The Canadian flag might be the most beautiful in the world.
But I may be biased in that assessment.
Our athletes wear it on their uniforms when they represent us at the Olympics.
It flies across the country outside every federal building.
Backpackers sew it to their packs when they venture out on a journey of self-discovery across the world.
It has even been tattooed on countless bodies.
But to get this iconic symbol was not a quick or easy process.
In fact, it was almost like pulling teeth to make it happen.
I’m Craig Baird, this is Canadian History Ehx and today we are going up the flagpole as I share the story behind the Great Canadian Flag Debate!
Many flags have flown over our soil in the past four hundred years of colonization.
Nowhere was this more apparent than around Milk River which sits in present-day southern Alberta.
The area saw eight different flags fly during those four centuries.
First, the French Explorer Rene-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle claimed the entire drainage basin of the Mississippi River for King Louis XIV of France in 1682. The Milk River drained into the great river, so the land of southern Alberta was under the flag of New France.
The Spanish flag flew over that same land starting in 1762, when France and Spain signed the secret Treaty of Fontainebleau. It was under Spanish control for the next four decades until 1800, when Spain ceded the territory to Napoleon.
The French flag only briefly flew before the territory was sold to the United States in 1803.
A quarter-century later, the 49th parallel was established as the boundary between the United States and Canada. Milk River was on the north side of this border, and the Hudson’s Bay Company, which controlled Rupert’s Land, claimed the land with its flag.
When Rupert’s Land was sold to the Dominion of Canada in 1869, the Union Jack became the sixth flag for Milk River.
In the early 20th century, the Red Ensign, which many Canadians fought under during the two world wars, became the next flag for the community.
The Red Ensign inspired the most pride among Canadians until the mid-1960s when the community sent up the flagpole, the final flag for Canada… The Maple Leaf
No government motion established The Canadian Red Ensign never an official flag of Canada. If you’re unfamiliar with it, the flag is red with the Union Jack occupying the top left quarter of it, with the shield of the coat of arms of Canada.
It emerged as an informal flag to represent Canada as early as the 1870s and was used at sea and on land until it became the country’s civil ensign in 1892.
From 1892 to 1965, it was the de facto flag similar to how O Canada was the de facto anthem of until Parliament made it official in 1980.
The use of the Red Ensign began with our first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, in 1868 when he ordered the flag flown on our borders, outside federal buildings, and at patriotic celebrations.
In 1891, Governor General Lord Stanley stated, quote.
“The Dominion Government has encouraged by precept and example the use on all public buildings throughout the provinces of the Red Ensign with the Canadian badge on the fly, which has come to be considered as the recognized flag of the Dominion, both ashore and afloat.”
A year later, the British Admiralty Warrant authorized the Red Ensign’s use on ships registered in Canada.
The flag flew over the Parliament Buildings until it was replaced by the Union Jack in 1904.
A decision made by Prime Minister Sir Wilfrid Laurier after he was pressured by pro-Imperial Canadians wanting stronger connections to the United Kingdom as the United States rose in power.
When the First World War began, the Red Ensign featured heavily in patriotic displays and in efforts to recruit soldiers.
Photographs at the time show it flying along with the Union Jack at parades, on Canadian troops and on the official car of Prime Minister Sir Robert Borden.
Because it wasn’t an official flag, use of the Red Ensign grew as embellishments were added to it.
Throughout the 1910s, the Red Ensign appeared with a crown on the shield, a shield in a white circle and with an olive branch of peace over the shield.
To bring consistency, the federal government asked King George V in 1925 for a new coat of arms of Canada that incorporated symbols for England, Scotland, Ireland, and France.
A year later, the new coat of arms was approved, and Parliament incorporated it into the Red Ensign.
With its widespread use the Red Ensign was approved for use on government buildings outside of Canada in 1924.
Over the next two decades, various proposals were put forward for a new flag.
The French-Canadian newspaper La Presse published a design on Jan. 11, 1930 that featured the Union Jack, blue pointed stars that formed the Big Dipper constellation, with a large North Star at the top of the flag.
When the Second World War began in 1939, then Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King wanted to show support for the United Kingdom, and he had the Union Jack flown over Parliament for the duration of the war.
Then on Sept. 5, 1945, only three days after the end of the War, when Governor General Alexander Cambridge, the Earl of Athlone, signed an Order in Council that stated the Red Ensign could be flown on buildings owned or occupied by the federal government within or outside Canada. This order also identified it as a distinctive Canadian flag.
