Harry Doyle

Diary of a Councillor

Tag: news

  • Reclaiming Our Flag: Why True Patriotism Celebrates Progress, Not Division

    As a resident and Councillor representing Dovecot, I have watched with growing concern as dozens of England flags have appeared across our community and throughout Liverpool in recent weeks. While I am proud to see our national symbols displayed, I am deeply troubled by the motivations behind this latest surge of flag-flying—motivations that have nothing to do with genuine patriotism and everything to do with exclusion, division, and thinly-veiled racism.

    I am proud of the British and English flags, but not for the reasons that drive today’s “Operation Raise the Colours” campaign. I’m proud because these flags can represent the remarkable progress our nation has made toward equality, justice, and inclusion. When I see our flag, I think of the journey we’ve traveled as a society—from the decriminalisation of homosexuality in 1967 to the legalisation of same-sex marriage in 2014. I think of women gaining the right to vote in 1918 and 1928, the Equal Pay Act of 1970, and the Sex Discrimination Act of 1975. I think of the England Lionesses winning Euro 2022 and defending their title in 2025, making history as the first English team to win a major trophy on foreign soil.

    This is the patriotism I embrace—a progressive patriotism that celebrates how far we’ve come and pushes us toward an even more inclusive future. Our flag, at its best, represents not a return to some imagined golden age, but the ongoing fight for equality and human dignity that has defined Britain’s greatest moments.

    The recent proliferation of flags across England, including here in Liverpool and Dovecot, tells a very different story. This campaign, explicitly linked to far-right groups like Britain First and supported by figures like Tommy Robinson, is not about celebrating Britain’s achievements. It’s about sending a message to immigrant communities that they don’t belong.

    The timing is telling. Where were these flags when the England women’s team made history? Where was this passionate display of patriotism when the Lionesses were bringing home European championships and inspiring a generation of young girls? The silence then compared to the fervor now reveals the true nature of this campaign—it’s not about pride in our country’s accomplishments, but about exclusion and division.

    Women's Six Nations 2025: Results and fixtures as Red Roses seek to ...

    Political theorist John Denham distinguishes between progressive patriotism and regressive nationalism. Progressive patriotism “defines the national interest as the common good” and is “inclusive, seeking fairness, prosperity and security for all”. It’s “radical because it has no hesitation in calling out the powerful who work against the nation as unpatriotic (even when they wrap themselves in the union flag)”.

    Regressive nationalism, by contrast, “seeks to preserve or re-establish the sense of national pride of a previous age” and often engages in “scapegoating and blame-shifting”. This perfectly describes what we’re seeing with “Operation Raise the Colours”—an attempt to use our national symbols to exclude rather than include, to divide rather than unite.

    The tragedy is that this exclusionary use of our flag makes many people—particularly young people, ethnic minorities, and those who support multiculturalism—feel uncomfortable with displays of national symbols. A 2024 YouGov survey found that 27% of Britons had an unfavorable opinion of people flying the England flag outside their home, with the divide falling largely along political lines.

    This is precisely what the far right wants—to make progressive Britons ashamed of their own flag, leaving the field clear for their exclusionary interpretation of what Britain should be. We cannot allow this to happen.

    Our greatest national achievements have come when we’ve embraced change and progress, not when we’ve retreated into exclusion. The abolition of slavery, women’s suffrage, the creation of the NHS, the decriminalisation of homosexuality, marriage equality—these represent the Britain I’m proud of. These are the values our flag should represent.

    The recent flag displays across England reveal a fundamental choice about what kind of country we want to be. Do we want to be a nation that uses its symbols to exclude and intimidate? Or do we want to be a country where our flag represents everything we have achieved and still aim to achieve?

    I choose the latter. I’m proud of the British and English flags because they can represent our progress—LGBT rights, women’s equality, multiculturalism, and the countless quiet acts of decency and solidarity that define our communities at their best.

    Celebrating 100 Years of Women's Suffrage

    But I’m not proud of flags flown to send messages of exclusion and fear. That’s not patriotism—it’s nationalism at its most toxic. And it has no place in the inclusive, progressive, and genuinely patriotic Britain that I believe in and will continue to fight for.

    The flag belongs to all of us. It’s time we took it back.

  • No More Rainbow Washing: How Resilient are Pride Organisations in a Hostile Climate?

