[Lennox970]

Good point, and I guess the Channel Islands are all what is left from an incredibly large sized chunk of what is now France held by the English during the Middle Ages. Remember Henry V "..."we few, we happy few, we band of brothers." is set during the Hundred Years War.

 

[Lone Primate]

I don't think it's fair to say that the Union Jack on the flag only represents people of British descent. It's meant to show our British heritage as a society, not of individual people. Those of us who aren't of British descent are part of that culture just as much as those who are. That said, I do think it's a bit silly to have a flag with a Union Jack on it in the 21st century.

Some of the designs proposed a few pages back are on the right track, IMO. The trillium and some combination of red, gold, white, blue, and/or green are a great starting point. 5 colours is probably too many though.

Well, it's certainly a perspective that has some resonance; I remember writing letters to the editor in The Star back in the 80s when I was a teenager that took that position. It's legitimate to say, as you seem to be doing, that people who have come to Ontario from places that don't share a British heritage are just as free to identify with it as... let's be honest, and with due respect to other cultures... the major establishing culture of the modern province we all share. It was a big empire and that can be a pretty big tent, and people should be free to claim it as their own if they want to.

I think it's worth having the debate and perhaps putting it to the people of Ontario in an election, and if a majority of the voters are open to establishing a new flag, have some fun with it. Narrow it down to a few candidates, including the current flag, and have a referendum to see what folks prefer. It could be really interesting and re-invest the citizens of Ontario in their shared institutions. We're pretty blasé about that kind of thing in this country.

 

[Lone Primate]

I genuinely cannot understand those who see it any different. OK, there will always be people with a chip on their shoulder over the UK/UJ. I get that. But this rehashed Red Ensign flag debate from the 1960s is nothing more than ancient history with no relevance today (or to anyone born after the 1950s).

Ah, I need to edit this, as I seem I'm repeating myself. Nevertheless, I think it does bear restatement as it does, judging by the writer's name, represent the view of someone not of British heritage but yet having been brought up steeped in our ersatz provincial version of it. This was a letter to the editor that appeared in The Star on Sept. 19, 1987...

Ontario's flag isn't representative

The patriation of the Constitution in 1982 made Canada, at long last, legally and technically independent from Britain.

Unfortunately, Canada is still colonially and symbolically subordinate in carrying Britain’s symbols.

Ontario’s so-called provincial flag, for one, is nothing more than an 18th century British naval squadron-rank flag — the red ensign version with three sickly maple leaves dominated and crowned by England’s cross of St. George.

The total Canadian content of this flag is less than 10 per cent. Isn’t it time for Ontario to finally have a flag representing its plural reality with total Canadian symbolism?

ROBERT HANULAK

I think it's fair to say there are probably a lot of Ontarians who feel the same way, but it's not a big enough deal for them to really get exorcised about. Nevertheless, it's a fair take on the matter. And I think having the Union Jack on the flag, this late in history, is probably needlessly antagonistic to Franco-Ontariens (not to mention francophones elsewhere in Canada) for whom it might be a constant reminder of the Conquest. As well, to people from such places as India and Pakistan who have a complicated relationship with Britain and who, while they might be eager to raise their families in a place largely formed around a British model, might prefer to do wo without necessarily feeling they're being reminded of 'who's in charge'... and after all, let's be honest, that's why Ontario (and Manitoba) grabbed the Red Ensign before it even hit the ground back in 1965. It was a faintly cynical attempt by conservatives to hold back the tide on the sea of history. Whether we embrace the Red Ensign or not, that's genuinely a factor that needs to be taken into consideration when we discuss whether it has a proper place representing us all. I don't say it lightly; it took me a long time to come around to accepting that as a legitimate perspective.

 

[Lone Primate]

A very interesting topic, IMO. I fully admit that I am challenged how in a country that is mature and self-confident in every respect, some still do not see our provincial flag as Canadian.

This can be contrasted, for example, by how other formerly imperial symbols are considered 'Canadian' and some 'colonial'. For example, a uniform that is 90% based on a British Army cavalry regiment (RCMP uniform) or the Imperial ensign of the French empire (Quebec fleurs de lis) have explicit imperial ties. Yet try campaigning against them....

My own theories are that:

i. We are chained to the 1960s national flag debate - it has now been decided that Red Ensign = colonial, consequently our discourse on the Union Jack can never move beyond that limit.
ii. Alternatively, a case of North American throw away culture. Like so much of our urban built heritage, our other heritage is equally disposable.

Sorry, not being deliberately argumentative, just probing where this leads!

