 Nothing generates high-profile fallouts and conservative rage quite like a debate about the Union Jack. And this week we've been treated to an almighty one. The Ferrari began with this moment from an interview on BBC Breakfast between hosts Charlie State and Nagamanchetti, and Communities Minister Robert Jenrick. Robert Jenrick, thank you. I think your flag is not up to standard size government interview measurements. I think it's just a little bit small, but that's your department really. It's just a thought. The picture of the Queen. You'll be aware that every time we have, we've seen it every day, and it's a stock thing, isn't it? The picture of the Queen there as well, though, in the Westminster office, I'm assuming. That was a very funny TV moment. The point was, not really to say the British flag is terrible, but it was just to say every time a Tory minister does an interview now, there's a huge flag behind them, wherever they are, often in very incongruous places. So you'll notice that was just next to a window, right? Flag is supposed to hang off stuff. You don't just have a huge Union Jack in whatever room you're working in. It's completely bizarre. That's why they're laughing. And the image of the Queen only made it more ridiculous, of course. Anyway, later that day, Jenrick tweeted this image alongside a message saying, we're always proud to fly the Union flag at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. It's a symbol of liberty and freedom that binds the whole country together, because it's just a flag next to a couch, another place where they aren't supposed to really be. I did promise you controversy, though. We've got to get on to that. And what really provoked Aya was when someone noticed that Nagamunchetti, one of the BBC presenters you just saw, had hit the like button on a tweet. Now, the tweet in question said, what has Charlie done? The flag shaggers will be up in arms. Tell him we love him. That got the like. And that led to fire and fury. And the BBC were not going to let Munchetti get away with it. And she's had to apologize for some other ridiculous things before, I think, before for suggesting that Donald Trump might be racist. Now she's had to apologize for liking a tweet. I liked tweets today that were offensive in nature about the use of the British flag as a backdrop in a government interview this morning. I have since removed those likes. This does not represent the views of me or the BBC. I apologize for any offence taken. This might all seem a bit silly to you. Of course, though, it wasn't too silly for the culture secretary, Oliver Dowden, to get involved. I'm concerned that what started as light-hearted banter became sneering, which is not the BBC at its best, as I've said before. It is so important that the BBC reflects and respects the values of the whole of the UK, which presumably is to have giant Union Jacks behind you wherever you are and whatever you're doing. Is there a huge giant Union Jack next to your sofa? If not, you've got your British values all messed up. Maybe you don't have them. Heaven forbid. What do you make of this? Should Naga have apologized? No. I mean, as someone tweeted, because this was all whipped up by Guido Forks, the right-wing blog. Only in the UK are there so many independent organizations dedicated to drumming people out of public life for insufficient deference to the government. I mean, that's what we're talking about. We're talking about a very sinister direction we're heading in, which I do keep talking about Hungary a lot. I went to Hungary in 2016. Hungary is ruled by a party called Fidesz, who used to be part of the Liberal International. They were a centre-right party which radicalized in power, waged so-called cultural wars against their opponents, and are now in a right-wing authoritarian government which has shut down vestiges of democracy. They rely on a combination of whipping up hatred against migrants, Muslims, trans people, anti-Semitism, throwing in for good measure. I just worry that the so-called cultural wars that are being waged are as much an attempt, their backlash against the struggle of minorities for their rights. That's partly what it is. It's also about essentially creating a hostile environment for any vague dissent or perceived dissent from the government and its supposed national mission and encapsulating its interpretation of Brexit. And I think the BBC has long been cowed. I mean, its coverage is as favourable to the government as I think the government could be satisfied with with a broader press ecosystem which overwhelmingly supports the Conservatives. We just had tonight, it reported, by the way, that Boris Johnson's director of communications James Slack quits months into his role to join the son's deputy editor-in-chief. So he'll carry on his role as director of communications then, just at the Sun newspaper. That revolving door of the press and the government is very much, you know, we've seen it, of course, with, as I've already mentioned, Boris Johnson's spokesperson, Allegra Stratton, formerly of the BBC, ends up at ITV. There's a huge division that generally in government. That's my worry. It's just this, you know, an authoritarian atmosphere, a kind of all-band light, all-banding the ruler of Hungary atmosphere and that's partly what this is about. Whipped up by right-wing outriders attempting to intimidate and harass anyone who's seen as deviating from allegiance to the British government. It's disturbing. I do think the path we're headed on is essentially towards Hungary. And I think this is an example of it. The revolving door you mentioned, we do have a good example of next. Robbie Gibb is the brother of a Tory MP. He was Theresa May's director of communications at number 10 and before that, he