    No More Rainbow Washing: How Resilient are Pride Organisations in a Hostile Climate?

    The landscape for LGBTQ+ Pride organisations in the UK and beyond has become increasingly fraught, as shifting political attitudes and the rise of far-right parties reshape the environment in which these groups operate. In recent years, the debate around trans rights has grown particularly intense, with high-profile legal decisions—such as the UK Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling narrowing the legal definition of a woman—further polarising public opinion. At the same time, the growing popularity of parties like Reform UK has led to a more hostile climate for LGBT+ communities, both in rhetoric and in policy.

    This political shift is not limited to the UK. In the United States, the re-election of Donald Trump has seen a rollback of diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, with his administration publicly criticising DEI as “illegal and immoral” and threatening companies that visibly support LGBTQ+ causes. Globally, countries like Georgia and Mali have enacted harsh anti-LGBTQ+ laws, signalling a broader trend: as far-right movements gain influence, LGBTQ+ rights are increasingly used as a political wedge and a target for reactionary backlash.

    One of the most immediate and tangible effects of this changing climate has been a sharp reduction in corporate support for Pride events. Where once major brands competed to sponsor parades and festivals, many are now quietly pulling back. In the US, organisers in cities like San Francisco and New York have reported funding shortfalls in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, as companies such as Mastercard, Pepsi, Deloitte, Anheuser-Busch, and Target scale down or withdraw their sponsorship. The reasons for this retreat are complex: economic uncertainty plays a part, but so does the fear of political reprisal and consumer boycotts in an increasingly polarised society. Many brands now prefer to limit their support for Pride to internal staff events, rather than risk public campaigns that might attract controversy.

    The UK is experiencing similar pressures. Some local authorities, influenced by the rhetoric of parties like Reform UK, are increasingly reluctant to fund Pride events. Councillors like Ian Cooper in Staffordshire have argued that taxpayer money should be reserved for “essential services” rather than community celebrations, a view echoed by other Reform UK representatives. This growing reluctance to provide public funding leaves Pride organisers in a precarious position.

    The consequences for Pride organisations are stark. Some events have been forced to rely almost entirely on community fundraising and volunteer labour just to survive. At the same time, the increasingly hostile political environment has emboldened anti-LGBTQ+ groups, leading to heightened concerns about safety and a greater need for security, at precisely the moment when resources are most stretched. It is a painful irony that as the need for Pride as a space for protest and solidarity grows, the ability to provide it is under threat.

    Liverpool Pride will not go ahead this year, a difficult decision driven by significant financial and organisational capacity pressures within the charitable organisation that runs the annual event, LCR Pride. Our Labour-run council worked closely with LCR Pride in an effort to prevent this outcome, even offering financial and operational support through Culture Liverpool. Despite these efforts, the challenges facing LCR Pride proved too great to overcome this time. While this news is deeply disappointing, we remain committed to celebrating our LGBTQ+ community. We are ready and willing to work with community members to pull together an alternative celebration this year and we are actively exploring ways to help sustain Pride in Liverpool for years to come, ensuring our city has an annual event to be proud of.

    Despite the increasingly worrying landscape, it is worth noting for Liverpool that pride organisations nationally and internationally are showing remarkable resilience. Many have turned to grassroots fundraising, creative partnerships, and a renewed focus on the core values of Pride—solidarity, protest, and community—rather than a commercial spectacle. The current climate has, in some ways, prompted a return to the roots of Pride as a movement for visibility and resistance, rather than simply a celebration. However, in my opinion, the need for sustained support from allies—both inside and outside the corporate world—has never been greater. If Pride is to continue as a beacon of hope and resistance for the LGBTQ+ community, it will require not just resilience from organisers, but renewed commitment from the wider public to stand in solidarity against a rising tide of hostility. I know I’ll personally be choosing corporations that don’t turn their back on our community.

  • Future of Liverpool’s Culture: The Need for a Tourism Tax

    Future of Liverpool’s Culture: The Need for a Tourism Tax

    Liverpool’s Labour-led City Council has played a central role in shaping and sustaining the city’s cultural scene since taking office in 2010. Over the past fifteen years, the council has championed ambitious projects, supported grassroots organisations, and ensured that culture remains a key driver of the city’s identity and economy—even as the sector faces ongoing challenges.

