Pride flag moved in Matlock after Christian bookshop complaint
A council in Derbyshire has removed a Pride flag following a complaint from a Christian bookshop.Matlock Town Council said it had received "communication" that the rainbow flag could be "forcibly removed" from outside Cornerstone Christian Bookshop in Dale Road so action was taken to relocate the the flag to another central location to avoid confrontation or damage.The council said the decision was "purely from a health and safety standpoint" and it stood in "full support of the LGBTQIA+ community".In a statement, the trustees of the bookshop said they were happy to fly flags but declined to fly the Pride flag as a "matter of conscience and in keeping with our faith and scriptures".
Last year, the council needed to replace a number of flags and approved a budget to add Derbyshire and Pride flags to complement the existing Union Jacks flown in the town.The town's mayor, Marilyn Franks, told the BBC the idea was to make the town centre more colourful and welcoming to visitors. The various flags were put up randomly above shop fronts but the Christian bookshop, which has been open since 1994, complained.
The council's decision to move the flag prompted criticism on social media.However deputy mayor Ashley Orwin, who is gay, said the complaint and the flag's removal had supercharged support for the town's first Pride event which is taking place in June next year."This has actually sparked a really positive response because it has shown how inclusive and accepting the community is," Orwin said. "There's been a moment of complaint and it spiralled into a bit of a social media thing. But the resounding thing from it is people support and love our community."As a gay man in public office, this has only been a positive thing... this has sparked our first Pride [event] in the Peaks in Matlock that's going to happen next year."In a statement, town council leaders said they "deeply regret" any upset the removal may have caused. "The move was made without malice or prejudice, and we sincerely apologise to any individuals or groups who were hurt by this decision," the statement said."We recognise how symbolic the flag is, especially during Pride Month, and we acknowledge the impact this action had, regardless of intent."
In a joint statement, the store's trustees said: "The bookshop is an inclusive organisation that wants to share the Christian faith with everyone and we do not want to advocate or condemn anyone on the basis of their belief or sexual orientation."As a Christian bookshop we would have been delighted to have flown the Derbyshire flag, the flag of St George or the Union Flag. "Unfortunately, due to lack of initial consultation on the matter, we had to decline to fly the flag allocated to our shop, as a matter of conscience and in keeping with our faith and scriptures."Many of the other faith communities in Britain would also have declined to fly this flag. Fortunately, we are blessed in this country with freedom of conscience and freedom of religion legislation, enshrined in the Equality Act of 2010 which allows religion or belief as a protected characteristic. "We are therefore very grateful for the speedy removal of this flag when we raised our concern to the council."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
33 minutes ago
- BBC News
Nigel Farage's Reform UK's rise in London 'a threat to main parties'
Is Reform UK on the rise in London?The party, led by Nigel Farage, says it has quadrupled its membership in the year since the general election, where they won five seats, including one for Farage in UK had the third-highest vote share in the country at the 2024 election - just over 14% - with half a million more votes than the Liberal Democrats. According to polling, London has a smaller share of Reform voters, but it has a higher share of people who say they would consider voting Reform in the future. Not far from the capital, Reform has control of Kent County Council, which had long been UK also has its first London Assembly member, Alex Wilson, who was elected in May 2024. London politics expert Prof Tony Travers told the Politics London programme that the party "could do very well indeed in some of the outer London boroughs, particularly I would say those that voted Leave in the Brexit referendum, so Barking and Dagenham, Havering, Bexley, Hillingdon, even Sutton".He added: "Those are the places I think they could well do a lot of damage to the incumbent parties."Laila Cunningham, a Westminster city councillor who last week defected from the Conservatives to Reform UK, told Politics London that her residents "would always point to how they were let down by the previous Conservative administration and how they wouldn't vote for them".She added: "Honesty, I think, is really lacking in politics now and I just couldn't defend their record." Cunningham said Reform UK were "serious about getting this country back on track, they're serious about cutting immigration, cutting crime, cutting waste, cutting tax and people say that's right wing but that used to be mainstream a few years ago".Deirdre Costigan, Labour MP for Ealing Southall, told Politics London that Reform UK's "key policy seems to be a massive tax cut for the rich".She added: "How are they going to pay for that tax cut? The only way of paying for that is to cut public services. So, we'll have less police on the streets of London and we won't have an NHS."Conservative London Assembly member Alessandro Georgiou told the programme that Farage "is a tax-and-spend socialist, if you take what he says". Watch the full Politics London programme on BBC iPlayer.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Support for Bilston Market traders rejected
