A Canadian White Ensign proposal

[PPCLI Guy]

I would think a staff paper would have been done up on topics similar to this in the past.  However, if someone wants to write one up and share it, I think this would be a great idea.

You mean like a MARS officer who supports the idea and has posted on this thread *cough* Snakedoc *cough*

Just saying...

 

[quadrapiper]

I guess I did omit the Greek philanderer from the mix.

Must say this takes things to a new low... referring to the Royals as inbreds, and now this.

Are you some sort of hypocritical republican, or of a type with that uber-Irish RMC instructor? Or merely incapable of remembering and keeping an oath?

Anyway, as to the topic generally at hand: the Centennial would've been an excellent time to, in addition to reintroducing the curl, de-Hellyerize everything else ceremonial, even if resurrecting, in whatever form, the name of RCN is currently impossible. For example: authorize white and blue square rig and frock coats as NPF gear, bring back black gaiters for guard commanders, shuffle the flags so Canadian warships are flying a Canadian naval flag, add three buttons to CPO's sleeves. Any or none of the above, or anything else lost and yet still remembered, as long as it gets a positive morale response from the Navy DEU crowd. Generally, bring back as much service identity indicators as possible. Most of it would or could be NPF anyway.

Oh - and hint at the Air Force that they should get their wish-list ready for the next suitable birthday. Not sure why they lost the distinct airman and officer cap badges, and the Navy kept theirs (regained after DEU was reintroduced? either way...).

To the specific notion of a white ensign? I'd like the current MARCOM flag to take that role. It's a simple design, obviously Canadian, and is already in service.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

Must say this takes things to a new low... referring to the Royals as inbreds, and now this.

Are you some sort of hypocritical republican, or of a type with that uber-Irish RMC instructor? Or merely incapable of remembering and keeping an oath?

RO Entry 2.11:

The QM will be issuing a sense of humour to all those lacking same on 1 Apr 11 from 0900-1100.  Issue times have been allocated based on specific need.  The Army will be served from 0900-1025, the Air Force form 1025-1100.  In the unlikely event that a Naval Officer decides to get a sense of humour, he will be referred to the BPSO for Compulsory Transfer to another service.

Sense of entitlement (Navy) currently out of stock.

Understanding of the demands of the current war* and its impact in optempo not currently available for issue, irrespective of current unprecedented demand / obvious requirement.

Despite repeated requests historical perspective tempered by current realities is NOT repeat NOT stocked.

Adjt
The Real World



*That would be Afghanistan, not Libya  The former has been on for 10 years - the latter 10 days.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Are you some sort of hypocritical republican, or of a type with that uber-Irish RMC instructor? Or merely incapable of remembering and keeping an oath?

And you had to choose to insult my ancestral heritage in order to make a point that you thought he was disrespectful?

 

[Snakedoc]

You mean like a MARS officer who supports the idea and has posted on this thread *cough* Snakedoc *cough*

Just saying...

haha, I'm more like one of those MARS officers who is closer to that happy medium on regaining our naval heritage.  I support the change but if nothing happens, I'm not going to go nuts over it.  I'll leave the staff paper to one of our greener members/sailors or perhaps the OP of the thread  :nod:

Now the renaming of MARCOM to Canadian Navy (Royal or not) is a different can of worms.  Hard to develop your naval heritage when you don't have an official name people can relate to.  But for that there's already been staff papers, petitions, senate motions that have passed...etc...etc...and I digress

 

[Edward Campbell]

haha, I'm more like one of those MARS officers who is closer to that happy medium on regaining our naval heritage.  I support the change but if nothing happens, I'm not going to go nuts over it.  I'll leave the staff paper to one of our greener members/sailors or perhaps the OP of the thread  :nod:

Now the renaming of MARCOM to Canadian Navy (Royal or not) is a different can of worms.  Hard to develop your naval heritage when you don't have an official name people can relate to.  But for that there's already been staff papers, petitions, senate motions that have passed...etc...etc...and I digress

I suspect that you are on the right track.

My guess is that a few moderately senior "creative thinkers" will get you a Canadian Navy, Canadian Army and Canadian Air Force as "administrative structures" (mainly for personnel management, operational/equipment requirements, doctrine and the like), each headed by a Chief of the Naval Staff, Chief of the General Staff and so on. I would also guess that the ensign/jack conundrum is fairly easily resolved to the satisfaction of most sailors.