    Liverpool’s cultural ambition has been vividly demonstrated by the city’s spectacular street theatre events, most notably the Giants. The arrival of these enormous puppets—created by French company Royal de Luxe—in 2012, 2014, and 2018 saw the city transformed into a giant stage, drawing crowds of up to 1.3 million for the final event. These performances not only showcased Liverpool’s creative ambition but also brought communities together and cemented the city’s reputation for world-class public events.

    Liverpool’s event calendar is always packed with world-class happenings, many of which have flourished under council support. Highlights include:

    • The Grand National Festival: The largest horse racing event in the UK, attracting global attention.
    • Liverpool Biennial: The UK’s largest free contemporary art festival, which takes over the city every two years.
    • Eurovision Song Contest 2023: Hosted in Liverpool, this international event put the city in the global spotlight.
    • On The Waterfront Festival: A multi-genre concert series that has become a staple of Liverpool’s cultural offering.

    These events, along with others like the Lunar New Year Festival and BBC Radio 1’s Big Weekend, demonstrate Liverpool’s ability to host and celebrate culture at scale, drawing visitors from across the UK and beyond.

    The council’s commitment to culture is underpinned by the Culture and Arts Investment Programme (CAIP), which currently invests £2.2 million per annum in local cultural organisations. This funding is a lifeline for many grassroots and established groups, enabling them to create, perform, and engage with communities across the city. The programme is part of a broader strategy to ensure that Liverpool’s creative and visitor economy remains resilient and ambitious, even in the face of economic uncertainty.

    Despite these successes, the live events sector continues to face significant challenges. Rising costs, increased infrastructure and compliance requirements, and the lasting impact of the pandemic have made it tough for even the most established festivals to continue. Africa Oyé, Liverpool’s beloved celebration of African and Caribbean music and culture, is a prime example. After record-breaking attendance in 2024, the festival made the difficult decision to take a fallow year in 2025 to ensure its long-term sustainability.

    Liverpool City Council through Culture Liverpool have been unwavering in their support for Africa Oyé. The festival is a key beneficiary of the Culture and Arts Investment Programme, and last year, the council provided additional funding to help deliver a comprehensive traffic management plan for Sefton Park, ensuring the safety and smooth running of the event. Culture Liverpool has also offered significant in-kind support, working closely with the festival team on logistics, promotion, and partnership building.

    This collaborative relationship continues, with the council and Culture Liverpool working alongside Africa Oyé to plan for a bigger and better festival in 2026.

    But while the council’s Culture and Arts Investment Programme is a vital source of support, it is clear that more needs to be done to secure the long-term future of Liverpool’s cultural sector. Current investment is stretched thin, and many organisations—especially those running live events—are struggling to keep up with rising costs and increasing demand.

    At present, Liverpool’s visitor economy is supported in part by the Accommodation Business Improvement District (BID). This scheme sees a levy placed on overnight stays in hotels and serviced accommodation, with the revenue intended to support tourism and the visitor economy. While the Accommodation BID has provided some much-needed funding, there are some flaws in how this money is accessed by culture organisations.

    The process for distributing BID funds can be opaque and overly bureaucratic, making it difficult for smaller and grassroots cultural organisations to benefit. Many groups report that the application process is complex and that the criteria for funding are not always aligned with the needs of the cultural sector. As a result, much of the money raised through the BID does not reach the organisations that are most in need of support.

    A more sustainable solution is needed. One that generates additional revenue specifically for the culture and visitor economy. The introduction of a tourism tax, similar to those used in many European cities, would provide a stable and significant source of funding that could be reinvested directly into cultural events, venues, and organisations.

    A tourism tax would be a small charge added to overnight stays in hotels and other accommodation, with the proceeds ring-fenced for the benefit of the city’s cultural and visitor economy. This approach is already gaining traction across the UK, with regional mayors—including the Mayor of London—backing calls for a tourism tax. Their support makes the introduction of such a levy increasingly likely.

    A tourism tax would not only provide more funding for the sector but would also ensure that the money is distributed fairly and transparently, with clear mechanisms for cultural organisations to access the support they need. This would help to future-proof Liverpool’s cultural sector, ensuring that the city remains an exciting place to live, work, and visit for years to come.