A rebel left-wing Labour and Co-operative MP has called English flags “tatty bits of cloth” and said they should be removed from lamp posts. Rachael Maskell, MP for York Central – who had the whip suspended this year after rebelling against Sir Keir Starmer – said her “stomach churned” when fellow party members waved the St George’s cross at the recent party’s conference.
Speaking at a university event, Ms Maskell said: “I personally think we need a little bit of a break from flags right now, and my stomach churned at Labour party conference when everyone got out their St George’s flag… that’s not the Labour party. “And Keir Starmer with his two Union Jacks regimented behind him… that’s not the Labour Party. “The Labour Party is the insurgent to the colonial state, you know, it’s not about owning it. “So I think having a bit of a break from flags would be therapeutic for us all in having to wrestle with this.” This comes after Sir Keir’s keynote speech in Liverpool, in which he urged members to “fly our flags”.
Ms Maskell was suspended from the Labour Whip in July this year after rebelling against Sir Keir Starmer’s welfare cuts.
In August, a campaign group launched “Operation Raise the Colours,” which advocates displaying the Union Flag and St George’s Cross in public places, including tying flags to lamp posts and painting them onto mini roundabouts. Supporters say this is to promote patriotism.
The campaign gained significant attention on social media when councils – including Tower Hamlets and Birmingham – began tearing them down. It has also found support from political party members across the political spectrum, including the Conservative Party, Reform UK, and the Labour Party.
In August, Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch slammed the move by the councils as “shameful”. Writing in the Daily Mail, Ms Badenoch said the flying of English flags should be “welcomed”, rather than “seen as an act of rebellion”.
“After years of politicisation by those who seek to diminish England’s culture and Christian heritage, it is encouraging to see English flags flown proudly as symbols of unity, nationhood and optimism,” she said.
She continued: “Suppressing the English flag does not stop division. It fuels it.”
Ms Maskell told The Sun she is trying to “build unity and not division” following racist incidents in York.
Labour MP Says Her ‘Stomach Churned’ at Sight of English Flags
A Labour MP has sparked a heated debate over patriotism, national identity and the place of English symbols in modern British politics after saying that her “stomach churned” when she saw colleagues waving St George’s flags at the Labour Party Conference.
Rachael Maskell, the Labour MP for York Central, made the remarks while discussing the role of national symbols and political identity. She said she believed Labour should focus on unity rather than division and argued that the party should take “a little bit of a break from flags”.
Her comments have generated criticism from those who believe the English flag is simply an ordinary symbol of national identity. At the same time, Maskell’s remarks reflect a longstanding debate within British politics about nationalism, patriotism and the meaning attached to national symbols.
The controversy illustrates how something as familiar as the St George’s Cross can carry very different meanings for different sections of society.
Maskell’s Reaction to the Flags
Speaking at a university event, Maskell recalled seeing Labour members wave St George’s flags at the party conference in Liverpool.
She said she felt uncomfortable with the display and argued that such imagery did not represent what she understood Labour to stand for. She also criticised the prominent display of Union flags behind Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer during his conference speech.
Maskell argued that Labour’s historical identity was connected to challenging established structures of power rather than embracing symbols associated, in her view, with the British state and its history.
She described the idea of taking a break from flags as potentially “therapeutic”, suggesting that political debate could benefit from placing less emphasis on national symbolism.
Her comments were personal and political rather than a statement that displaying the English flag is prohibited. The controversy instead concerns what she believes the flag represents and whether such symbolism is appropriate for Labour.
The Context of the Labour Conference
The remarks came after Starmer had encouraged Labour members to embrace national symbols during his conference speech.
The Labour leader told members to “fly our flags”, following a period in which questions of British and English identity had become increasingly prominent in political debate.
Members responded by displaying different national flags, including the St George’s Cross, the Scottish Saltire and the Welsh Red Dragon.
The symbolism was significant because Labour has traditionally been associated with working-class communities across the United Kingdom, while the party has also historically had a complicated relationship with patriotism.
For some Labour politicians and supporters, displaying national flags can demonstrate that the party understands the importance of national identity to voters. For others, particularly those on the left of the party, an increased emphasis on national symbols can raise concerns about nationalism and political exclusion.
Maskell’s comments placed her firmly within that debate.
The English Flag and Its History
The St George’s Cross is one of England’s most recognisable national symbols.
The red cross on a white background has been associated with England for centuries and is widely displayed during sporting events, national celebrations and community occasions.
For many people, the flag has no direct political meaning. It can represent family heritage, local identity, sporting support or simply pride in being English.
The same symbol can nevertheless acquire different associations depending on how and where it is used.
National flags have frequently been adopted by political movements around the world, sometimes including groups with strongly nationalist or exclusionary agendas. This history means that some people are cautious about displays of national symbolism, particularly when flags appear alongside political slogans.
The disagreement surrounding Maskell’s comments partly reflects this difference in interpretation.
Critics Defend the Right to Display the Flag
Critics of Maskell’s remarks argue that displaying the English flag should not automatically be interpreted as a political statement.
A person may put up a St George’s Cross because they identify with England, support an English football team, celebrate English culture or simply enjoy seeing the national flag.
A Labour source responding to the controversy said the party was proud of the country’s flags and would not apologise for that position.
From this perspective, rejecting or expressing discomfort with the English flag risks creating distance between politicians and people who regard the symbol as an ordinary part of their national identity.
The debate therefore extends beyond one Labour MP’s personal reaction. It raises a broader question about whether progressive political parties can embrace national identity while maintaining their traditional focus on equality and social justice.
