In 2016, Jerry Kunkler, a publican celebrating 45 years behind the bar, boldly painted a vibrant red St. George’s Cross onto the exterior of his historic Moonrakers Inn, a beloved landmark in the Wiltshire village of Pewsey.
The seemingly patriotic gesture quickly drew the attention of local authorities, who deemed the cross “out of keeping” with the village’s designated Conservation Area, initiating a formal challenge to its presence.
A planning committee, comprised of Wiltshire councillors, convened to deliberate the fate of the painted cross, weighing the preservation of the building’s historical integrity against the public’s sentiment and the pub’s character.
After careful consideration of planning policies and all relevant factors, the committee delivered an unexpected verdict: permission was granted for the decoration to remain, a decision reached by a vote of five to three, with one abstention.
Kunkler, barred from speaking at the meeting in his roles as both applicant and local councillor, expressed his relief and joy at the outcome, particularly with St. George’s Day and upcoming sporting events on the horizon.
He argued that the paint itself caused no structural harm to the building, unlike the potential damage that could be inflicted by brackets used for traditional flags, making it a less intrusive alteration.
Kunkler believes the initial complaint stemmed from the cross’s symbolism, perceiving it as a political statement rather than a simple expression of national pride, a notion that fueled the controversy.
The committee ultimately concluded that the alterations were acceptable within planning guidelines, posing no unacceptable harm to the listed building or the unique character of the Pewsey Conservation Area.
Cllr Mel Jacob, Deputy Leader of Wiltshire Council, emphasized the council’s legal obligation to protect listed buildings and conservation areas, assuring that the process was followed correctly and the decision was made democratically.
Jacob clarified that the decision was based solely on planning and heritage considerations, explicitly stating that the meaning or content of the design itself played no role in the committee’s deliberations.