I would tend to agree to some extent; I think I'm more comfortable with seeing the Union Jack on a provincial flag, where it tends to represent local heritage and traditions, as opposed to on the national flag where it speaks for an entire nationality... I do think our national flag definitely needs to be distinctive. I'd like to say I'm not strident in wanting to change Ontario's flag, just interested in the views and what we might choose to give ourselves if we do decide to move on to a new design.

 

[Lone Primate]

Shouldn't Quebec change it's own flag to move away from the French (the country, not the language)?

I don't think whataboutery shoves anything; it just passes the buck. Quebec will do what Quebec will do. We're talking here about our province, the people in it, and our common symbols. But to engage in it for a moment, if you're saying you'd like to see a more inclusive flag for Quebec, how can we turn a blind eye to ours?

 

[Lennox970]

k it does bear restatement as it does, judging

Ah, I need to edit this, as I seem I'm repeating myself. Nevertheless, I think it does bear restatement as it does, judging by the writer's name, represent the view of someone not of British heritage but yet having been brought up steeped in our ersatz provincial version of it. This was a letter to the editor that appeared in The Star on Sept. 19, 1987...

Ontario's flag isn't representative

The patriation of the Constitution in 1982 made Canada, at long last, legally and technically independent from Britain.

Unfortunately, Canada is still colonially and symbolically subordinate in carrying Britain’s symbols.

Ontario’s so-called provincial flag, for one, is nothing more than an 18th century British naval squadron-rank flag — the red ensign version with three sickly maple leaves dominated and crowned by England’s cross of St. George.

The total Canadian content of this flag is less than 10 per cent. Isn’t it time for Ontario to finally have a flag representing its plural reality with total Canadian symbolism?

ROBERT HANULAK

I think it's fair to say there are probably a lot of Ontarians who feel the same way, but it's not a big enough deal for them to really get exorcised about. Nevertheless, it's a fair take on the matter. And I think having the Union Jack on the flag, this late in history, is probably needlessly antagonistic to Franco-Ontariens (not to mention francophones elsewhere in Canada) for whom it might be a constant reminder of the Conquest. As well, to people from such places as India and Pakistan who have a complicated relationship with Britain and who, while they might be eager to raise their families in a place largely formed around a British model, might prefer to do wo without necessarily feeling they're being reminded of 'who's in charge'... and after all, let's be honest, that's why Ontario (and Manitoba) grabbed the Red Ensign before it even hit the ground back in 1965. It was a faintly cynical attempt by conservatives to hold back the tide on the sea of history. Whether we embrace the Red Ensign or not, that's genuinely a factor that needs to be taken into consideration when we discuss whether it has a proper place representing us all. I don't say it lightly; it took me a long time to come around to accepting that as a legitimate perspective.

by t

@Lone Primate you raise some interesting points.

There is no debate on the Ontario flag, so far as I am aware. I can probably assume with a high degree of certainty that the general public doesn't care. They accept it as it is, almost certainly with little or no thought. Of course, the Toronto Star trots out stories on it (and, sigh, the monarchy) as regularly as clockwork; it must be their Editors' own personal hobby horse or whatever. There was a flash in the pan last summer by a chap recently arrived in Canada who was none too happy with his adopted country's Provincial Flag. His story was given wide coverage (surprisingly so, did he have backing from somewhere) but attract diddly squat support.

@lenaitch made a very insightful point about why can the UJ be accepted without debate as the Hawaiian state flag, but ours isn't by some here. You may not agree, but let me put this out there: the litmus test of our maturity as a nation is acceptance of the UJ on national emblems, provincial flags, Coat of Arms etc.

Because here is something that really spun me out of orbit. I am a big fan of Canadian history and know the ins and outs of the Flag debate. But in 2016 New Zealand, a nation about as similar background to our as you'll find in the world, voted to retain their current flag, the Blue Ensign. Now I was brought up on the myths of the 'struggle' for Canadian nationhood etc and how we came of age when we ditched the British Empire and Red Ensign (loved by - grrrr! Conservatives) and adopted the Maple Leaf. But NZ spun this narrative on its head. As a mature, free, progressive country they voluntarily voted to retain the 'British' emblem in their national flag. Moreover, and research this yourself, the popularity of the current flag was strongest amongst the 18-25 and 26-35 year old cohorts (3rd place 65yo+). There's more. By a slight margin, the popularity of the Blue Ensign was greater amongst the Maori/Asian/Pacific Islander ethnic population than the ethnic European. Eh?? And tell 900,000 Fijians that there beloved Light Blue UK Ensign doesn't represent them! ;-)

What am I arguing? Simply that changing our flag is neither a foregone conclusion nor is it naturally antagonistic to those of non-British background. There is no sea of history to hold back. Our flag is what we want it to be, why not as you suggest, make it a symbol of achievement? There is so much negativity in our country currently. After all, if you want something to crow about, can we not take pride that our Province was the main destination in British North America that escaped slaves sought freedom? The Union Jack was the symbol of that freedom? Its all there if you want it.