Maskell’s Argument About Unity
Maskell subsequently explained her position in terms of unity rather than opposition to English people or English culture.
She said she wanted to promote unity rather than division following racist incidents in York.
That explanation is important because it provides a different interpretation of her original remarks.
Supporters of her position may view national symbolism through the lens of its potential political uses. From that perspective, the concern is not necessarily the flag itself but the circumstances in which it is displayed and the messages that may accompany it.
Critics, however, can argue that this distinction is difficult to maintain in everyday life because the vast majority of people who display the English flag may not be attempting to promote an ideological message.
The disagreement consequently comes down partly to how political symbols should be interpreted.
A Wider Debate Inside Labour
The controversy also reveals tensions within Labour over the question of patriotism.
For many years, Labour politicians have debated whether the party should place greater emphasis on British identity.
Some believe Labour needs to demonstrate that patriotism and progressive politics are compatible. They argue that working-class voters can simultaneously support public services, equality and national pride.
Others have historically been more sceptical of nationalism, particularly when national identity becomes associated with immigration, ethnicity or exclusion.
The debate became more prominent following Brexit, when questions surrounding British sovereignty and national identity became central to political discussion.
Labour has subsequently attempted to present itself as both patriotic and socially progressive.
Starmer’s use of national flags during his conference speech formed part of that broader effort to present Labour as a party comfortable with national identity.
Maskell’s comments demonstrate that not everyone within the party shares the same interpretation.
Why Flags Have Become Politically Sensitive
The growing political sensitivity surrounding national flags is not unique to Britain.
Across Europe and elsewhere, national symbols can become points of disagreement during periods of social and political change.
Supporters often see flags as symbols of shared history, community and belonging.
Critics may worry that the same symbols can be used to define who belongs and who does not.
The interpretation can also depend heavily on context.
A St George’s flag outside a football stadium may be understood very differently from an identical flag displayed at a political demonstration. Similarly, a flag hanging from a private home may have a completely different meaning from one displayed alongside a political campaign.
This makes broad assumptions about the intentions of individuals difficult.
England Within the United Kingdom
The issue is particularly complicated because England is one part of the United Kingdom.
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland each have strong national identities and distinctive symbols. England’s national identity has sometimes received less explicit political attention because England forms the largest part of the UK.
In recent years, however, English identity has become more prominent in political discussion.
Some people believe English identity deserves greater recognition, while others are concerned that increased English nationalism could create additional tensions within the United Kingdom.
The St George’s Cross therefore operates at several levels simultaneously. It can represent England itself, English cultural heritage, local community identity or, in some contexts, political nationalism.
Different people can therefore look at exactly the same flag and understand it in completely different ways.
The Question of Patriotism
At the heart of the controversy is a fundamental question: can patriotism comfortably coexist with left-wing politics?
Many people believe that it can.
They argue that loving one’s country does not require hostility towards other nations or communities. A person can feel proud of their country’s history while supporting multiculturalism, equality and international cooperation.
Others remain cautious about nationalism because of historical examples in which national identity has been used to justify exclusion or hostility towards minority groups.
Both perspectives are part of the wider political debate.
Maskell’s remarks have therefore become significant because they expose a disagreement that exists not only within Labour but across British society.
The Changing Political Landscape
The political importance of national identity has grown considerably in Britain over recent years.
Brexit transformed discussions about sovereignty and Britain’s relationship with Europe. Debates over immigration have also increased public attention on questions of borders, belonging and national culture.
At the same time, many voters have expressed a desire for politicians to recognise traditional symbols and institutions.
Political parties therefore face a difficult balancing act.
They must appeal to citizens who want national identity to be recognised while also avoiding language that can be interpreted as exclusionary.
Labour’s decision to embrace the Union Jack and encourage members to “fly our flags” represents one approach to this challenge.
Maskell’s reaction demonstrates that such a strategy can generate disagreement within the party itself.
Beyond One Controversial Remark
The dispute surrounding Maskell’s comments is ultimately about more than whether she personally likes seeing English flags.
It raises questions about how political parties define themselves, how national identity should be expressed and whether patriotism belongs equally to people across the political spectrum.
For supporters of national symbolism, the St George’s Cross represents a straightforward expression of English identity.
For critics of nationalism, the political context surrounding some flag displays can make them uncomfortable.
Neither interpretation automatically describes every person who displays the flag.
The same symbol can mean different things to different people, and political debate becomes more constructive when those differences are recognised.
Conclusion
Rachael Maskell’s comments about feeling that her “stomach churned” when she saw Labour members waving St George’s flags have opened another chapter in Britain’s continuing debate over patriotism and national identity.
Her remarks reflected her own political interpretation of national symbols and her preference for what she described as unity rather than division. Critics, meanwhile, have argued that the English flag is a legitimate and ordinary expression of national pride that should not automatically be associated with political extremism or exclusion.
The disagreement illustrates a much larger challenge facing modern British politics.
National identity remains important to millions of people, but it does not have one universally accepted meaning. For some, the English flag represents heritage and belonging. For others, it raises questions about nationalism, history and political division.
Labour’s evolving approach to patriotism will continue to be watched closely, particularly as the party attempts to appeal to voters with different attitudes towards British and English identity.
The controversy surrounding Maskell ultimately demonstrates the continuing power of national symbols in British public life. A simple flag can represent pride, history, community or political disagreement depending on who is looking at it—and that complexity is unlikely to disappear from Britain’s political debate anytime soon.