mean search-and-rescue coverage has disappeared from the surrounding waters. Other RNLI stations and independent lifeboat services remain available, with HM Coastguard coordinating the most appropriate response when an emergency occurs.

The immediate controversy began after an RNLI crew brought around 120 people ashore at Eastney in Portsmouth following a Channel rescue on September 6.

The incident quickly became the focus of protests by people opposed to the government’s immigration policies. Demonstrators attempted to disrupt the movement of the newly arrived migrants and blocked roads around the port area.

For the RNLI volunteers involved, the confrontation created a situation very different from the ordinary rescue work for which the organisation is known.

The charity’s crews are trained to respond when people are in danger at sea. Their role is to rescue those facing an immediate threat to life, regardless of nationality or immigration status.

The RNLI has therefore continued to insist that its fundamental responsibility is maritime safety.

But the political atmosphere surrounding Channel crossings has made that responsibility increasingly complicated.

Following the Portsmouth incident, volunteers were subjected to verbal abuse and online harassment. Some crew members were targeted on social media, while protesters confronted personnel and questioned their involvement in bringing migrants ashore.

The RNLI subsequently introduced additional security measures and advised volunteers to consider whether wearing charity-branded clothing could put them at risk in certain circumstances. Staff were also told that they could close stations or other facilities if they believed they were in danger.

The decision to temporarily suspend Portsmouth operations was described by the RNLI as a matter of duty of care towards its volunteers.

Jacqui Irons, the charity’s south-east head of region, said the station had been paused so that crew safety and wellbeing could be reviewed following the events of September 6. She also stressed that alternative rescue arrangements were in place.

That reassurance is important because Portsmouth occupies a strategically significant position on the south coast.

A lifeboat station is not simply a building where volunteers gather. It forms part of a wider network of maritime emergency services. When one station becomes unavailable, other resources may need to cover its normal area.

The RNLI has said contingency measures have been put in place so that people at sea can still receive assistance.

Nevertheless, the temporary suspension illustrates how public disorder can have consequences beyond the immediate protest.

The dispute is rooted in Britain’s continuing argument over irregular migration across the English Channel.

Small boats crossing from France have become one of the most politically sensitive aspects of immigration policy. The government is under pressure to prevent dangerous crossings, while rescue organisations remain responsible for responding when vessels or individuals are in distress.

Those two realities can collide.

From the perspective of the RNLI, a person in danger at sea requires assistance. From the perspective of protesters opposed to irregular migration, bringing people safely to British shores can be viewed as contributing to a wider migration system they want the government to change.

That disagreement has increasingly placed rescue volunteers in the middle of a political argument they did not create.

The RNLI has rejected the idea that its volunteers are responsible for Britain’s immigration policy. Its crews do not decide who is permitted to remain in the United Kingdom, nor do they determine how asylum applications are processed.

Their role is to respond to maritime emergencies.

Yet protesters have argued that the organisation’s involvement in Channel rescues makes it part of the migration system.

That argument has contributed to increasingly hostile demonstrations outside RNLI facilities.

Security concerns have spread beyond Portsmouth. The RNLI has increased protection around other locations, including its headquarters in Poole, after demonstrations and hostile activity. Police have also become involved in protecting volunteers, staff and buildings in parts of southern England.

The charity has also reported online abuse directed towards its personnel.

The problem is particularly sensitive because social-media campaigns can expose individual volunteers to attention far beyond their local communities. Reports have described images of crew members being circulated online alongside accusations concerning their involvement in migrant rescues.

For volunteers who give their time to maritime rescue, such treatment can have a significant effect on their willingness to participate.

The RNLI relies heavily on volunteers. Many crew members are ordinary people who train in their spare time and respond to emergencies when called.

The organisation’s ability to operate therefore depends not only on boats and equipment but also on people willing to put themselves forward.

If volunteers become concerned that their names, photographs or personal information could be targeted because of their rescue work, recruitment and retention could become more difficult.

That is one reason the RNLI has treated the situation as a safety and welfare issue rather than simply a public-relations dispute.

The Portsmouth protests also raised broader questions about public order.

Reports said demonstrators attempted to prevent vehicles carrying migrants from leaving the area, while police officers were injured and vehicles damaged during the disorder.

The events have prompted increased attention from government and police authorities.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has urged police chiefs to improve intelligence gathering and make full use of their legal powers when dealing with demonstrations that involve intimidation, obstruction or criminal behaviour. She has also highlighted concerns about protesters wearing masks and other forms of concealment during demonstrations.

At the same time, there remains an important distinction between lawful protest and criminal conduct.

People have the right to express opposition to immigration policy, asylum accommodation and government decisions. Peaceful demonstrations are part of Britain’s democratic system.

That right does not extend to assault, threats, criminal damage or unlawful obstruction.

The authorities therefore face the challenge of protecting both democratic protest and public safety.

The RNLI’s position adds another layer to that challenge.

Unlike a political organisation, the charity’s primary purpose is not to campaign on immigration. Its historic mission is maritime rescue.

That is why the controversy has caused particular concern among supporters of the organisation.

The RNLI has been one of Britain’s most recognisable charitable institutions for generations. Its volunteers respond to emergencies involving fishing boats, yachts, swimmers, commercial vessels and other people in trouble around the coast.

The organisation’s supporters argue that the principle behind maritime rescue is simple: if someone is in danger, rescuers respond.

The recent controversy has tested that principle in an unusually political environment.

The September 6 rescue was especially sensitive because the people rescued had crossed the Channel in a small boat. The RNLI’s involvement therefore became part of the immigration debate almost immediately.

The charity has nevertheless maintained that its crews cannot ignore people in danger simply because their rescue may become politically controversial.

The temporary closure of the Portsmouth station is not presented as a change in that principle. Instead, it is a measure intended to protect the people carrying it out.

The RNLI says it expects Portsmouth to return to operational service in the near future. Until then, neighbouring stations and other maritime resources will continue to provide coverage.

The episode nevertheless raises difficult questions about the future.

As long as Channel crossings remain politically contentious, rescue organisations may continue to encounter hostility when their crews bring migrants safely to British shores.

The challenge will be ensuring that political disagreements about immigration do not undermine the ability of emergency services to perform their core functions.

For protesters, the Portsmouth events represent another opportunity to draw attention to concerns about Britain’s borders and asylum system.

For the government, they present a public-order challenge at a time when immigration remains one of the country’s most divisive political subjects.

For the RNLI, however, the immediate concern is much more practical: keeping its volunteers safe while ensuring that people in danger at sea continue to receive assistance.

The suspension of Portsmouth operations is therefore significant not because the RNLI has abandoned its rescue mission, but because an organisation built around emergency response has found itself having to temporarily step back from normal operations because of the reaction to its work.

What happens next will depend on whether tensions around Channel crossings continue to escalate or whether the situation around the south coast becomes calmer.

For now, the RNLI has made its priority clear: protecting its volunteers while maintaining maritime rescue coverage through the wider network.

The Portsmouth dispute is a reminder that Britain’s migration debate is no longer confined to Parliament, government departments or political campaigns. It is increasingly affecting local communities, police forces, transport networks and even emergency volunteers whose traditional role has been to save lives rather than participate in political arguments.

The RNLI’s return to full service will therefore be closely watched.

The organisation’s challenge is to ensure that its crews can continue doing what they have always been trained to do: respond when people are in danger, regardless of the circumstances that placed them in the water in the first place.