West Northamptonshire Council votes through new flag protocol
A council has approved a "divisive" policy change which will mean it no longer fly an LGBTQ+ rainbow flag from any of its buildings.The newly elected Reform UK administration on West Northamptonshire Council made changes to the local authority's flag protocol after coming to power last month, and it was formally passed on Thursday.Council leader Mark Arnull said its "revised approach ensures consistent and respectful use of public buildings."But Conservative councillor David Smith called on the authority to "think again" on the protocol, which dictates that only the union jack, St George's flag and council flag will be flown outside its buildings.
The administration previously said it remained "committed to supporting community-led events and activities", including Pride, despite the change of policy.In Thursday's full council meeting at the Guildhall in Northampton, 40 ward councillors voted in favour of the new policy and 26 against it, while one councillor abstained.Under the new flag protocol, the council said additional flags would be flown on specified dates for royal or national occasions.It is flying flags this week to mark Armed Forces Day, but no flag has been flown to reflect this month's international Pride month, as has been the case in previous years.
Speaking before the vote, Arnull said: "The administration maintains our support for community-led events and inclusive engagement across West Northamptonshire, and I state for the record this administration supports all community groups everywhere."However, the move was heavily criticised by opposition parties on the council.Tory councillor Smith said the Reform administration had "no manifesto" and "no strategic vision". He added: "Your only notable initiative is a divisive flag policy that sidelines symbols of inclusion and unity. [It] is shameful you doing this, you should think again. Understand the community you now represent, and do the right thing and actually vote against this."Labour councillor Zoe Smith, who attended the meeting in a rainbow-themed dress, said: "Our community, my community, will not be erased by a flag protocol, but it does diminish dignity and civic responsibility of this council and the way we represent all our people to remove respect for the LGBT community and others."
'Heartbroken'
The enforcement of the policy means that no flag will be flown for a number of events, as in previous years.Martin Cole, the co-founder of the Northampton Windrush Generation organisation, said his group was "heartbroken" by the policy change.He added: "This decision is not only unjust but strikes at the heart of our values. As a society that celebrates diversity, inclusion and the rich tapestry of cultures that define us. "The Windrush generation has long stood as a symbol of resilience, unity, multi-culturalism, the very essence of British identity. Raising global flags is more than a symbolic act. "It is a statement of solidarity recognition and respect for the communities that have contributed to the vibrancy of this nation."
Follow Northamptonshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
34 minutes ago
- Sky News
Starmer warned over fears of 'toothless' Hillsborough Law replacement
Why you can trust Sky News More than 130 MPs have urged Sir Keir Starmer to deliver the Hillsborough Law as promised - amid claims it is being watered-down with a "toothless" replacement. Ian Byrne, the Labour MP for Liverpool West Derby, has written to the prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, over concerns that officials have "carved out" key elements of the long-awaited legislation. The Hillsborough Law is intended to prevent future state cover-ups by putting a legal duty of candour on public servants to tell the truth, with criminal sanctions for lying. It also includes a commitment to funding so families receive proportional legal representation in battles with official bodies. The bill had its first reading in 2017 when it was introduced by Andy Burnham and supported by Steve Rotheram who were MPs at the time. In his letter, Mr Byrne said a draft government version of the law, shown to the now Great Manchester and Liverpool City Region mayors respectively and one of the campaign's lawyers in March, did not contain the key provisions. In particular, he said it did not contain a duty of candour, only an "aspirational objective". He said there was also "no reference at all" to the rebalancing of resources for legal representation for families at inquests and inquiries. As Sky News reported at the time, the government paused the process to listen to these concerns, meaning it missed its own deadline to implement the law by the most recent anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster on 15 April. However campaigners have not been shown the latest draft and say meetings with ministers and officials have indicated the Hillsborough Law is still to be replaced with weaker legislation. 