The winning argument was not that flag-burning is admirable, but that disgust is not a sufficient basis for criminal law. No won with 548 votes to 416, as the floor’s most-respected voices insisted that “in a free country someone should be allowed to do things that are offensive and upsetting”.
The No case was strongest when it drew a boundary around ownership and harm: “provided the flag burners burn their own flags rather than someone else’s flag”. Others warned that reviving sedition would make political dissent legally precarious, calling it “an infringement on free speech and freedom of expression”.
Yes voters argued from national identity rather than legal restraint. One said, “if we want to honour others culture we need to remember to respect our own identity too”, while another declared: “This is OUR country, OUR flag, OUR heritage.” Their case treated the burning as provocation and symbolic treason; the opposing side treated it as an obnoxious but protected act, provided no property or person was endangered.
That puts this vote inside the wider argument over whether liberal freedoms must protect conduct that many find contemptuous of the nation itself. The chamber’s answer was that existing public-order and damage offences should do the work, not a new offence aimed at political symbolism; even one No voter who disliked the act conceded it was “unpleasant and offensive behaviour” rather than a crime.
The room was not fond of flag-burning, but it was more wary of prosecuting it — and more protective of the right to make a spectacle of dissent than of the symbol’s dignity.
35 Opinions
It's a flag.
Although objectionable, the burning of flags (or the Quran, or other symbolic items) should not be illegal.
Im not a die hard patriot. but if we want to honour others culture we need to remember to respect our own identity too.
Banning someone burning a flag is not going to change the minds of people who wish to do harm to the people of this country. It wont do a thing, leave things as they are.
The now abolished Sedition laws were used as excuse to jail political opponents reinstating it is an infringement on free speech and freedom of expression. Democracy involves power to the public over its government you cannot have this with sedition laws you will see journalists being locked up for criticising the government.
I cannot see how this measure would help anything. The real issue is authorities disrespecting our flags & arresting citizens for flying them - as being offensive to other often militant & terrorist supporting groups - essentially giving full reign to those who hate our country to desist whatever they want. We gave to be free to burn a flag without fear.
Nor should burning the Pride flag, the Palestine flag, the Koran. We are a free country and if it is yours and by doing so you are not endangering anyone elses property or life then go for it. If I see you burning the Union flag here in the UK I will call you out but it is a free country.
Criminalising political symbols sets a slippery slope toward authoritarianism. Id like to think our true national pride isn't so fragile that it requires locking up protesters to defend itself.
As much as I personally dislike flag burning, this should remain protected under freedom of expression provided the flag burners burn their own flags rather than someone else’s flag.
Probably a lot of those who want to prosecute for this would support the burning of other flags, books etc they disagree with. Move on to real policies that actually do something rather than generate noise around distracting policies that deliver nothing