Leader cleared in Pride Flag row complaint brought by chief executive

Warwickshire’s leader, Cllr George Finch, and its chief executive, Monica Fogarty, clashed last year after Fogarty refused Finch’s request to take the Pride Flag down.  

Responding to the request in June 2025, Fogarty said that any decisions on which flags to fly at Shire Hall had - up until then - been left to her as the chief executive.

She told the leader that it would be up to him to propose a policy on flags as an executive decision.

The dispute garnered national attention after Reform UK leader Nigel Farage accused the chief executive officer on social media of being an "unelected bureaucrat" who "should look for a new job".

Cllr Finch also made comments about the dispute on social media which later formed part of Fogarty’s standards complaint.

She complained that Finch did not have an in-person conversation with her about the flag policy, instead opting to conduct all correspondence by email and in "public/social media".

"This despite my asking to discuss matters in person," the complaint added.

The complaint invoked a section of the council's Code of Conduct that says members must value their colleagues and staff "and engage with them in an appropriate manner and one that underpins the mutual respect between us that is essential to good local government".

Warwickshire commissioned Claire Ward, a partner at Anthony Collins, to investigate the complaint.

Ward ultimately found that, in her view, Cllr Finch failed to comply with the Code "because he had failed to engage with her appropriately on the issue at a time when the matter was escalating and the subject of media attention".

Cllr Finch's failure to engage meaningfully with the chief executive amounted to a failure to engage with her in an “appropriate manner” as required by the Code, she added.

Fogarty told the sub-committee that the media attention had left her feeling unable to do her job effectively and isolated and undermined.

During the hearing, the chief executive also produced an email that showed she had asked Cllr Finch to discuss the issue in person. The leader did not reply to her email.

Cllr Finch meanwhile told the sub-committee that "he had simply given an instruction to the Chief Executive on removing the flag", and that he did not believe the emails had been disrespectful.

He believed that using emails was appropriate as it provided an audit trail, he added.

In coming to a decision, the sub-committee accepted that a face-to-face discussion might have assisted the relationship between the then interim leader and the chief executive.

However, on a majority basis (two to one), members were not satisfied that the absence of such a discussion amounted to a breach of the Code.

The council's decision notice states: "This was based on the fact that there was no definition in the Code or the LGA guidance of what was meant by 'appropriate' engagement in paragraph 3(l).

"The Sub-Committee felt that this paragraph of the Code did not compel the Subject Member to communicate in a specific format or to respond further to the Chief Executive after they appeared to have reached a position where they did not agree. The Sub-Committee concluded that whilst other members may have adopted a different approach the actions of the Subject Member did not amount to a breach of the Code."

Adam Carey