'Legally nothing left' In particular, there are concerns the obligation to be truthful would be applied only to some investigations and could even be reduced to a professional duty dealt with by codes or staff handbooks rather than a criminal backstop. A government spokesperson said they are "fully committed" to a legal duty of candour with criminal sanctions for those who don't comply. However Elkan Abrahamson, one of the lawyers who drafted the original Hillsborough Law, told Sky News: "It's easy to talk about commitment but until we see something in writing... we don't know what that means." He said that under the government's proposals there would "legally be nothing left" of the original bill, adding: "My message to them is rip up your draft, go back to ours and tell us what the problem is and we will sort it with you." The government declined to say what its concerns are with the Hillsborough Law when asked by Sky News. It has said it wants to bring the legislation in "at pace" but "having consulted with campaign groups, we know more time is needed to draft the best version of a Hillsborough Law". 1:36 At the Labour Party conference in Liverpool in 2022 when he was still in opposition, Sir Keir said that "one of his first" acts as prime minister if he won the election would be "to put the Hillsborough Law on the statute book". The Times has reported officials have concerns that the Hillsborough Law could punish junior civil servants who turn up late for work and lie about it. But in his letter, signed by 136 cross-party MPs and 29 peers, Mr Byrne said "that is manifestly not correct". He added: "We have no doubt that the attempts to replace the bill with wholly deficient and ineffective redrafts are led by those who are most likely to be affected by the Hillsborough Law: senior civil servants and public institutions who want to retain their impunity in protecting their reputations above telling the truth." 'Toothless replacement' He called on the prime minister to "show leadership and strength" in implementing the Hillsborough Law in full "and not some toothless replacement". "We urge you not to pass up this opportunity to achieve generational culture change, and a step change in the integrity of public life." The campaign for the Hillsborough Law follows a decades-long fight for justice for the 97 football fans who were unlawfully killed after gross negligence by police at an FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest at Hillsborough stadium in Sheffield in 1989. Shortly before kick-off, supporters were let through a gate, which caused crowding in the stand and a crush. Nobody has ever been convicted for its subsequent cover-up.
BBC News
39 minutes ago
- BBC News
US Supreme Court allows parents to opt out of lessons with LGBT books
The US Supreme Court has sided with parents in the state of Maryland who wanted to opt their children out of reading books with LGBTQ justices voted 6-3 in support of the group of parents who said a curriculum adopted in 2022 by the Montgomery County Public Schools for elementary age children violated their religious rights. The court's majority said the parents who brought the case are entitled to a preliminary injunction while it introduction of the books "along with its decision to withhold opt-outs, places an unconstitutional burden on the parents' rights to the free exercise of their religion", Justice Samuel Alito wrote. The ruling allowed the preliminary relief, arguing the parents showed their case is likely to succeed on its merits, they are likely to suffer irreparable harm in its absence and that an injunction would be in the public interest. The three liberal justices dissented. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in her dissenting opinion that the result of the case will be "chaos for this nation's public schools"."Given the great diversity of religious beliefs in this country, countless interactions that occur every day in public schools might expose children to messages that conflict with a parents' beliefs," she parents involved represent several different faiths, but all oppose their children being introduced to LGBTQ themes. The US Constitution's First Amendment protects the right to freely exercise one's religious beliefs, which the parents argued includes the right to pull their children out of lessons they find also pointed to school rules that allow parents to opt older children out of sex education. The books include Uncle Bobby's Wedding, which tells the story of a girl being told about her uncle's planned gay wedding, and Born Ready: The True Story of a Boy Named Penelope, about a transgender boy. The parents argued they have no objection to the books being on the shelf or available in the County Public Schools, Maryland's largest school system, added the books in an effort to provide greater diversity in the stories children read. In 2023, it removed the opt-out option because it caused classroom disruption and could expose LGBTQ students to social stigma and a hearing for the case earlier this year, the justices appeared split along ideological lines. The court's conservative majority expressed sympathy for the group's argument. This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.