It was about as official as it could get, without it being official.
Following the war Prime Minister King wanted Canada to have its own flag, and he asked Canadians for designs and over 2,600 ideas were sent in from across the country.
On May 9 1946 a committee gave its recommendation for a combination of the Canadian Red Ensign with a maple leaf in autumn golden colours on a background of white.
The proposed flag was unpopular in Quebec, because of the use of the Union Jack on the proposed flag and to prevent angering Quebecers prior to an election, Prime Minister King did not act on the report.
As the 1950s dawned, younger Canadian were looking for independence from the United Kingdom and attitudes towards the Red Ensign began to change and many wanted to see a unique flag to be part of that.
And Lester B. Pearson would be the guy to take the first steps towards that.
Lester B. Pearson was a First World War veteran and spent decades working in the Department of External Affairs.
From 1944 to 1946, he served as the Canadian Ambassador to the United States and was instrumental in the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the United Nations.
He was nearly elected as the first Secretary General of the United Nations, but due to Canada’s close ties with the United States was vetoed by the Soviet Union.
In 1948, Pearson was elected to the House of Commons as a Liberal and became the Secretary of State for External Affairs.
In 1953, he was the leading candidate for Secretary-General once again, but was vetoed by the Soviet Union once more.
Three years later on July 26, 1956, Egyptian President Gamal Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, which links the Mediterranean with the Red Sea.
It was a vital route for transporting oil to Britain. Without it, all shipments would have to go on a much longer journey around South Africa, and that threatened Britain’s economic interests.
While Nasser continued to operate the canal as usual, Britain, France and Israel began to plan a military response. As the situation escalated, Nasser received weapons from the Soviet Union.
Without notifying the United States or Canada, an attack was planned on the canal.
On Oct. 29, 1956, Israeli forces advanced and while Britain and France both publicly ordered Israel and Egypt to withdraw from the canal zone.
Britain, France, and Israel had pre-planned this move to get Egypt to withdraw when refused Britain and France bombed the Suez Canal two days later.
There was a real threat that the conflict could escalate to nuclear war if the United States and the Soviet Union were drawn into active roles.
The United States and Canada urged Britain and France to find a peaceful solution and Lester B. Pearson spent the summer working to end the crisis.
When the bombing began, he worked with Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent and the United Nations to create a peacekeeping force, which was established on Nov. 4, 1956, when 57 member states voted towards it.
Two days later, a cease-fire was called, and UN peacekeepers entered the canal zone. This allowed Britain, France, and Israel to withdraw without appearing to have lost.
While some criticized Pearson for a lack of support of Britain, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1957 because the Nobel selection committee felt he had saved the world.
How does this connect to the Canadian flag?
During the early proposals for a peacekeeping force, Pearson offered to have Canadian troops go into Egypt which the Egyptian government refused because of the Union Jack on the Red Ensign.
It would be hard to argue for peacekeeping when soldier uniforms contained the flag of the nation bombing them.
Pearson then set the goal for an unmistakably Canadian flag distanced from its colonial past.
But he had an obstacle in his path…John Diefenbaker.
And Diefenbaker.
Loooooved.
The Red Ensign.
I consider Dief the Chief to be one of Canada’s finest prime ministers but in my opinion, he went a bit overboard in his hatred of a proposed Canadian flag.
John Diefenbaker, leader of the Progressive Conservatives, became Prime Minister by winning the 1957 federal election, thus ending 22 years of Liberal rule in Canada.
The party would be in power for the next six years but that wouldn’t stop Pearson in his quest for a new flag.
A1958 poll found 80 per cent of Canadians wanted a flag different from any other nation, while 60 per cent of those wanted a flag with a Maple Leaf on it.
By Jan. 27, 1960, Pearson was the Leader of the Liberals and the Official Opposition, and he issued a press release stating quote “Canadian government taking full responsibility as soon as possible for finding a solution to the flag problem by submitting to Parliament a measure which, if accepted by representatives of the people in Parliament, would, I hope, settle the problem.”
Diefenbaker refused to explore the potential for a new flag. and in response Pearson made the new flag part of the Liberal platform in 1961.
By 1962 and the election he integrated it into the election platform.
Due to things like the cancellation of the Avro Arrow program, the Progressive Conservatives were becoming very unpopular and that election year they lost dozens of seats to form a minority government.
