Raise the Colours or Raise the Questions?
Updated: Sep 5
There is nothing inherently sinister about flying a Union flag or a St George’s Cross. Millions of people do it because they are proud of where they live, because of sport, family history, military service or simple affection for the country. The flag itself is not the question. The organisation around it is.
Raise the Colours describes itself as a grassroots movement for unity and patriotism. Its supporters say the campaign gives ordinary people a visible way to express national pride. Critics have raised concerns about anti-immigration rhetoric and about incidents associated with people involved in the wider campaign. Those are different claims and they should not be lazily collapsed into guilt by association.
From flags to a brand
The movement now has the familiar infrastructure of an organisation: branded material, official merchandise, a donation system, volunteers, online content and campaigning activity. Its own website says merchandise purchases help sustain the work and asks supporters to donate towards flags, banners, equipment, community support and outreach.
That does not make the movement fraudulent. It does change the accountability question. When a political identity becomes a recognisable brand, supporters are entitled to know who controls it, how decisions are made and where the money goes.
A current contradiction worth clarifying
As of 4 September 2026, Raise the Colours’ homepage says the movement does not encourage or support people travelling to France, approaching migrant vessels or attempting to intervene in crossings. However, its separate donation page currently says donations support “French operations”, including continued trips to France to maintain a presence and disrupt illegal crossings. Those two statements appear difficult to reconcile and deserve a clear explanation from the organisation.
That observation is not proof of unlawful conduct, nor does it establish what any specific trip involved. It is precisely the kind of inconsistency that makes transparent governance important. The strongest way for the organisation to answer it would be to explain what “French operations” means, who authorises them and how donated funds are spent.
Patriotism should survive questions
Questioning a campaign that uses national symbols is not an attack on the country. A confident patriotic movement should not need to treat scrutiny as betrayal. If the organisation is lawful, transparent and genuinely focused on civic pride, clear answers will help it demonstrate that.
Raise the colours if you want to. But raise the questions too. Who organises it? Who funds it? What is the objective? What happens to the money? What conduct is authorised in the movement’s name? Political symbols become healthier, not weaker, when the people using them can answer ordinary questions.
Patriotism does not cancel the right to ask who benefits
Raise the Colours describes itself as a lawful grassroots movement for unity and patriotism. Its own website also solicits donations and directs supporters to official merchandise, while the associated shop sells branded clothing and accessories. None of that is evidence of wrongdoing. It is evidence that the movement has an organised financial dimension as well as a symbolic one.
That distinction matters because questions about money are too often treated as attacks on patriotism. They are not. A movement asking the public for donations or selling products to supporters should expect the same basic questions as any other political or campaigning organisation: who controls the money, what is it spent on, what legal entity receives it and how clearly is that explained to supporters?
TruthVsHate.com view on this story
A Union flag does not make those questions disrespectful. In a healthy civic culture, patriotism and transparency should reinforce one another. If a movement says it represents ordinary people, ordinary people should be able to see how the movement operates.
Sources and evidence
Truth Vs Hate publishes the sources behind our reporting so readers can check the evidence, context and claims for themselves. Transparency matters because readers should be able to verify what we say rather than simply take our word for it.
Raise the Colours homepage: https://raisethecolours.org.uk/
Raise the Colours donation page: https://raisethecolours.org.uk/donate/
Guardian reporting on Birmingham and Oxfordshire disputes involving Raise the Colours: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jul/26/birmingham-council-raise-the-colours-flags-city
Comments