• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Inevitable Debate on Half Masting

Aside from having had this conversation at least once already - in one of the casualty threads - wasn't there also a discussion on "half staff" vice "half mast"? ;)

My opinion, as stated the first time we discussed this, was in line with Haggis' and those that agree with him. In fact, I suggested that it was appropriate for home stations to lower their flags but not for a national showing.

It would be inappropriate, in my opinion, to give junior ranks and officer the same status as heads of state. Just because HM Queen Elizabeth II had to bow to public pressure to lower the flag on Buckingham Palace when Diana was killed, doesn't mean we have to...
 
I do not believe that Recce41's statement regarding the  flag (Union Jack at that time) being at half mast during WW2 is correct.
In my opinion that would amount to striking one's colours and be missing the point.  The flag is the symbol of the country, it is inspiration for those who serve under it.  To rally the troops and the citizenry, the flag must be seen to be displayed proudly.  It is appropriate to recognize those who have fallen for Canada on Remembrance Day and to think of the fallen, collectively, every day. But to have our flag at half mast every time a soldier gets killed in war?  No. 

I agree with Haggis.
 
I do not believe that Recce41's statement regarding the  flag (Union Jack at that time) being at half mast during WW2 is correct.
Canada flew the Union Jack during WW2? That's news to me.
Mike,
If the ambassador from Burkina Faso died in Canada tomorrow, "the Flag on the Peace Tower is to be half-masted on the day of the funeral/memorial service or, should there be no such service scheduled, on the day that the remains depart Canada."
If that's the case, surely 4 Canadian soldiers killed in the line of duty deserve the same respect.
All the best,
Bart
P.S. I don't mean to pick on the ambassador from Burkina Faso, Her Excellency Juliette Bonkoungou, or the country of Burkina Faso, I just remember it as one of the places Bart Simpson called to see if toilets in the southern hemisphere flush the other way due to the Coriolis effect. Burkina Faso is actually in the northern hemisphere, but nevermind.
 
Yes, Bart, the Union Jack was Canada's flag.  In World War 2, the Red Ensign was the flag many soldiers fought under, but the flag on the Parliament Buildings was the Union Jack.  The Red Ensign, though popular, was never adopted as Canada's National Flag.  There is some good information on Canada's flag here:  http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/cultural/flag/historical-overview.html
 
Just listening to a Talk Show on the Radio and the matter of the Flag has come up as one of the main topics.  The host is an Ex-military Member and he is talking about the Flag on the Peace Tower, and suggests that it have it's priorities raised to the point that it only be lowered on three occasions:  The Death of the Monarch, the Death of the Serving Prime Minister, and on 11 November for Remembrance Day.  Of course there may be two others, the Governor General's death and the death of the Chief Justice, (the second in command to the Governor General.) 

A lady just phoned in and suggested that there be a flagpole erected at the National War Memorial over the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier that would fly the Flag at Half Mast every day in respect and remembrance of all the members of the Canadian Forces who have sacrificed their lives in service of Canada.

As for the lowering of the Flag, other than the Peace Tower, it is still up to the Province, Municipality, Organization, etc, to carry out their own policies in the lowering of their own Flags.  CF Bases will carry out the policy of lowering Base and Unit Flags as these occasions arise, as will Royal Canadian Legions and other Service organizations.

 
Audio of interview with MGen (Ret'd) Lewis McKenzie on CFRA, Ottawa, Tuesday morning: while he supports the flag decision, he doubts the wisdom of banning the media's covering the coffins' return at Trenton.
http://www.cfra.com/chum_audio/Lewis_MacKenzie_Apr25.mp3

Mark
Ottawa
 
Although I didn't read any of the previous posts on this subject, I still want to put my 2 cents in.

In light of the fact that our Government decided to do this without any regard for debate or others opinion, I'm going to go ahead and buy my own Flagpole and put a Canadian flag on it. Then I will decide when the flag is at half mast, and pay my own respects. The Government can kiss my **s. And God help the son of a b*&$#h who comes on my property and tries to give me grief about it.

There...I have vented..phew!

Cheers,

Gnplummer :cdn:
 
gnplummer421 said:
Although I didn't read any of the previous posts on this subject, I still want to put my 2 cents in.

Perhaps you ought to read the previous posts so that you don't swallow both feet up to your knees.
 
