# Canada's Half-Mast Flag Policy Explained



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Herewith a copy of a letter to the editor in our local paper from our M.P. explaining the flag lowering policy to constituents who questioned the policy.

All this hassle when in fact the policy refers to only ONE flag, that being the national flag atop the Peace Tower. All other flags honour the fallen.

It is clear that it does not dishonour service men and women in any way and leaves the door open for communities affected to lower their flags in respect.

The letter:

Editor:

Many people have been confused about our announcement on keeping the Canadian flag flying on the Peace Tower while we mourn the loss of our soldiers who have died in Afghanistan.

The Prime Minister’s announcement applies only to the flag on the Peace Tower on Parliament Hill. It will fly high demonstrating that Canada is a proud and free nation that will not be cowed or brought to its knees by any terrorist anywhere in the world, just as it flew high during the First and Second World Wars.

The 80-year-old tradition specifies that the Canadian flag on the Peace Tower will be lowered in honour of all fallen service personnel on November 11, Remembrance Day.

In the event of a Canadian Forces’ operational death, the Department of National Defense protocol specifies that Canadian flags will be lowered within the operational base, the home base of the member and the National Defence Headquarters from the day of death until sunset on the day of the funeral. Tradition also specifies that all Canadian flags within the service (navy, army or air force) of the member will be lowered from sunrise to sunset on the day of the funeral.

By keeping with this tradition we will ensure that all those who have served this country and who have given the ultimate sacrifice are honoured equally, respectfully and with dignity. Our freedom comes at a cost, and we lower our flags in recognition of that price and keep the flag on the Peace Tower high in recognition that we are free.

John G. Williams, M.P.
Edmonton - St. Albert Constituency


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

That's hardly enough to change my mind on the subject.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

SINC, thanks for the explanation. 

Here is my question to you. Do you think that the present government is trying to hide the realities of war by not lowering the flag every time a soldier is killed and media ban when a body returns?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

ArtistSeries said:


> SINC, thanks for the explanation.
> 
> Here is my question to you. Do you think that the present government is trying to hide the realities of war by not lowering the flag every time a soldier is killed and media ban when a body returns?


No, I do not believe that for a moment.

Only one flag officially represents ALL Canadians to all other nations and that is the flag on the Peace Tower. It should fly high and proud with the exception of Remembrance Day. It signals to the world we are strong and free and proud.

The lowering of all those other flags in honour of our service men and women signals our respect for those we lose.

That is why even the Royal Canadian Legion is comfortable with this policy. Both my parents served during the Second World War, my father being wounded in Germany. He was a proud Legionnaire, and a member of the national executive and president of his provincial command. He lost many members of his infantry brigade and never questioned the flag flying high, a tradition of 80+ years.

The Liberals mistakenly changed that protocol. The current government reverted to the accepted norm as it should remain.

Support for that policy is strong in this military community. In conversation with members of today's military at our Legion branch last week, they reminded me that they felt changing the policy *dishonoured* the hundreds of thousands of vets who gave their lives in previous wars for whom the flag was never lowered. That opinion alone is certainly food for thought.

As for the media ban on the return of bodies, if only a single family requests privacy, it should be granted without hesitation. It is after all, their right.


----------



## adagio (Aug 23, 2002)

Thanks for posting that, SINC. I asked my dad about the flag issue. He said the same thing. In other words, lowering the flag went against protocol and tradition.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

If anyone heard cross country last week it was well covered by the General in charge of the Afghan campaign and his explanation was clear about the provincial and home town and based flags which make sense.

He also ripped a very large one in Harper and Co about banning the press He siad he told them flat out it was a bad policy andhe made an interesting point about the whole thing.

The banning got more press than the deaths 

He said "don't give orders you can't fulfill"...Harper did in this case.

The press till covered the repatriation ( he said he knew they would ) and the soldiers were not the heart of the story the banning was.

Are you listening to the feet on the ground Mr. Harper????,........I think not 

Did it backfire........big time..










http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...servative_poll_060506/20060506?hub=TopStories 



> Poll finds most Cdns oppose Afghanistan deployment
> Updated Sat. May. 6 2006 12:22 PM ET
> 
> CTV.ca News Staff
> ...


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

adagio said:


> Thanks for posting that, SINC. I asked my dad about the flag issue. He said the same thing. In other words, lowering the flag went against protocol and tradition.


