By Sally Churchward. Additional reporting by Joy McKay. Image: Orlagh Scorey Auckland.
Cheers and claps rung out in a Southampton City Council meeting this afternoon when Reform councillor Philip Crook withdrew a controversial motion to ban all flags except the Union Jack, St George Cross and Southampton City flags from being flown at the Civic Centre.
The initial motion, which he had subsequently revised also called for the Union flag to be flown or displayed at every council owned property/building and council run schools – which commentators highlighted had the potential to be a hugely expensive project.
Some 70 protesters gathered outside the Civic Centre to demonstrate against the motion, which many felt was particularly aimed specifically at banning the Pride flag from being flown outside the Southampton Council seat of power.
They were joined by members of the Socialist Party/TUSC, who were bringing a separate matter before the council but who stood in solidarity with the protesters at the event, organised by Trans Pride Southampton.
There were two counter protesters, one waving a St George Cross flag.
A large party of the protesters attended the council meeting in the public gallery found themselves sitting though three and a half hours of council business before the motion was reached.
But while those in the public gallery – and some on the floor – were jubilant, cllr Crook indicated that he would be bringing the motion back to a future meeting in some form.
When asked by the Mayor, who was presiding over the meeting if he formally wished to move his motion, Reform councillor Crook said: “Madam Mayor, thank you very much indeed. I wish to withdraw the motion for this time being,” adding that further would follow.
Boos from the public gallery followed the latter part of his statement.
The motion had been widely criticised, both for banning the wide array of flags that are currently flown over the civic centre and for the potentially astronomical cost of installing and maintaining Union Jack flags at every council owned property.
Following the meeting, a spokesperson for Trans Pride Southampton said: “We feel relief, but we were confident the motion would not pass. It is in a way disappointing the motion was withdrawn rather than voted on and, inevitably struck down.
“The protest was a show of strength for common sense in Southampton – that we will not be pulled into nonsense political point scoring by restricting our city’s freedom of speech, and restricting the representation of the city’s citizens.
“If similar motions are proposed in the future, stronger demonstrations will follow. We have a strong LGBTQIA+ community in Southampton, both in sheer numbers, and organisations to reject these policies.
“Fly the flags, Fly them proud. Every city. Every town.”
It was a sentiment echoed by a member of the public, who had gone to watch the council meeting, having protested the motion beforehand.
They said: “It was honestly a bit of a disappointment that this motion was withdrawn. Coming almost four hours into a council meeting where such important matters as foster care and the impact of the climate crisis had been discussed, I was looking forward to hearing the absurdity of Cllr Crook’s motion being spoken aloud before being defeated by a huge majority vote.
“But we can take this as a small win for now. He did promise to re-table a revised version of this ridiculous, petty and harmful motion sometime in the future. But as a friend shouted from the public gallery “we’ll be back!”
Southampton Stand Up to Racism also gave their reaction: “Reform’s decision to withdraw the flag‑banning motion “for the time being” was not a thoughtful reconsideration — it was the community making its position impossible to ignore.
“Before councillors even entered the Full Council meeting, they were met with a huge, loud and determined protest outside the Civic Centre. People from every part of Southampton turned up — LGBTQ+ communities, trade unionists, anti‑racists and young people — all united in saying no to a motion that sought to narrow who belongs in our city. It was noisy, it was proud, and it sent a message that no councillor could pretend not to hear.
“Southampton Stand Up To Racism will continue to oppose attempts to restrict recognition of our city’s diverse communities. We stand with everyone who made their voices heard so clearly outside the Civic Centre, and we will keep fighting for a Southampton that is inclusive, outward‑looking — a city where everyone belongs and everyone’s contribution is recognised.”
Amongst those who had criticised the motion were Southampton Pride, who said: “For many people, a Pride flag is not simply a piece of fabric. It is a visible sign that says: “you are welcome here. You belong here. You will be treated with dignity and respect.’”
They continued: “Government buildings should represent every resident of our city. Flying the Pride flag for a limited period each year does not diminish our national identity or our city identity. It complements them by demonstrating that Southampton is a city where diversity is respected and everyone is welcome.”
Southampton Stand Up To Racism had also spoken out against the motion, saying: “This motion is not really about flags. It is about identity, belonging and the kind of city Southampton chooses to be. It forms part of a wider political strategy that turns diversity, equality and inclusion into manufactured “culture war” battlegrounds, distracting attention from the real issues facing local people.”
Meanwhile, whilst some on social media had said that the motion was ‘patriotic’, others had criticised the motion as ‘performative politics’ and pointed out that it might not be the best use of tax payers’ money.
Yesterday, In Common contacted Cllr Crook regarding the motion, who did not give a direct answer to our question regarding the costings of the project, saying: “The motion has been amended to remove the last point about schools. It’s been changed due to practical reasons such as lease agreements. However, when Reform UK gains power in the future it will pursue the installation of flags in our schools etc. If it was included and voted in it would be for the Labour/Lib Dem council to action.”
- In Common is not for profit. We rely on donations from readers to keep the site running. Could you help to support us for as little as 25p a week? Please help us to carry on offering independent grass roots media. Visit: https://www.patreon.com/incommonsoton