Their hold on power was becoming weaker with each passing day and Pearson knew his time was coming and he would be ready when it arrived.
(PAUSE MUSIC TRANSITION).
In February 1963, a three-leaf flag design was leaked to the press, some say by the Liberals themselves.
It was Pearson’s preferred design for the flag and became known as The Pearson Pennant featuring blue bars on either side of three Maple Leaves attached to one stem.
John Matheson, a Parliamentary Secretary, arrived at Pearson’s home in early 1963 to look at the sketches of the three-leaf flag and stated.
“The prime minister studied the sketches produced. Then without any prior advice or warning to me, Beddoe extracted from his briefcase another design with vertical blue bars, which he handed to the prime minister saying, ‘Perhaps you would prefer this flag which conveys the message from sea to sea.”
Once the flag design was leaked, the Progressive Conservatives immediately criticized it.
Opposition to it also came from other people including a ten-year-old boy in Alberta who wrote.
“I don’t like the three maple leaves on the white background, the single maple leaf looks better. As I am only 10, I will have to look at it longer than Mr. Pearson.”
Weeks later, an election was triggered, and Canada once again headed to the polls.
During the 1963 campaign, Pearson promised that if the Liberals were elected, he would bring a new flag to Canada within two years. Pearson wrote in his memoirs,
“The flag was part of a deliberate design to strengthen national unity to improve federal-provincial relations, to devise a more appropriate constitution, and to guard against the wrong kind of American penetration.”
The Liberals won with a minority government on April 8 1963 and immediately set to work on the new flag.
While many Canadians were in favour of it one group who provided the greatest opposition had to be won over.
Veterans.
Through the First and Second World Wars, and Korean War, 111,916 Canadian soldiers died and 228,200 were injured while wearing the Red Ensign.
Veterans did not want to see the flag changed because many believed a change dishonored those that had served but didn’t return.
Pearson could have simply ignored the outcry from veterans, but as a veteran himself he was not about to do that.
He had enlisted as a medical orderly during the First World War, been shipped overseas, and promoted to corporal. He served in southern Europe, Egypt, Serbia and in the Royal Flying Corps during the war.
In the RFC he earned the nickname of Mike from a flight instructor who thought the name Lester was a quote unquote “sissy name”.
He likely would have served longer had he not been hit by a bus while on leave in London.
In contrast, the man who vehemently opposed the new flag, John Diefenbaker, enlisted but never served overseas.
According to his memoirs, Diefenbaker said he was hit by a shovel while training and the injury prevented his service. Oddly, army medical records don’t list an injury.
Meanwhile Pearson took his polished medals to meet veterans and win them over. First, he met with Legions in his own riding before taking his message to a wider audience. On May 17, 1964, the Royal Canadian Legion held its national convention in Winnipeg and Pearson, without consulting his advisors or cabinet, arrived to speak to what he considered the most critical audience possible.
The Legion was very pro-Red Ensign and that year the cover of Legionary magazine carried an image of the Red Ensign with the caption “This is Canada’s Flag: Keep It Flying”.
Pearson knew what was waiting for him and later he said quote.
“I chose this occasion deliberately, though I might easily have arranged to speak to an audience which would have given my views a friendlier reception. I thought, however, that, outside of Parliament, the Legion had the right to be the first to hear my statement. I had no illusions about their reaction for I knew their official views. But I got a fair, if somewhat hostile, hearing. It was naturally a difficult speech to make in the circumstances.” end quote.
Pearson wore his war medals as he walked onto stage to a chorus of boos and heckles from 1,900 veterans in the crowd. The only cheer he received was when he mentioned the Red Ensign at the start of his speech.
Then he said quote
“I believe that today a flag designed around the maple leaf will symbolize, will be a true reflection of the new Canada.”
Which was met with cries of “Who wrote that for you?” and “What do you know?”
As the crowd grew angry Legion president Judge Clare Parling stood up and asked everyone to come to order.
Pearson smiled and said,
“It is all right Mr. Chairman. This is a veterans meeting! As Harry Truman once said, if you can’t stand the heat, keep out of the kitchen.”
The crowd laughed, and the mood settled somewhat.
Pearson reminded the crowd that the Legion had adopted the maple leaf as part of its badge in 1960. quote
“Our troops wore it on their caps and uniforms in the First World War. It appears on the flag of the Canadian army. It appears on our national coat of arms. It appears on the shields of our provinces.”
