At the risk of being unpopular as hell: The way I read it from the article (as an unrelated party from a different country) they can host such events with their own funding and organization, if they want them to happen. Why should public spending go towards subsidizing events, when those could be realized by e.g. a private co-op of the people interested?

There is a case to be made for when the target group of people can't realistically be expected to have enough resources/capacity to do so, so personally I'm not in favor of a blanket ban without exceptions, such as the law seems to be here, but I don't like superfluous subsidies.