My other guess, potentially less popular, is that "Royal" is out of fashion - permanently - in Canada. I read somewhere that the head of the monarchists said that their big enemy wasn't republicans, it was indifference. That's it, I think, there are a few people who are desperately keen to restore our Royal/British heritage and a few more who are equally, or more, opposed, but the vast majority of us, English, French, native born, immigrant, black and white, simply don't care and we are unwilling to endure any fuss being made by one side or the other.The effect is that our sovereign, when she visits us, is seen, more and more, as a visiting head of another, foreign state - rather more like the Queen of the Netherlands than the Queen of Canada. That may (or may not) be a pity but I think it is a fact and, Senate committees or not, that "fact on the ground' dooms any and all attempts to recreate the Royal Canadian Navy or the Royal Canadian Engineers or the Royal Canadian Air Force. Perhaps I'm wrong ... I am quite often, but I think not, not this time.


Edit: typo

 

[quadrapiper]

And you had to choose to insult my ancestral heritage in order to make a point that you thought he was disrespectful?

No; rather, to identify a particular, and relevant, individual, Capt Aralt Mac Giolla Chainnigh.

No disrespect meant to those of Irish extraction in general - my apologies.

 

[Pusser]

I think the idea is that battle honours represent a connection to a past that, in many cases, no living person remembers -- just like other symbols such as the White Ensign.

However, the Canadian navy has in fact lost some battle honours: a number of years ago, as directed by someone who could politely be called a vandal, we withdrew from the Commonwealth "system" of battle honours whereby a ship named after a previous one from anywhere in the Commonwealth inherits the accompanying battle honours.  So, for example, HMCS BONAVENTURE had one from the 1600s because of a previous BONAVENTURE that served in the Royal Navy.

We no longer do this.  Only battle honours earned in Canadian service are inherited now, so some will in fact disappear as ship names are revived.  There will be some here who think that's a good thing, but the fact that we were a part of that system (and other Commonwealth navies remain so) says something about the depth of naval heritage.  It didn't all fall from the sky fully formed in 1910 -- or 1968.

Technically true, but moot.  This would only be an issue if any future Canadian ships were to named using names that had previously been used elsewhere in the Commonwealth.  This is highly unlikely.  A whole naming convention for Canadian warships has been developed and we are unlikely to ever see any future name that is anything but Canadian. 

As for the present, any current Canadian ship that carries battle honours from previous eras and held them at the time of this policy change, continues to carry them (i.e. no battle honours have been stripped).  Hence the reason several Reserve units still carry battle honours dating back centuries.

As an aside, the current HMS YORK ship's badge is virtually identical to the HMCS YORK badge (less the maple leaves).  This badge was Canadian first.  The  RN asked for and was granted permission to use it.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Hence the reason several Reserve units still carry battle honours dating back centuries.

Which ones?

The oldest Canadian battle honour commemorates the Second Fenian Raid of 1870. The Regimental Colour for the 50th Battalion Huntingdon Borderers, presented by His Royal Highness Prince Arthur in 1920, bore the words "Trout River" commemorating an action that occurred on 24 May 1870. The Victoria Rifles of Canada received the battle honour "Eccles Hill" on 5 December 1879, commemorating an action from 25 May 1870. Both of these regiments have since been disbanded.

The first major award of battle honours to the Canadian Militia was for the North-West Campaign of 1885. These award were made over a period 42 years and sparked much debate between the Militia Department and the War Office in England over the criteria and precedence by which awards were made. The final list of honours included: "North-West Canada 1885", "Batoche", "Saskatchewan", and "Fish Creek". The first honour from this campaign, "Batoche", was granted to the 10th Battalion, Royal Grenadiers on 2 May 1888. On 1 May 1899, The Royal Canadian Regiment received the honour "Saskatchewan"; in 1911, the 90th Winnipeg Rifles received the honours "Batoche" and "Fish Creek". Additional awards came in 1919, and in 1929 a large award of several of these distinctions went to 13 regiments including The Halifax Rifles ("North-West Canada 1885) and The Princess Louise Fusiliers ("North-West Canada 1885). The last honours for the campaign were granted to The Royal Grenadiers in 1930.

Source: The System of Battle Honours in the Canadian Army, by Captain (now Major) J.R. Grodzinski, CD


The Canadian Forces Publication THE HONOURS, FLAGS AND HERITAGE STRUCTURE OF THE
CANADIAN FORCES (A-AD-200-000/AG-000) also identifies "Niagara" as an authorized Canadian Battle Honour, but no current unit carries it.

It provides the following on early Battle Honours:

Prior to Confederation, British authorities awarded all battle honours. Only one of these was earned by a unit of the Canadian Militia: "Niagara," won by a battalion of Incorporated Militia in the War of 1812. The unit was disbanded in 1815.