As for adoption of the Ontario and Manitoba Provincial Flags in 1965, you painted it in a very negative light describing it as a cynical conservative policy. If so, why did it pass through the Legislature with a unanimous (bar one) vote?* Although the Conservatives had a majority, both opposition parties could've voted against as a protest and still not stopped the Bill. Why not? I do not know, but it is an interesting question.

But let me speculate. There was more of a contentious debate and a lot emotion in the argument over the Canadian Flag, 1963-65, than we give credit for today. Naturally, the winners get to write the history and the emotion and genuine affection for the old flag is either glossed over or delegitimised. But back then, many of those who wished to see a distinctive flag had mixed emotions over changing it. If you read Jose Iguartua's book on the subject, his research makes clear many didn't want change but did so for the sake of bringing Quebec into the fold. Could the adoption by Ontario and Manitoba of provincial flags based on the Red Ensign be seen as a runner up prize for this old, familiar symbol? Might the Ontario and Manitoba provincial flags have helped defuse emotions, and even enabled or encouraged the acceptance of the new Maple Leaf flag? Could our Provincial Flag not be so much a symbol of revenge, but one of reconciliation? These questions aren't asked because they go against today's narrative. They only ones interesting in the flag seem to be those vested in its change. But, Jose Iguartua's book brings to life the complexity of emotion in the Canadian public at the time. Life is rarely binary.

Oh, and in light of current events, who will be the first politician to raise changing flags as an issue. With increasing bitter public debate and polarisation, no.
Just, no.
Please, no.


*P.S. Thank you for not quoting Elmer Sopha! Trotted out every time, ever so tiresome.

 

[afransen]

Lennox, I would be more sympathetic to that view if the Ontario flag were not objectively bad. It is forgettable, fussy, and very light on any meaning to Ontarians. I doubt most Ontarians could describe it from memory, especially the crest (the notionally most Ontario-specific part of it).

 

[Lennox970]

Lennox, I would be more sympathetic to that view if the Ontario flag were not objectively bad. It is forgettable, fussy, and very light on any meaning to Ontarians. I doubt most Ontarians could describe it from memory, especially the crest (the notionally most Ontario-specific part of it).

I take your point on fussiness & forgetableness, so here's a wee quiz ....and no cheating ;-)

1. What heraldry is besides the sun on the BC flag?
2. How many mountain peaks on the Alberta flag? How many have snow?
3. What is on the shield of the Saskatchewan flag? What colour and position of the background colours?
4. What animal on the Manitoba flag?
5. What animal on the NB flag? What colour is it?
6. What animal on NS flag? What direction is it facing?
7. What objects are on PEI flag? How many?
8. On the Newfoundland flag….sorry, even I cannot remember.
9. As for the territories’ flags...

Well, you get my point.

Flags don’t have to be able to be drawn by a 4 year old in order to be good. And the Scandinavians aren't all bothered about being that special snowflake, eh?

Confirmation bias is where we have an opinion and seek evidence to justify. I often do it myself. However, to pronounce that our flag is poor – ‘self-evidently’ so, then that is only an opinion that may or not be shared by others. In fact, it sounds more like marketing: having to convince a consumer that they need or want something, when they didn’t before.

The question posed by @lenaitch still stands. Why seek change when others (even in more multiracial/cultural societies e.g. see below) do not? And why build identarian compartments of us/their symbols when it will be so divisive, zero sum and not lead to anything good.

I don’t doubt there is a 60 year chip on the shoulder for some. But is the need for change in built into our culture? Seeking some mystical purity of Canadian-ness, purged of colonial symbols? But the British & French flags have flown on this land for nearly 4 centuries, doesn’t that qualify as genuine or legitimate Canadian symbols? And if not, why not? And why not the ‘House of Commons’ the Mounties uniform, and 100s of other smaller things?

 

[lenaitch]

I keep wandering by this thread from time to time mostly out of curiosity of the debate, since I don't envision any government burning political capital on it for the foreseeable future. There are too many downsides and not enough votes for a government to tread into this minefield. Anything designed by a government committee or hired consultant would try to mean everything to everybody and ending up meaning nothing to anybody.

