Children of volunteers for the RNLI have reportedly been bullied at school over the charity’s work in the English Channel. The RNLI responds to small boats that are generally in distress and require specialist rescue skills.

The leader of a lifeboat crew in Portsmouth said the children of two crew members had been bullied by their peers over their fathers’ volunteer work. The volunteers have also been confronted while shopping and socialising in public, according to a report by the Times.

RNLI crews have faced years of abuse for the charity’s role in rescuing migrants crossing the Channel.

In one instance, a lifeboat crew was trapped inside its boathouse for two hours during a protest at Eastney harbour. Volunteers from other RNLI stations were tasked with ensuring the safety of anti-migrant protesters who entered the sea during the protest.

Images of the crews’ faces were shared online, alongside calls to identify them. One widely shared post on X urged people to “get their family”.

Callouts for small boats in distress while crossing the Channel constitute only 1.7 per cent of the charity’s total, however. In 2025, 41,472 people crossed the Channel, but only 2,353, or 5.7 per cent, were rescued by the RNLI.

According to the Times report, Peter Sparkes, the charity’s chief executive, said there had been “deliberate misinformation and a misunderstanding” about RNLI tasking and how it responded in the Channel.

“Sadly, as a result, some of our volunteers and staff have been the subject of online and, in the worst cases, physical abuse,” he said.

“The RNLI’s people represent the very best in our society, they selflessly give up their time to keep others safe.

“Yet they and their families are being threatened by those who would hide behind a balaclava or a keyboard.

“Their action, in contrast, is wholly unacceptable in a civilised society.”

Children of RNLI Volunteers Bullied Over Channel Migrant Rescues as Lifeboat Crews Face Growing Hostility

Children of Royal National Lifeboat Institution (RNLI) volunteers have reportedly been bullied at school because of their parents’ work rescuing people attempting to cross the English Channel, intensifying concerns about the growing hostility directed at the charity.

The allegations emerged during a debate at Portsmouth City Council, where councillors discussed recognising the RNLI for its longstanding contribution to the city. A letter from a local lifeboat station described how volunteers had faced abuse in public, had their personal details circulated online and had become the targets of intimidation following controversial migrant rescue operations.

The letter also revealed that the children of two crew members had allegedly been bullied because their fathers volunteered for the lifesaving organisation.

The reports have highlighted how the increasingly heated debate over small boat crossings is affecting people far removed from Westminster and the immigration system. While disagreements over border policy remain a major political issue, the allegations have raised questions about whether hostility towards the RNLI is crossing the line into the harassment of volunteers and their families.

Children caught in the middle of the migration debate

According to the letter presented to councillors, some RNLI volunteers have been confronted in pubs, shops and yacht clubs. Others have reportedly received repeated messages, while the names and photographs of crew members have circulated on social media.

The letter described the bullying of two volunteers’ children as one of the most distressing consequences of the situation.

Children should not be held responsible for the voluntary activities of their parents. Yet the allegations suggest that the anger surrounding Channel crossings has extended into school life, placing additional pressure on families who already devote considerable time to helping others.

For the volunteers involved, the situation presents a difficult challenge. They give up their time to respond to emergencies at sea, often in dangerous conditions, but have found themselves facing hostility because of the people they are tasked with rescuing.

The allegations have prompted concern among local representatives, who argue that disagreement over government policy should not become a reason to intimidate individuals or target their children.

Councillor Gerald Vernon-Jackson told the council meeting that he was deeply concerned about the abuse, intimidation and threats directed at the charity. He urged the authority to express its support for the RNLI and recognise its contribution to the city.

Portsmouth councillors backed a motion supporting the charity’s nomination for the Freedom of the City honour, despite opposition to elements of the motion from Reform UK councillors.

The debate demonstrated how the migration issue has become intertwined with local politics, even when the immediate question concerns the safety of volunteers and their families.

Why the RNLI rescues people crossing the Channel

The RNLI has faced criticism from people who believe its involvement in Channel rescues contributes to irregular migration. Some protesters have described the charity as a transport service for migrants, arguing that rescuing people and bringing them ashore undermines efforts to control the UK’s borders.

The organisation rejects that characterisation.

The RNLI is a maritime rescue charity whose purpose is to save lives at sea. Its lifeboat crews are tasked by His Majesty’s Coastguard to assist people in distress, regardless of their nationality or immigration status.

The charity says its crews do not decide who is permitted to enter Britain. Following a rescue, responsibility for those brought ashore is transferred to the appropriate authorities, including Border Force where relevant.

This distinction is central to the controversy. Decisions about immigration enforcement belong to the government and its agencies, whereas the RNLI’s immediate responsibility is to respond when people are in danger on the water.

The Channel is one of the world’s busiest shipping lanes. Small, overcrowded boats can be vulnerable to changing weather, strong currents, mechanical failures and collisions with other vessels. When people are at risk of drowning, a delayed response can have serious consequences.

According to figures published by the RNLI, its lifeboats were launched 9,058 times in 2025, with 109 launches involving people in distress in the Channel. Those Channel incidents represented approximately 1.2 per cent of its total launches that year.