Your father is among the majority of military thinking Canadians. Those who disagree with the reversal simply do not understand the culture of the traditions and the very deep meaning it has for members of Canada's military.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

ON Cross Country many were military people that phoned in and there was a clear split certainly not a clear majority on the call in about the flag.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> ON Cross Country many were military people that phoned in and there was a clear split certainly not a clear majority on the call in about the flag.


Talk to the remaining WWII or Korean war vets and you will find the majority you claim is missing. 

The current group serving in Afghanistan are mostly from Edmonton and those are the ones I spoke with who agreed with the reversal of policy.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> Here is my question to you. Do you think that the present government is trying to hide the realities of war by not lowering the flag every time a soldier is killed and media ban when a body returns?


Conservative government goes with tradition, doesn't lower the flag every time a soldier is killed. Saves money on administration. ArtistSeries dumps on them.

Conservative government breaks from tradition, posts bio of PM's wife online. Costs a few dollars more to taxpayers. ArtistSeries dumps on them.

There is just no winning.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

Traditions change. The fact that something is tradition doesn't make it right (or wrong). It would have been nice, at either time things were changed, to have a real discussion about it. Even if we assume the military are OK with things the way they always used to be, that doesn't mean that we civillians can't decide we want more recognition.


----------



## ArtistSeries (Nov 8, 2004)

guytoronto said:


> Conservative government goes with tradition, doesn't lower the flag every time a soldier is killed. Saves money on administration. ArtistSeries dumps on them.


In 2002, the flag was lowered when some of our soldiers where killed. I think it was the right thing to do as a reminder and a sign of respect. Traditions do evolve and the lowering of the flag on Parliament Hill can be done for various reasons (MPs, senators and privy councillors and other people). I think that soldiers who die are as deserving as those senators of being honoured. 

If the reversal of lowering the flags as per the previous administration had been explained as a return to "tradition", there could of been less partisanship. 
Except that O'Connor decided to bring politics into it ""The previous Liberal government broke".
Oddly, while in opposition, the Cons did ask for the flag to be lowered on Parliment Hill and all government buildings.


> That this House demand the Prime Minister instruct all federal government buildings to immediately lower all Canadian flags to half-mast to recognize the tragic death of Lieutenant Chris Saunders yesterday on the HMCS Chicoutimi.


http://www.parl.gc.ca/38/1/parlbus/chambus/house/debates/004_2004-10-07/han004_1125-E.htm

Just because the Cons did not think of lowering the flags does not mean it's not a good idea whose time has come.





guytoronto said:


> Conservative government breaks from tradition, posts bio of PM's wife online. Costs a few dollars more to taxpayers. ArtistSeries dumps on them.


If anything, it shows the hypocrisies of Cons. They apparently love tradition except here. Unless they are trying to emulate American style traditions, no?


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

On cross country a former head of protocol said traditions are merely guidelines and are meant in fact to ease transitions.....they are open to change but it should be done in a respectful manner.

As I indicated before I don't really have an issue with the national flag not being lowered tho I can certainly see the point of it being a reminder....perhaps a moment of silence in Parliament with the name read out by the Speaker would be the kind of reminder that is even more pointed.

Lack of coverage of repatriation tho smacks of pure Bush style "hiding". 
I was very glad to see many in the military including the general officer in charge agree ..and many in no uncertain terms.....including the father of one of the fallen soldiers.

If anything perhaps as some small part of the reward for dangerous work for little pay, the national honours are due and MUST be seen to be paid by the government that sent them.


----------



## guytoronto (Jun 25, 2005)

ArtistSeries said:


> Traditions do evolve...


But I guess it's only a good thing if you, personally, approve of it. Post a bio on a government website? Evil! Why? Because Americans do it!


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MacDoc said:


> I was very glad to see many in the military including the general officer in charge agree ..and many in no uncertain terms.....including the father of one of the fallen soldiers.


What about that family that asked the PM to keep it private? They wanted out of the media glare and got their wish. :clap:


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

Every single person involved said the family wishes are paramount and I have no issue at all with that nor did the general.....it was NOT the case here.


----------



## RevMatt (Sep 10, 2005)

SINC said:


> What about that family that asked the PM to keep it private? They wanted out of the media glare and got their wish. :clap:


Indeed, and so they should have. It is unfortunate that no one involved could see their way to finding a compromise. There were several suggested at the time, but no one was listening.


----------



## MacDoc (Nov 3, 2001)

> but no one was listening.


....that was incredibly evident.


----------

