LIM has been refused state funding and states that it will have to close down if the decision is not reversed. At a time of increased attention to integration problems, the government chooses to undermine an organisation that is independent and enjoys trust among immigrants who experience problems. This is a signal that cannot be misunderstood.

LIM stands for equality, integration, diversity – the very buzzwords that the authorities readily invoke. Are we now to understand it such that the government does not favour independent actors? That they are a threat? Sarah Gaulin says this is the end of the road. She writes on facebook:

This is not only about us. It concerns which voices and organisations will remain for immigrants in Norway.

We need both organisations that work with knowledge and information dissemination, and those that dare to take the difficult conversations. LIM has been both. We have worked throughout the country and contributed where needed.

LIM has been a unique and rare voice. An immigrant organisation that works with and together with people who are often not heard. We engage in debates others do not dare to take. We bring together voices with and without religious backgrounds who confront honour culture (æreskultur), forced marriage (tvangsekteskap), child marriage (barneekteskap) and negative social control (negativ sosial kontroll).

We have also served as a link in cases concerning youth crime and organised crime. Many contact us before approaching the support services (hjelpeapparatet), because they trust us and are familiar with our work.

When we advocated a ban on cousin marriage (søskenbarnekteskap), we were the only immigrant organisation that clearly said yes. We encountered environments that themselves stated that prevention was not sufficient. We assumed responsibility for a debate that many did not wish to engage in.

Last year, we conducted a major youth survey on electoral participation among young people with an immigrant background. We mapped barriers and worked on solutions. The survey received national attention and contributed to increased understanding locally.

We raise topics that many are reluctant to address. Criticism of both religion and culture when necessary, with reasoned argumentation. We engage with opponents and contribute to a better climate of debate.

When such voices disappear, the space for debate becomes narrower.

We fear greater polarisation. Not less.

We will appeal the decision. We hope IMDi and politicians recognise the value of the work we do, and why such voices are needed.