Derby City Council has been forced to hire security personnel at a cost of hundreds of pounds to protect contractors removing St George's Cross and Union Jack flags from street furniture, following multiple incidents of intimidation and threats.
Security Deployed After Threats to Contractors
The council confirmed it appointed third-party security in late November to ensure the safety of workers from its street lighting contractor, Balfour Beatty. This decision was a direct response to what the authority described as "multiple incidents of threatening behaviour and threats towards contractors simply doing their jobs".
According to information released under a Freedom of Information (FOI) request, the council had spent £1,400 on security provision as of December 17. A council spokesperson stated that specific details about the security arrangements could not be disclosed publicly for safety reasons.
A Contentious Council U-Turn on Flag Policy
The need for security followed a significant reversal of policy by the Labour-run council. Earlier in the year, after flags were erected on lampposts and bridges, the council initially stated it would not use discretionary powers to remove them.
However, in September, Cabinet member Sarah Chambers announced it was "time to bring this campaign of flag flying to an end". The justification given was the need to clear lampposts for future seasonal and commemorative events, a decision that provoked a strong public backlash.
Public Backlash and Ongoing Tensions
The council's reversal and the subsequent removal operation have not been accepted quietly. An irate resident from Spondon suggested that the action may not be the final word on the matter, telling reporters: "I think some people may just put the flags back up. I doubt this is the end of it."
Interestingly, the FOI response confirmed that police officers have not been deployed to accompany the flag removal teams, with the council opting for private security instead. The council originally indicated the work would be done at no extra cost as part of an existing contract, but the threatening behaviour led to the unforeseen security expenditure.
The council spokesperson strongly condemned the behaviour directed at workers, stating: "The council absolutely condemns this behaviour and believes that people have a right to carry out their roles safely and without fear." The situation highlights the tensions that can arise between civic policy decisions and public sentiment on symbolic issues.
