Council spent £15k removing patriotic flags (Image: Getty)
A Labour councillor has demanded police “lie in wait and nab the b*******” who fly Union flags in her area. Susanna Pressel was caught on camera calling for officers to catch residents putting up patriotic flags on lampposts in Oxford.
The shocking video, filmed at an internal county council meeting, was shared on social media. In the staggering footage, the Labour politician is heard ranting: “Can they not trace people who are using social media or if flags are repeatedly reinstalled after we remove them, can they not lie in wait and nab the b******* who are reinstalling them so quickly? Because that’s the sort of thing I would like to see from the police.”
The extraordinary outburst came after it was revealed Oxfordshire County Council has blown a staggering £15,000 of taxpayers’ money removing Union Flags and St George’s flags from lampposts. Following the backlash, furious residents have responded by displaying several flags around Ms Pressel’s own home address.
But the defiant left-wing councillor insisted her neighbours are “incensed” by the patriotic display.
Speaking to the Oxford Mail, she said: “They all say they would like these flags taken down at once. I have passed that on to the county council.”
But Tory councillor Liam Walker, who was on the call, delivered a scathing verdict on Ms Pressel’s comments.
He said: “I was on the call at the time and I was genuinely shocked by what was said along with the time and money the council is spending on the removal of flags. This sort of language is not acceptable in any setting — whether in a discussion with councillors, in conversations involving council staff, or in public. We are elected to represent our communities with professionalism and respect. Rather than offering an apology, Cllr Pressel has said she simply wouldn’t say this to someone’s face, and that response falls far short of what is expected. She should apologise for using this poor language.”
She added: “However, this was an internal county council meeting, in which council officers were briefing councillors on the measures being taken for safety reasons to remove unauthorised flags on council infrastructure. We were told that more than £15,000 of public money has already been spent taking flags down. Quite often they are quickly replaced.”
The Labour politician defended the removal of the national flag bizarrely claiming they pose a danger to the public as they distract drivers, and then claimed some of neighbours found the flags racist.
She added: “I also hear complaints from a very large number of people who find the flags intimidating and, in fact, racist.”
And Oxfordshire County Council Spokesman said: “As a council, we proudly fly both the Union Jack and St George’s flags. We also welcome residents displaying flags on their own property.
“However, placing flags or painting them on or near highways can create serious safety hazards. These include reduced visibility for drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians, and increased risk of distraction. In addition, installing flags on street furniture or near roads can lead to personal injury or property damage. For these reasons, we strongly advise people against doing so.
“To keep everyone safe, our teams have been removing flags and other unauthorised attachments from streetlights during routine maintenance or where they pose an immediate risk.
“With the current darker, windier and wetter weather, these risks are increasing. We are therefore stepping up the removal of flags and other unauthorised items. Each case will be assessed based on the level of risk, with priority given to those that pose an immediate risk.
The latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
“Our overarching priority is to keep our roads and public spaces safe for everyone.”
Labour Councillor Demands Police ‘Lie in Wait and Nab the B*******’ Flying Union Flags
A political controversy has erupted after a Labour councillor reportedly called on police to take action against people displaying Union Jack and St George’s flags, using language that has triggered questions about political judgment, freedom of expression, and the role of law enforcement in Britain’s increasingly heated debate over national identity.
The reported remarks have reignited tensions surrounding the growing flag-display movement across England, where thousands of British and English flags have appeared on streets, bridges, roundabouts, and public buildings.
For supporters of the movement, displaying the national flag represents patriotism, pride, and a desire to celebrate British identity. However, critics argue that some campaigns have become increasingly associated with political confrontation and anti-immigration messaging.
The latest controversy has raised a fundamental question: should people displaying national flags face police intervention, or should such activity be protected as a legitimate expression of identity and political opinion?
A Controversial Call for Police Action
The controversy centres on remarks attributed to a Labour councillor who reportedly suggested that police officers should wait for people putting up flags and arrest them.
The language used in the reported statement has attracted particular attention because it appeared to encourage a confrontational approach to people participating in flag displays.
However, there is an important legal distinction between displaying a flag and unlawfully attaching it to public infrastructure.
In England, displaying a flag is not automatically a criminal offence. However, placing flags on traffic signs, lighting columns, bridges, or other public structures without permission may raise questions involving property rights, highway safety, and local authority regulations.
Police officers must establish whether an actual offence has occurred before taking enforcement action.
Simply disagreeing with the political message associated with a flag is not a lawful reason to arrest someone.
Britain’s Growing Flag Movement
The controversy comes amid the growing visibility of movements encouraging people to display the Union Jack and St George’s Cross.
One prominent campaign, Raise the Colours, attracted national attention through coordinated displays of British and English flags.
Supporters describe the initiative as a peaceful expression of national pride and a response to what they perceive as declining confidence in British identity.