6.  After Confederation, the Canadian Militia  decided on and awarded its own honours. "Eccles Hill," awarded for service in the Fenian Raids of 1870, is the oldest Canadian honour still carried by a Canadian  regiment, although this unit, the Victoria Rifles of Canada, is now dormant on the Supplementary Order of Battle. The oldest honours won by active Canadian units are for the North West Rebellion of 1885.

That publication also provides the following explanation of the method used for Naval honours:

Naval battle honours evolved in a different manner from those of the army. Until 1954, the selection and display of honours in Commonwealth navies was left in the hands of ships' commanding officers. Then, in a move to foster unit identity and esprit de corps among ships' companies, the Royal Navy developed official battle honours for all actions which could be assessed up to that time. These were assigned to ships' names and naval air squadrons, and the Royal Canadian Navy (RCN) subscribed to the same list. Unlike army and air force practice, in which Canadian units only claimed honours won by themselves or their perpetuated Canadian predecessors, the RCN considered itself, for these purposes, to be a part of a single King's Navy, sharing honours on a common list. Thus battle honours such as "ARMADA, 1588" and "QUEBEC, 1759" were assigned to Canadian ships. Only honours won by Canadian sailors are now allotted to new construction, but some ships and one former naval air squadron (880 Squadron), were assigned British battle honours after the Second World War and still carry them by right of continuous service from the RCN. (See Annex B.)

 

[Pusser]

HMCS YORK carries "Schooneveld 1643" and "Louisburg 1758," and several others for example.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Thank you for clarifying it was Naval Reserve units you were referring to.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Which ones?

HMCS Unicorn:

http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/navres/1/1-n_eng.asp?category=104&title=837

If I read this correctly then HMCS Uincorn could be carrying battle honors from 1588

HMCS Carleton

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMCS_Carleton

Lake Champlain 1776


Thats just a quick look using google and wikipedia which agreeably may be inaccurate.

 

[kratz]

HMCS YORK carries "Schooneveld 1643" and "Louisburg 1758," and several others for example.

I have a photo of myself standing beside the board.

The unit holds 11 honours, the oldest being:

Lowestoft  1665

During unification, HMCS QUEEN CHARLOTTE was one of the many units paid off and lost her 3 battle honours. In the 1990s when she was recommissioned, under modern DHH policies, she was not eligible to formally reclaim those honours. This system is different than the army's method of laying up the colours.

 

[Pusser]

Thank you for clarifying it was Naval Reserve units you were referring to.

Reserve units are the only ones left now (I believe), but CORMORANT carried older battle honours up until she was paid off in the 90s.  One of them was "Quebec 1759."

 

[Gorgo]

haha, I'm more like one of those MARS officers who is closer to that happy medium on regaining our naval heritage.  I support the change but if nothing happens, I'm not going to go nuts over it.  I'll leave the staff paper to one of our greener members/sailors or perhaps the OP of the thread  :nod:

You're welcome to try it with one of the new sailors, Snakedoc.  I haven't been in the service since 1991 and since I'm a diagnosed Type II diabetic now, I doubt I'll ever get back in.

:nod:

 

[Pusser]

I have a photo of myself standing beside the board.

So do I somewhere...

 

[q_1966]

Technically true, but moot.  This would only be an issue if any future Canadian ships were to named using names that had previously been used elsewhere in the Commonwealth.  This is highly unlikely.  A whole naming convention for Canadian warships has been developed and we are unlikely to ever see any future name that is anything but Canadian. 

As for the present, any current Canadian ship that carries battle honours from previous eras and held them at the time of this policy change, continues to carry them (i.e. no battle honours have been stripped).  Hence the reason several Reserve units still carry battle honours dating back centuries.

As an aside, the current HMS YORK ship's badge is virtually identical to the HMCS YORK badge (less the maple leaves).  This badge was Canadian first.  The  RN asked for and was granted permission to use it.

HMCS Uganda, I suppose would/could be one of the reasons for this.

 

[Ex-SHAD]

Though I doubt we’ll ever see another HMCS Uganda or the reinstatement of any other name that even remotely smacks of the British Empire, I have to wonder if Maritime Command could be motivated to reinstate the use of some of the more generically named vessels (ie: HMCS Patrician), since after all it wouldn’t violate what some would see as the unofficial policy of making sure that nothing even remotely British ever sneaks its way back into the Canadian Navy, while also tipping our hat to the men that went before us.

 

[Journeyman]

....(ie: HMCS Patrician)....

Sexist. You've just offended the matriarchs 

 

[Edward Campbell]

Sexist. You've just offended the matriarchs 

More likely the plebeians.