Reform UK strips Warwickshire Council chief executive of flag-flying powers amid Pride row
– 2 min read
Warwickshire County Council has voted to remove its chief executive’s authority over which flags are flown outside its headquarters, following a heated dispute over the display of the Progress Pride Flag during Pride Month.
The decision, led by Reform UK councillors, transfers flag-related powers from Chief Executive Monica Fogarty to the council chairman, Edward Harris, also of Reform UK. The move comes after Fogarty refused a request from newly elected council leader George Finch to remove the Progress Pride Flag from Shire Hall in Warwick.
The Progress Pride Flag, which includes colours representing marginalised LGBTQ+ communities and ethnic minorities, was flown in June. Finch, aged 18, argued that only the Union Flag, the St George’s Cross, and the County Flag of Warwickshire should be displayed, citing a desire for “unity” and “common sense”.
During a cabinet meeting on 4 September, Finch stated: “It takes it out of the hands of the elected leader, it takes it out of the hands of non-elected members, it puts it in the hands of the chairman of the council.” The new policy does not require the chairman to publicly justify decisions on which flags are permitted.
Opposition councillors have criticised the move. Liberal Democrat leader Jerry Roodhouse dismissed claims that the new process would be apolitical, saying, “I’ve never seen a chairman yet go against their political party in a council meeting.” Green Party leader Jonathan Chilvers raised concerns about inclusivity, asking for reassurances that council staff and visitors would not be judged based on their sexuality.
Finch responded: “It’s not about the colour of your skin, your sexuality, who you love. It’s about whether you can do the job.”
The controversy has sparked wider debate about the role of flags in public spaces and the balance between political leadership and bureaucratic authority. Reform UK maintains that the change ensures democratic accountability, while critics argue it risks politicising symbolic gestures of inclusion.