For many participants, the flags represent history, national traditions, democratic institutions, and a shared sense of belonging.
Others have criticised certain demonstrations, arguing that national symbols have sometimes been used alongside anti-immigration rhetoric.
This has created a complicated political environment in which the same flag can represent different things to different people.
For one resident, it may simply be a symbol of patriotism. For another, its appearance during a politically charged campaign may raise concerns about exclusion or intimidation.
The challenge for public authorities is to distinguish between lawful expression and genuinely unlawful conduct.
Freedom of Expression Must Be Protected
The right to freedom of expression is protected under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, incorporated into British law through the Human Rights Act 1998.
This protection includes the right to express political opinions, display national symbols, and participate in peaceful demonstrations.
However, freedom of expression is not unlimited.
Authorities may impose lawful and proportionate restrictions in circumstances involving public safety, the rights of others, or the prevention of crime.
For example, attaching objects to traffic infrastructure could create safety risks or interfere with the operation of public equipment.
Local authorities may also have legitimate reasons to regulate unauthorised attachments to public property.
Nevertheless, any enforcement action must be based on the law rather than political disagreement.
A person displaying the Union Jack should not be treated differently from someone displaying another lawful national, cultural, or religious symbol simply because of the message authorities associate with it.
The Police Face a Difficult Balancing Act
The reported comments have placed additional attention on the responsibilities of police officers.
Police forces must maintain public order, investigate suspected offences, and protect people’s rights.
They should not become involved in enforcing political preferences or acting against individuals simply because their views are unpopular.
If a flag has been attached unlawfully to public infrastructure, the appropriate authorities can investigate the circumstances and determine whether removal or enforcement action is justified.
However, police intervention must remain proportionate.
The idea that officers should deliberately wait to arrest people merely for displaying national flags raises concerns about whether enforcement would be directed towards actual unlawful behaviour or political expression.
Public confidence in policing depends on consistency, impartiality, and respect for the law.
Political Pressure and Labour’s Position
The controversy also raises questions about Labour’s relationship with national identity and patriotism.
Political parties have increasingly recognised that national symbols and immigration debates remain important issues for many voters.
Some Labour representatives have emphasised the importance of celebrating British identity while supporting multiculturalism and equal rights.
Others have expressed concerns about campaigns that associate flag displays with hostility towards immigrants or minority communities.
However, disagreement over the political meaning of national symbols should not lead to selective enforcement of the law.
A democratic political party must be able to distinguish between opposing a particular campaign and restricting the rights of individuals participating peacefully in it.
The councillor’s reported remarks therefore raise questions about political responsibility and whether public representatives should exercise greater caution when commenting on police enforcement.
Local Authorities and the Removal of Flags
Another important issue concerns who has responsibility for removing unauthorised flags.
Depending on the location and circumstances, responsibility may belong to a local council, highways authority, property owner, or another relevant public body.
Flags attached to traffic signs and street lighting infrastructure can create maintenance and safety concerns.
Local authorities may therefore establish rules governing unauthorised attachments.
However, such rules should be applied consistently.
If a council removes one type of flag while allowing comparable displays from another political or cultural group, it risks creating accusations of unequal treatment.
Transparent policies are essential to maintaining public confidence.
The issue should be addressed through clear regulations rather than politically charged instructions to police officers.
A Wider Debate About British Identity
The controversy reflects a broader struggle over how Britain understands national identity in an increasingly diverse society.
Some people believe that the Union Jack and St George’s Cross should be displayed more prominently as symbols of national unity.
Others worry that national flags are increasingly being associated with confrontational political campaigns.
Yet patriotism and multiculturalism are not necessarily incompatible.
People from different ethnic, religious, and cultural backgrounds can identify strongly with Britain while maintaining their own traditions.
Similarly, displaying a British flag does not automatically indicate hostility towards immigration or minority communities.
A healthy democracy should allow people to express different interpretations of national identity without treating disagreement as a criminal matter.
Conclusion: National Flags Should Not Become a Policing Battlefield
The reported remarks by the Labour councillor have reignited an important debate about freedom of expression, police independence, and the treatment of people displaying national flags.
If individuals break the law by attaching objects to public infrastructure or creating safety risks, the authorities have legitimate reasons to intervene.
But displaying the Union Jack or St George’s Cross is not, by itself, a criminal offence.
Police officers should investigate genuine offences, not enforce political preferences.
Likewise, public representatives should recognise that their words carry considerable weight, particularly when they are discussing the use of police powers against members of the public.
Britain’s national symbols belong to the democratic public, not exclusively to one political movement or party.
The country must be able to debate patriotism, immigration, and cultural identity without turning peaceful expressions of national pride into a confrontation with law enforcement.
Ultimately, the rule of law must apply equally to everyone. Political disagreement should be answered through democratic debate, not selective policing.