was head of BBC's political programme. This is probably the most worrying revolving door there is. Someone who's in charge of making the news on the most important outlet and platform in the country, which is the BBC News at 6, the BBC News at 10, who then goes on to work for the politician who he was supposed to be holding to account. Anyway, in response to this, on the day the BBC announces the welcome news that is moving more programmes out of London, the BBC Breakfast clip reveals a sneering and cynical attitude towards our monarchy and flag that shows it's not just about where people are based. The BBC has a wider cultural problem. BBC Breakfast is filmed in Salford. So I suppose he's in a way, he could say, that proves my point. You move them to Salford, they're still liberal elites who laugh at flags and pictures of the Queen. Again, I'll repeat, the problem with that argument is that ordinary Brits do not have huge two metre wide flags on big flag poles next to their couches or in front of their windows. These are not places where flags are supposed to be. That's why it's hilarious and ridiculous that every government minister who goes on every breakfast show, every interview, however big or small and they have these two incredibly out of place, or one or two incredibly out of place Union Jacks behind them. Presumably they do quite like these outrages happening. It's exactly the kind of culture war that they want to start. Labour also putting their huge flags behind them. So I don't necessarily think this is the fight that the left should be having on this terrain more than just to say, this is ridiculous. How ridiculous and sad are all in class? I mean, I don't find it particularly offensive to have a huge flag behind you when you're doing a TV interview. I just think it's ridiculous. And I think it's even more ridiculous if you get outraged at someone else pointing out that it's ridiculous. The thing I want to know from you, the last thing I want to know from you is how much do you think the Tories are going to try and sort of push their flag war agenda between now and 2024? Do you think this has got legs, or do you think they're going to have to give up at some point, especially as you know, Keir Starmer's not averse to a Union Jack himself? There's only so many flags you can drape yourself in or how big your flag can be. Because I mean, that's what we're going to end up with, isn't it? We're going to end up with a Mexican standoff about who can have the biggest flag. I think we should try and reframe it. I mean, I think that, you know, because they do want us, they do want us to kick off over flags. They want us to get angry and all the rest about it. And I'm like, yeah, I'm like, if you want to put a flag behind you, treat yourself. I don't care. I mean, I obviously think it's very patronizing, but I think we should reframe it as, you know, what shows more love for your country, wanting to feed all of its children instead of forcing them to, you know, forcing hundreds of thousands of children into poverty, into hunger, or sticking a flag behind you. It's very easy to put a flag behind you. Just buy a flag. You can get one on Amazon, I'm sure. Probably get one for a fiver. Whack it behind you. Done. Or is it about, you know, what's more patriotic than wanting to rid your own country of injustice? Not everyone on the left is comfortable talking about this. I get that. But I do think you can redefine it and start talking about the history of people who fought at great cost and sacrificed for the rights and freedoms we have today about making sure that every person has a decent affordable home. Everyone has a decently paid job. Everyone has a decent standard of living. No child grows up in poverty. That shows love for your country. What better way to express your love for country than that? And I think, you know, that's what Podemos have done in Spain. It's a different context. I mean, I can't. You know, in Ireland, Sinn Féin can talk about this because obviously, Irish nationalism is about struggle against the oppressed, the oppression nation, against empire. Our nationalism clearly, you know, so not our nationalism, but patriotism, demarcating it from nationalism attached to the history of empire. There are complexities involved in that. I get that. But I do think we can redefine it and we can talk about the struggles of our ancestors if we can talk about real, genuine love for your country's ridding of these injustices, not sticking a flag behind you and expecting people to love you off the back of it. If Labour do it, by the way, it looks so inauthentic because I just don't think anyone thinks, yeah, their heart really beats a little bit faster when they see the flag. It just doesn't look authentic. It looks like, you know, people trying to be down with the kids, the equivalent, whatever that is, with patriotism. And I think inauthenticity greats on people. I think instead of fighting on that to reign, I mean, it's just finally on that, is what Ed Miliband did, which I think he would regret, is when he was leader of the Labour Party, his big passion was inequality. But he did lots of, he didn't do a single speech about inequality. He just did speeches about immigration. And that didn't diffuse the issue. It drove it up the agenda. And obviously the Conservatives could always outflank the Labour Party on immigration. It just shifts the political debate onto terrain that's favourable for your opposition. So what you should do is shift it onto your terms. And obviously things like the fact that people in this country, children cannot afford to eat. I think that is obviously terrain which is far better for the Labour Party and they can claim it's patriotic if they want. I think that would be a better approach.