A motion to financially support displaced market traders in Wolverhampton has been defeated. Traders said they had suffered financial loss as well as ill health since Bilston Outdoor Market relocated last year to make way for a £5.2m upgrade of the site.A plea for financial support, asking City of Wolverhampton Council to "step in immediately" was defeated at a full council meeting this week. A statement from the council said major projects were rarely completed without "some level of disruption". Anita Stanley said two traders had suffered ill health and another had quit. The Reform UK ward member for Bilston North said traders had also been informed improvements would not be completed until 2026, rather than before Christmas, as originally motion called on the council to put together a financial package to offset trader's losses, freeze rents, and issue an apology letter - but it was defeated at a full council meeting. Cabinet Member for Resident Services, councillor Bhupinder Gakhal, said the Bilston market scheme had "been shaped" by the people who use it - and the council had positive feedback from traders and residents throughout the said: "I want to be absolutely clear we will not cut back on our ambition for Bilston. I see the new market as a key development, the catalyst for even further investment in and around it."Major, multimillion-pound projects are rarely completed without some level of disruption. "We know from talking to market traders and local businesses that the current situation has created some positives and some negatives. "We will continue to listen to and work with them to make this is as pain-free as we can, whilst preparing them for the bigger prize and opportunities the scheme will create."After listening to traders' ideas in March, the council said phase two of the project would find a way of "better connecting footfall" from the bus station to the indoor market. Gakhal said the council was also announcing a £15,000 fund to increase footfall through events in the area. "I am determined to ensure that traders have a big say in how this is used but I'm clear that it will benefit both the indoor and outdoor markets and the wider town centre", he said. Follow BBC Wolverhampton & Black Country on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Reform the NHS, not our shopping baskets
This week, the NHS will publish its 10 Year Health Plan. The most we can expect from this exercise in Soviet-style planning is tinkering around the edges of an edifice that was erected when Joseph Stalin ruled in Moscow. By 2035, the end date of this 10-year plan, the country will almost certainly be unable to afford the NHS in its present form – if, indeed, it hasn't collapsed under the weight of its own contradictions by then. Unable to address the fundamental problems of the NHS, the dirigistes of Whitehall have come up with a new plan to direct us how to lead our lives – telling us what we should or shouldn't be allowed to choose to put in our shopping baskets. Supermarkets will be expected to cut 100 calories from the average shopping basket by limiting sales of sugary and salty snacks or other 'junk food'. Ever since Napoleon Bonaparte sneered at England as 'a nation of shopkeepers', we have worn his insult as a badge of honour. We are proud to be a people who earn our living by trade and we cherish the liberties that are the glory of a commercial society. Even those of us who are not shopkeepers are at least customers. So little does this Labour Government know the British people that it is about to resort to distinctly Napoleonic measures to punish both retailers and consumers. Yet previous attempts to control consumption have never succeeded in changing enduring patterns of behaviour rooted in human nature. It is outrageous that officials feel empowered to tell us what we can, and cannot, eat. The public is being infantilised and robbed of agency. Centuries have passed since Parliament abandoned sumptuary laws that prohibited the lower orders from imitating the luxurious dress of the aristocracy. But the bureaucratic mind is obdurate in its disdain for popular tastes in food and drink. Combined with Labour's instinct to meddle, along with its insatiable fiscal appetite, it is no surprise that, as we report today, a modern version of the sumptuary laws is about to land on an unsuspecting nation. Obesity is a genuine and growing problem, but, hitherto, all attempts to address it by fiscal means have failed. The latest obesity tax – supermarkets will be fined if they don't reduce the nation's calorie intake, and this will inevitably be passed on to consumers – now emerging from the bowels of the Health Department and the Treasury, claims to be aimed directly at our waistlines. In reality, like all its predecessors, it will target our wallets. There is a certain grim irony in the fact that this policy should have been adopted at the same time as the decision by the NHS to prescribe the weight-loss drug semaglutide (contained in Ozempic and Wegovy). It is fairly obvious that the underlying rationale of the new regulations is less about obesity than about the Government's failure to control spending. No doubt figures will be trotted out about how many lives will be saved by cutting consumption of ultra-processed foods or any other category of comestible that attracts the ire of the health bureaucrats. But the truth is that new rules are being concocted because the Government is running scared of its own MPs, who have effectively imposed a veto on cuts in welfare spending. What would genuinely make a difference to life expectancy and health outcomes would, of course, be a radical reform of the NHS, a more active population, and a reduction in the numbers wasting their lives on benefits. Rachel Reeves has just poured another £29 billion into the health service, without any clear cost-benefit calculation. Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, is intelligent enough to know that he has inherited an obsolete behemoth that is crying out for root-and-branch reform. But building a new consensus for a new NHS would require the Labour Party to rethink its assumptions about the social contract, as well as the role of insurance and individual responsibility. The original 1946 NHS Act created 'a comprehensive health service designed to secure improvement in the physical and mental health of the people of England and Wales'. Today, the nation's health is not safe in the hands of a dysfunctional Labour Party that would rather do anything – even introducing an assisted-dying service – than take on the overdue task of making the NHS fit for purpose. These new directives are at best a displacement activity, at worst an act of fiscal condescension. A nation of shopkeepers deserves better than to be bossed around by its own government.