Sometimes I like to throw my raw emotion out there before I read..but I see your point.

Thanks.
 
Haggis said:
That's one of the cool things about living in a free country.  We can agree to disagree.

My :cdn: stays up.

I agree with Haggis...
HL
 
What do the people on this forum think about parliament not lowering its flags when a soldier dies in combat (except on Remembrance Day) or the legislation that the ceremony marking the return of soldiers' bodies to Canada will no longer be recorded for public dissemination?

I know that this board mostly supports a Conservative government, but I did notice that the University of Toronto (mostly a Liberal or NDP supporting organization from what I perceive) did lower its flags in honour of the four soldiers who died last week... just curious to see what everyone else thinks about this new Conservative legislation.
 
Matty - there is already one thread open on this, and it is probably being mentioned in a number of other threads as well...

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/42481.0.html
 
Saw this article and once again it shows the hypocrisy of the liberal party.  They are under the impression that the decision to raise/lower the peace tower flag should be made by the whole of parliament and not the government of the day.  I guess when they where in power, it was okay, but now its not.  One more reason why this whole flag/flap is nothing more than an attempt to discredit the Convervatives and paint them in a rather negative light.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2006/04/27/1553813-cp.html

Opposition MPs question government's power over Peace Tower flag protocol
   
OTTAWA (CP) - The power to lower the Peace Tower flag to half-mast should rest with all parliamentarians through the Speaker, not with the prime minister, the defence minister or the Heritage Department, opposition MPs said Thursday.

A controversial government decision to keep the flag flying high this week despite the weekend deaths of four soldiers in Afghanistan has raised the ire of many military families.

The House of Commons rose for a moment of silence Thursday afternoon to commemorate the sacrifice of Cpl. Matthew Dinning, Bombardier Myles Mansell, Cpl. Randy Payne and Lieut. William Turner.

Afterward, New Democrat MP Pat Martin asked Speaker Peter Milliken to consider whether the Conservative government overstepped its bounds on the flag issue.

"It should be the Speaker on behalf of members of Parliament who should determine if and when the flag flies at half-mast," said Martin.

Quoting from scholarly sources, Martin said "the House of Commons is not a department of the government of Canada. It exists as a constituent element of Parliament."

Liberal House leader Ralph Goodale agreed control of the Peace Tower flag raises an interesting legal question that should be clarified by the Speaker's office. 
 

Rob Nicholson, the Conservative House leader, brushed off the arguments.

He said the protocol for the Peace Tower flag, which is lowered for the death of senators, former parliamentarians, privy councillors and other VIPs, has been in place almost since Confederation - with the last four years of the Afghan mission the exception.

"Something like this is the prerogative of the Crown and the Crown exercised that prerogative on the advice of the government of Canada and that is precisely what has happened here.

"So I don't think you'll have to spend too much time with this one, Mr. Speaker," Nicholson concluded, as MP Jason Kenney chortled and patted him on the shoulder.

Milliken, a Liberal who is considered one of the pre-eminent experts in the House on parliamentary procedure, said he would take the matter under consideration.

Parliamentarians "do have certain controls within the building," he said.

"How far out they go will be the question I'll examine in relation to the flag pole on top of the Peace Tower."
 
So MP Kenney "chortled" did he?  Interesting verb selection in a straight news piece.  Just "style" I suppose.
 
I'm just wondering which military families it "has raised the ire of" and why none of them are quoted.

As a matter of fact, I'd be surprised if they actually asked any of our families about it (Mr. Dinning's letter aside. Curious as to whether the politicos received permission to even read his letter in the House in the manner that they did).

Kudos to the CBC for at least publishing some of the comments from our guys on the ground in 'Astan.
 
Another opinion by Dr Granatstein:

Honouring the Dead Without Hypocrisy
J.L. Granatstein

Is there no limit? Is there nothing politicians will not do to capitalize on the misery of others and to obscure their own role in that misery?

Canadians have just endured the deaths of four soldiers in Afghanistan, four young men killed by an improvised explosive device that destroyed their vehicle. That is bad enough, but the casualties were the subject of pages of coverage in the national media and then of an unseemly squabble in Parliament and the press over the proper ways of honouring their sacrifice.

