Monty Don’s Biggest Controversies Exposed: What Really Happened?

Monty Don’s public image is calm, thoughtful, and deeply rooted in the rhythm of gardens—but his career has repeatedly crossed into surprisingly heated public fights. Not scandal in the tabloid-crime sense, but a series of very public clashes over taste, class, ecology, TV standards, and what gardening should represent in modern Britain.

Before the controversies, the core story matters: Don has been the defining face of Gardeners’ World since 2003, filming from his Herefordshire base and becoming one of BBC Two’s most trusted presenters. He has also spoken openly about depression and the minor stroke that forced him to step back for a period in 2008.

The first major turbulence came as a more technical but sharp-edged battle: the organic gardening row. In 2012, Don’s anti-pesticide tone reportedly triggered complaints from industry voices, and a public argument followed about whether the BBC should present more “balanced” pest-control advice. Coverage at the time framed it as a real institutional clash, not just a comment-thread spat. What made it explosive was the symbolism: Don stood for a values-based, low-chemical approach; critics argued viewers also needed mainstream product pathways. The fight eventually cooled, but it cemented his reputation as a presenter who can drive policy-level arguments just by talking about slugs and soil.

If that argument was technical, the begonia episode was cultural. Don’s withering comments about certain bedding plants—especially begonias—sparked an “is gardening snobbery?” backlash. For fans, it was funny and classic Don: opinionated, literary, anti-instant-makeover gardening. For critics, it sounded dismissive of ordinary gardeners who buy what’s affordable and available. The row never became a career threat, but it did expose a recurring tension in his brand: expert conviction can sound elitist when it collides with mass-market gardening culture. The story faded, yet it still gets cited as shorthand for his take-no-prisoners style.

The next controversy was less about plants and more about culture wars. In interviews, Don argued that future gardening TV should better reflect urban life and national diversity, and that repeating the same old presenter mold would be a mistake. Supporters called it overdue realism. Detractors called it performative “wokeness.” He also drew fire for broader comments about lawns and artificial grass, feeding a perception—fair or not—that he was lecturing viewers on lifestyle choices. What happened next is telling: he didn’t retreat from the conversation, and he also didn’t leave Gardeners’ World when speculation spiked. Instead, he publicly committed to continue.

In 2024, he triggered one of the loudest professional debates by criticizing Chelsea Flower Show judging as overly “box-ticking,” suggesting technical criteria were crowding out delight and emotional impact. The comment landed like a thunderclap because it came from one of British gardening’s most influential voices during the country’s most prestigious show week. The Royal Horticultural Society and others defended the integrity and rigor of judging, and designers involved pushed back against the idea that merit had been diluted. The result: no structural collapse, no formal rupture—just a very public reminder that Don remains willing to challenge garden institutions, even at peak ceremonial moments.

Most recently, the controversy shifted from TV and taste to heritage and planning. Don became associated with opposition to a large proposed development near Rousham, a historically significant landscape. Supporters of the objections argue the scheme could damage protected views and the spirit of the site; developers argue impacts can be mitigated and that the project serves housing and economic needs. This is still an active dispute rather than a closed chapter, which makes it one of the few Don controversies still unresolved as 2026 begins.

So what is the through-line across all of this? Don’s controversies rarely come from personal scandal. They come from strong positions in spaces where gardening overlaps with money, class, media power, environmental ethics, and national identity. That is why the arguments keep returning. He is not simply presenting plants; he is continuously arguing—sometimes gently, sometimes sharply—about what kind of culture gardens should build.

And whether viewers agree with him or not, that is exactly why the debates around Monty Don never stay small.