I'm not a huge fan of the current flag, primarily because I find it unnecessarily derivative. In Commonwealth usage, the ensign has a maritime origin and is typically used for departments of the national government but, as we know, is also used for national flags (Australia, et al). It seems in the world of vexillology, there is room for much interpretation. Clearly, when the members of the day strove to protest the new national flag, they lacked imagination.

For the argument that the inclusion of the Union (Jack) Flag displays a lack of maturity, I wonder if proponents went to court to change their surname when they got all growed up and left home.

 

[ShonTron]

I take your point on fussiness & forgetableness, so here's a wee quiz ....and no cheating ;-)

1. What heraldry is besides the sun on the BC flag?
2. How many mountain peaks on the Alberta flag? How many have snow?
3. What is on the shield of the Saskatchewan flag? What colour and position of the background colours?
4. What animal on the Manitoba flag?
5. What animal on the NB flag? What colour is it?
6. What animal on NS flag? What direction is it facing?
7. What objects are on PEI flag? How many?
8. On the Newfoundland flag….sorry, even I cannot remember.
9. As for the territories’ flags...

Well, you get my point.

Most provincial and territorial flags - Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nunavut being the notable exceptions - feature the shield, or are simply stretched versions of the shield (BC, NB, even NS). Only Nova Scotia's crest really works as a standalone flag.

Only three provinces and one territory - QC, NS, NL, and NU - have good flags. Saskatchewan's is passable, only because it is big on the provincial colours. Alberta's is as distinctive as 20 US states' flags.

 

[W. K. Lis]

From link.

 

[Lennox970]

Most provincial and territorial flags - Quebec, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nunavut being the notable exceptions - feature the shield, or are simply stretched versions of the shield (BC, NB, even NS). Only Nova Scotia's crest really works as a standalone flag.

Only three provinces and one territory - QC, NS, NL, and NU - have good flags. Saskatchewan's is passable, only because it is big on the provincial colours. Alberta's is as distinctive as 20 US states' flags.

What no BC?????? Injustice!!!! Well, apart from one provincial flag that looks like it was designed by someone on LSD (go on, guess ) I can live with all our provincial flags. It all boils down to opinion in the end which means there will always be unhappy people.

Moreover, flags designed by so-called experts more often than not look like complete crappola 'in my opinion'. Mississippi changed its flag recently and below are some of the suggestions put forth. If I didn't know better they could be the company flag of any random business like 'Compu-Globo-Hyper-Mega-Net' or medium sized Malaysian car manufacturer.

I genuinely hope there are no changes to our provincial flags. Our societies and cultures are rapidly homogenising across the globe, I am keen to resist.

 

[Lennox970]

The harp is one of the most recognisable symbols of Ireland and this flag is one that represented the 17th Century Confederacy of Ireland (nothing to do with General Lee and Stonewall Jackson, before you get angry). It has also been touted as a possible contender for a united Ireland (granted, a very big if) one day.
One look at it and it is instantly recognisable, eye catching and unforgettable. That said, what are the chances any flag expert (vexillologists?) would design something as unique as this today? It certainly wouldn't pass Urban Toronto's 'must be drawn by a 6 year old test' either.

There are a couple of very memorable features in this design, anyone guess?

 

[Towered]

What no BC?????? Injustice!!!! Well, apart from one provincial flag that looks like it was designed by someone on LSD (go on, guess ) I can live with all our provincial flags. It all boils down to opinion in the end which means there will always be unhappy people.

Moreover, flags designed by so-called experts more often than not look like complete crappola 'in my opinion'. Mississippi changed its flag recently and below are some of the suggestions put forth. If I didn't know better they could be the company flag of any random business like 'Compu-Globo-Hyper-Mega-Net' or medium sized Malaysian car manufacturer.

I genuinely hope there are no changes to our provincial flags. Our societies and cultures are rapidly homogenising across the globe, I am keen to resist.

View attachment 381631

All of those proposals are far better than what they actually picked.

 

[Towered]

The harp is one of the most recognisable symbols of Ireland and this flag is one that represented the 17th Century Confederacy of Ireland (nothing to do with General Lee and Stonewall Jackson, before you get angry). It has also been touted as a possible contender for a united Ireland (granted, a very big if) one day.
One look at it and it is instantly recognisable, eye catching and unforgettable. That said, what are the chances any flag expert (vexillologists?) would design something as unique as this today? It certainly wouldn't pass Urban Toronto's 'must be drawn by a 6 year old test' either.

There are a couple of very memorable features in this design, anyone guess?

I think that would be a great flag for a united Ireland (I find the Republic's tri-colour rather generic), though it would likely be stylized for a future flag. I imagine the boobs alone would be an absolute no-go.