What is important in this unseemly affair is the hypocrisy of the politicians, all the politicians, and the media. The press have seized on the government’s decision to treat the arrival of the servicemen’s coffins at CFB Trenton as a family matter as a way of chastising Prime Minister Harper for his general attitude to the media. No journalist says this is the reason, but let us be very clear: it is. Give us more access, Prime Minister, the implicit message is, or we the media will make your life unbearable.

Not that the Prime Minister and the government deserve much sympathy here. The decision to bar the press from the Trenton ceremonies was made without consulting the soldiers’ families. Most of us likely prefer to mourn our dead in private, but some may differ. As a minimum, the government ought to have asked before issuing its ukase.

Then there is the real reason for the government’s press ban—the all too obvious concern that the attention paid the casualties will impact on the already shaky support for the Afghan War and, perhaps, hurt the government’s chances of re-election. There is some hypocrisy shaping the government’s actions.

There is more hypocrisy in the Opposition ranks. To have the New Democratic Party’s spokesmen calling for the lowering of the flag on government buildings might be barely tolerable if the NDP had ever called for more money to be spent on the Canadian Forces. If the NDP had ever supported giving the CF the proper equipment to carry out its roles. If the New Democrats had ever preached for anything except the most benign blue beret peacekeeping as the only acceptable role for our troops. If the NDP had ever done anything for the men and women in uniform except to capitalize on their deaths. The blatant hypocrisy here is frankly stomach-turning.

The NDP hypocrisy is exceeded, hard as that might be to imagine, by that of the Liberals. The Chrétien government for a decade and more starved the military of funds and failed to replace its obsolescent equipment. The latest casualties near Kandahar died in a G-Wagon, one of the vehicles hastily secured when the wretched Iltis jeeps proved too vulnerable even for the Liberals who had unhesitatingly sent our soldiers into harm’s way in unarmoured, ancient equipment. I suppose we ought to be grateful that SeaKing helicopters weren’t sent to Kandahar. For the next generation or so, common decency suggests that the Liberals should be very cautious in attacking the Conservatives on defence matters.

And then there is Ujjal Dosanjh, the Liberal Opposition Defence critic, who has taken the lead in attacking the government on the flag issue. To be blunt, Dosanjh knows nothing of defence and cares nothing for it. He criticizes for the sake of criticizing, and the best he can do is to attack the Prime Minister for, he says, trying to act presidential and aping President George W. Bush by keeping the media away from Trenton. Anti-Americanism is always the last refuge of Canadian scoundrels, and Dosanjh’s hypocrisy stands high even in a crowded field. He shamefully seeks to profit politically from the dead. No one in Ottawa comes out of this sorry affair with credit.

To be fair, that is not wholly true. The Royal Canadian Legion and the National Council of Veterans Associations have stoutly maintained that all soldiers’ deaths should be honoured on November 11, Remembrance Day. The Legion and the NCVA are right. So too are the Canadian soldiers serving in Afghanistan. They too would prefer that the media stay away from Trenton and that their comrades be re-united quietly with their families. In an age of hypocrisy, the vets and the soldiers alone understand how to act.

(Historian J.L. Granatstein writes for the Council for Canadian Security in the 21st Century. Free use may be made of this column so long as mention is made of CCS21 and its website, www.ccs21.org)

Reading this, there are two complimentary courses of action:

1. Bombard the press and opposition MPs with mail. email and phone messages calling them out for goulishly attempting to exploit our dead. Use the same tone and content of Dr Granatstein's article so you are taken seriously.

2. Discuss our mission and goals in Afghanistan to as large an audience as possible. People don't know or understand what is going on over there, and credible information will help the general public to understand and generate support. (Note there are some places like some Universities or Rabble.ca where this approach will not work, but choose your targets accordingly).