Daily Mail
44 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Tax hikes Reeves could impose after the £3bn benefits U-turn
Households are on alert for further potential tax hikes in autumn after Keir Starmer handed major concessions to rebels in a bid to salvage flagship legislation on health and disability benefits. On Friday, the government confirmed a U-turn on its cuts to disability benefits in order to avert a rebellion by more than 120 Labour backbenchers. The reversal leaves a £3billion hole in Chancellor Rachel Reeves ' financial plans, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. Meanwhile, the Resolution Foundation warned that tax rises may be needed for her to now meet her fiscal rules. The initial benefit reforms would have saved the government £5.5billion by the end of the Parliament. The planned cut to personal independence payments eligibility was set to raise the bulk of this saving, £4.5billion. However, according to the IFS, the revised package of reforms will save only £2.5billion, so will cost the government £3billion relative to their previous plans. Under the change in tack, people who currently receive personal independence payments (PIP), or the health element of universal credit, will continue to do so. Instead, planned cuts will now only hit future claimants. Liz Kendall, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, said: 'We have listened to people, we are in a good place now'. Most economists and think tanks think tax rises in the Autumn Budget 2025 are now inevitable. Tom Waters, an associate director at IFS, said: 'These changes more than halve the saving of the package of reforms as a whole, making the Chancellor's already difficult Budget balancing act that much harder. 'The decision is to protect existing health-related benefit claimants from the reforms, thereby making the savings entirely from new claimants to these benefits. 'This will create big differences – thousands of pounds a year, for many years in some cases – between similar people with similar health conditions who happen to have applied at a slightly different time.' Samuel Mather-Holgate, an independent financial adviser at Mather and Murray Financial told Newspage: 'With Starmer doing more U-turns than someone doing the bleep test, taxes are going up. 'There's no way that other departments can mitigate these changes to their budget.' Which taxes could be increased? Reeves has ruled out taxes on the working people, including income tax , National Insurance for employees, VAT and corporation tax. Other taxes will be in her sights. Capital gains tax Higher capital gains tax could be one option for Reeves. Capital gains tax is levied on profits from assets ranging from shares to second homes, buy-to-let properties and personal possessions. The rates for stocks and shares gains were hiked in the 2024 Autumn Budget to 18 per cent for basic rate taxpayers and to 24 per cent for those paying higher rates of tax. The profits from assets like sharers tend to come from people taking a risk, whether an entrepreneurial one or an investment one, making capital gains tax a likely target for hikes. Inheritance tax Reeves could have inheritance tax in her sights again It is a growing money-spinner for the government, with the number of households falling in scope for it rising. In the 2024 Autumn Budget, Reeves capped the availability of Business Relief and Agricultural Relief, and halved the relief available on Alternative Investment Market shares. Reeves also unveiled plans to bring pensions into the scope of inheritance tax from 2027. Further tweaks and amendments could happen. Pensions Pensions are a major source of wealth for many people, making them a prime target for Reeves. Last year, while Reeves dragged unused pension assets into the inheritance tax net from April 2027, she did not go as far as some experts feared. That is not to say that she will not meddle with pensions later this year. HMRC recently announced a consultation on salary sacrifice - when people forgo a pay rise or bonus and add to their pension instead, which helps avoid higher marginal tax rates. It has prompted speculation that Reeves could introduce a cap on the amount of salary sacrifice people can use. There is also speculation about the reintroduction of the pensions lifetime allowance. The Chancellor could also look at reforming income tax relief on pension contributions. Tax thresholds freeze The freeze on certain tax thresholds since 2021 has created a huge stealth tax raid in recent years. The frozen basic rate threshold, currently £12,570, drags more people into paying income tax and means that the real value - adjusted for inflation - of the tax-free allowance has been diminished. Stalling the higher rate threshold at £50,270 has shifted more people and a greater slice of earnings into the 40 per cent bracket. John Woolfitt, a director at Atlantic Capital Markets, told Newspage: 'A "stealth tax" manoeuvre will be high on the cards. 'Income tax allowance and the higher-rate threshold currently rise with inflation . Freezing or delaying future increases effectively raises income tax, without officially having to announce a hike.' He added: 'Targeting high earners and wealth transfers could also be seen and a populist move as the government tries to sure up support from the broader electorate.' According to the Resolution Foundation, extending the freeze in personal tax threshold by one year will save £4billion a year, 'though further consolidation is likely to be needed in the Budget this Autumn.' Property Businesses Higher employer national insurance contributions are already hammering businesses across Britain. However, under growing pressure to boost the Treasury's coffers, Reeves could set her signs on corporation taxes, VAT exemptions or other duties. 'This would really impact the already fragile business confidence in the UK', Woolfitt said. Wealth tax Some campaigners believe Reeves should impose a wealth tax to boost the tax-take and quash inequality. Tax Justice UK is calling on more taxes for the super-rich to be introduced by the current Government. It wants to see a 2 per cent wealth tax on assets over £10million, which it says will raise up to £24 billion a year. It also wants to apply national insurance to investment income, close inheritance tax and non-dom loopholes, and introduce a 4 per cent tax on share buybacks. It remains unclear whether a wealth tax is on Reeves' agenda and how it would work in practice. An unprecedented 16,500 wealthy Britons are predicted to leave this year amid higher taxes and a gloomy economic outlook.