The figures challenge the suggestion that rescuing people from small boats defines the charity’s overall work. Its crews also respond to emergencies involving swimmers, sailors, fishermen, recreational boat users and others in danger around the British and Irish coastline.

Nevertheless, Channel rescues have become a highly visible part of the national immigration debate, leaving volunteers exposed to criticism that would previously have been less likely to reach their homes, workplaces and families.

Online abuse raises safety concerns

The allegations of bullying have emerged amid wider reports of intimidation directed at RNLI crews following migrant rescue operations in the Portsmouth area.

In September, photographs and personal details of volunteers involved in a Channel rescue were reportedly circulated online. Some social media posts accused the crew members of helping an alleged invasion of Britain, while other messages used language such as “traitors” and “cowards”.

The RNLI said the circulation of misinformation had contributed to online abuse and, in some cases, physical intimidation. Its chief executive, Peter Sparkes, condemned threats against volunteers and their families and said the organisation would take steps to protect its people.

The situation also raised concerns about the possibility of online harassment spilling into the real world. Publishing personal information can expose individuals to unwanted contact, threats and intimidation, particularly when social media posts encourage others to identify or confront them.

The RNLI has reviewed security arrangements in response to the incidents. Volunteers have been advised to consider whether wearing clothing bearing the charity’s logo could put them at risk in particular circumstances.

Portsmouth’s lifeboat station was temporarily taken out of service following abuse and protests connected with migrant rescues. The charity subsequently returned the station to normal operations, with contingency arrangements used to maintain rescue coverage during the interruption.

The episode illustrated the potential consequences of targeting an emergency service. Any disruption to a rescue station can create additional pressure on neighbouring crews and emergency-response arrangements, even when those arrangements are designed to preserve coverage.

The political argument over immigration continues

The controversy reflects a wider division over the UK’s approach to irregular migration.

Critics of the government’s current system argue that dangerous Channel crossings must be reduced and that people who enter Britain without authorisation should be subject to effective immigration controls. They also question how public and charitable resources are used in responding to the consequences of those crossings.

Those concerns form part of a legitimate political debate. Governments are responsible for border security, asylum processing and enforcing immigration law, and voters can reasonably demand explanations about whether those systems are working effectively.

However, the RNLI does not set asylum policy or determine the outcome of immigration cases. Its stated role is to respond to people in danger at sea when tasked by the Coastguard.

That means the charity can be criticised or questioned about its work without its volunteers being threatened, personally exposed online or having their children targeted at school.

The distinction is important because treating rescue workers as representatives of government immigration policy risks directing anger towards people who have no authority over the decisions at the centre of the dispute.

Reform UK councillors sought to amend the Portsmouth motion, arguing that residents should be able to express concerns about the role of the RNLI without the council debate becoming an exercise in political commentary. They also argued that responsibility for the migration situation rests with the government.

That position reflects the political sensitivity of the issue, but it does not resolve the central concern raised by the allegations: how to maintain a public debate about immigration without allowing harassment and intimidation to become normalised.

A charity under pressure to protect its volunteers

The RNLI relies heavily on volunteers who give up their time to respond to emergencies, often at inconvenient hours and in difficult conditions. Its work depends on people being willing to undertake demanding training, maintain specialist equipment and answer emergency calls when lives may be at risk.

Abuse directed at volunteers can have consequences beyond the individuals directly targeted. Families may become worried about their safety, while potential recruits could be discouraged from joining if they fear that their involvement will expose them to harassment.

The organisation has said that the welfare of its volunteers and staff remains a priority. Protecting those people is particularly important when lifeboat stations face public demonstrations or when crew members are identified online.

Schools also have a responsibility to take allegations of bullying seriously. If children are being targeted because of their parents’ work, the appropriate response is to investigate the reported behaviour and protect the pupils concerned, rather than allowing political arguments to spill into their education.

The details of individual cases must be handled carefully, particularly where children are involved. The allegations presented to Portsmouth councillors are serious, but the public information does not establish every circumstance surrounding the reported incidents.

The wider question facing Britain

The RNLI controversy exposes a difficult challenge for Britain: how to debate immigration policy firmly while protecting the people who carry out essential emergency work.

The government must answer questions about border security, asylum processing and the dangerous journeys undertaken by people crossing the Channel. Those questions are unlikely to disappear, and public disagreement over the appropriate response will continue.

But rescue crews operate according to a different immediate responsibility. When people are in danger of drowning, their task is to save lives and bring those people to safety. Immigration decisions are then handled by the relevant authorities.

The allegations that volunteers’ children have been bullied underline the human consequences when political anger reaches beyond public debate and affects families.

For the RNLI, the immediate priority is to ensure that crews can continue responding to emergencies without fearing intimidation. For local authorities and schools, it is to respond appropriately to reports of harassment and protect those affected. For political leaders and social media platforms, the challenge is to ensure that criticism of public policy does not become a justification for threats or the circulation of private information.

Britain can have a vigorous debate about migration while still recognising that children should not be punished for their parents’ voluntary service. The allegations in Portsmouth have brought that principle into sharp focus, placing the safety and wellbeing of RNLI families at the centre of a debate that began with the dangerous crossings of the English Channel.