Help for option 2:

Ali A. Jalali, “The Future of Afghanistan,” Parameters (Spring 2006), available from http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/06spring/jalali.htm

Mark Sedra, “Four Reasons why Canada is in Afghanistan,” The Conference of Defence Associations (CDA Commentary 4-2006), available from http://www.cda-cdai.ca/CDA_Commentary/Mark_Sedra_Commentary_4-2006.pdf

Col (Ret’d) Brian MacDonald, “Is it Time to Cut and Run from Kandahar?” The Conference of Defence Associations (CDA Commentary 2-2006), available from http://www.cda-cdai.ca/CDA_Commentary/CDA%20Commentary%20Time%20to%20Cut%20and%20Run.pdf

Gen (Ret’d) Paul Manson, “Could Canada Pull out From Afghanistan? A ‘What if’ Scenario,” The Conference of Defence Associations (CDA Commentary 1-2006), available from http://www.cda-cdai.ca/CDA_Commentary/CDA%20Commentary%20Manson%20on%20Kandahar.pdf



 
Let me see, they allowed the media to film the departure ceremony, but barred the arrival ceremony and refused to lower one flag on the Peace tower. Talking about creating a story so the media can report on it.
 
it's an old thread, (aucune réponse n'a été postée dans ce fil depuis au moins 100 jours) but same subject :


Commons poised to vote on flag-lowering motion

OTTAWA  -- The House of Commons appears set to adopt a motion calling for the flag to be lowered on the Peace Tower whenever a Canadian soldier is killed
in Afghanistan. And the Conservative government appears set to ignore the vote result.

The Commons votes Wednesday on a Liberal motion that would require a moment of silence and a lowering of the flag for one day following the death of a Canadian soldier.
Both other opposition parties told The Canadian Press they will support the Liberal motion, easily guaranteeing it will have enough votes to be adopted in the minority Parliament.
But the motion is non-binding -- and the government has other ideas about how to honour soldiers.

The Tories said they will refer a report by an expert panel to the Commons heritage committee, and ask members to hold hearings and come up with a wide-ranging policy
on when the flag should be lowered. "Canada should have a consistent policy on half-masting the Canadian flag,'' said Alykhan Velshi, a spokesman for multiculturalism and
Canadian identity minister Jason Kenney. "Our government is committed to bringing clarity and consistency to Canada's half-masting policy.''

A panel led by Canada's former chief herald Robert Watt recommends against lowering the Peace Tower flag whenever a soldier dies. The Tories commissioned the report
following an uproar in 2006 when they first announced they would not lower the flag to half-mast. Watt's report also suggests scaling down other occasions in which the flag
is placed at half-mast -- including Dec. 6, the national day of remembrance and action on violence against women. It also recommends against the continued lowering of the
flag once every September to honour fallen police officers.

According to the panel, such events water down the significance of Remembrance Day on Nov. 11.

The flag-lowering motion was tabled by Liberal MP Andrew Telegdi, and will be voted on late Wednesday afternoon. The NDP says it will support the motion, adding that while
the government might legally ignore the will of the House of Commons it would not be politically wise.

Link
 
The big question here is does the nation mourn, or is the nation in mourning when any soldier dies in the line of duty?

We also commemorate all our soldiers that have died fighting the good fight every Nov 11.

To me I say no to this motion.  The nation no more goes into mourning when Pte Bloggins dies than it does when Jim-Bob falls into the shredder down at the plant.

And each of them has their day to be remembered, Remembrance Day for the Soldier, and National Day of Mourning (April 28th) for the worker.
 
Haggis said:
We should stay the course with tradition for more than one reason.

Remembering the fallen has always happened nationally on Nov 11.  At that time, Canada stops to mourn.  Certainly their families, comrades and friends will remember them each year but, five years from today, 22 April, will Canada still stop to mourn this loss?  Does Canada stop to mourn on 17 April for four brave Patricias lost on Op APOLLO??  What of those lost in the Balkans, Cyprus and other missions?  Does Canada mourn thier day of passing? 

With each loss we add a date.  Where does it end or do we become a country perpetually mourning it's war dead? By extension, if our losses contunue to mount in this, or another, campaign, we could find ourselves with the flags perpetually at half mast. 

Lastly, I feel that the current policy, articulated in the CANFORGEN is the right way to go in the eyes of our citizens and, more importantly, the eyes of our enemies.  There is nothing the Taliban would like to see more than a crack in our resolve.  The fact the the Maple Leaf flies high and proud over our Peace Tower at this terrible time is a symbol that we are resolved, as a nation, to stay the course and take the fight to the enemy.  You cannot bow us.  You will not beat us.

I was just reading about this issue on CTV, and I've always sort of been sitting on the fence. But I think Higgins made an excellent argument a couple years ago when this was first discussed.
 
Back
Top