While there were some cries of anger, Pearson was beginning to win them over.
He knew that the veterans would have more respect for a politician who faced them in a hostile environment, than one who tried to evade them.
Pearson showed the veterans respect, and in return, they started to listen to what he had to say.
He finished off his speech by stating,
“Our ties to the Mother Country do not now include any trace of political subordination. They are ties of affection, of tradition and respect. As a Canadian, I don’t want them destroyed or weakened but they have changed, and the symbols of Canada have also changed with them.”
The convention speech was meant to win over some of his harshest critics and bring the new flag national attention.
Thus began, the Great Canadian Flag Debate.
While the debate over the flag was taking Canada by storm it was met with indifference in Quebec.
The province was in its Quiet Revolution which you might remember from my 2023 in an episode. Quebec was looking for its own identity, one that didn’t include a new Canadian flag.
A professor named Pierre Elliot Trudeau said,
“Quebec does not give a tinker’s dam about the new flag. It is a matter of complete indifference.”
A year later he would be elected to Parliament and became Pearson’s successor as prime minister in 1968.
Meanwhile the idea of a unique Canadian flag was very popular among much of the population, but the supporters of the Red Ensign were not about to go gentle into the night.
They were going to rage, rage against the dying of the light…or the Red Ensign as it were.
On June 1, 1964, supporters gathered on Parliament Hill to demonstrate over the decision to create a new flag. Nearby, a group wanting a new Canadian flag was counter-protesting, and the RCMP stood guard to separate the two groups.
A Red Ensign supporter said,
“See these medals? This shows my husband fought for democracy in the First World War. We are not going to have a flag forced on us by Mr. Pearson.”
Others carried signs that said, “Get Rid of Quebec” and “Down with Press Propaganda”.
That same day Parker Kent, a columnist with the Calgary Herald conducted an informal poll among readers which found that most respondents who wanted to keep the Red Ensign were of Anglo-Saxon descent, with ancestors from the United Kingdom.
Canadians who were descended from areas of Europe were more in favour of something different.
More importantly the poll found support for a new flag outnumbered the Red Ensign two-to-one.
One war veteran wrote,
“I am whole-heartedly for the Red Ensign. After all, I fought a war under it and for it.”
In contrast, another war veteran wrote,
“I fought a war under the swastika, not under the Red Ensign. My side lost to the one under the Red Ensign, so naturally I’d like something different, something distinctly Canadian.”
A flag salesperson in Calgary wrote,
“This flag issue has been a wonderful thing for the country. My sales are way up. I can’t understand it, but I never sold so many Union Jacks and Red Ensigns in the previous five years as I’ve sold in the last two weeks. My suppliers can’t keep up.”
They stated some factories were working double shifts to keep up with the demand for the Red Ensign.
Two days later the Globe and Mail published a letter to the editor that had a different solution to the flag issue.
Paul Ludger of Guelph wrote,
“Consider the possibility of declaring that Canada will be the world’s first nation to commit itself to rationality and be officially flagless. Think of the hope we could offer to the weary millions of the world who are simply sick and tired of nationalism and all the bleating stupidity it entails.”
The idea didn’t exactly take off.
That same day, Prime Minister Pearson met with eight Ottawa journalists to get their opinion on his flag design. He considered it to be an off-the record meeting, but Walter Stewart of the Toronto Star wrote an article about it, while another reporter wrote that Pearson had already chosen the new flag.
These articles served as fuel for the fire under John Diefenbaker and the Progressive Conservatives.
They criticized Pearson for forcing his flag without consultation.
Diefenbaker added in one fiery attack that Pearson had subverted Parliament by personally selecting a flag.
Although most Canadians seemed in favour, they did not want the Pearson Pennant. A poll in August 1964 found that 48 per cent of Canadians liked the pennant, while 41 percent disliked it.
On June 15, 1964, Pearson opened the debate in Parliament with a resolution that stated,
“Establish officially as the flag of Canada, a flag embodying the emblem proclaimed by His Majesty King George V on Nov. 21, 1921, three maple leaves conjoined on one stem, in the colours of red and white, then designated for Canada, the red leaves occupying a field of white between vertical sections of blue on the edges of the flag.”
John Diefenbaker with his booming voice and skill for long speeches stated that if there was to be a flag, it needed to include the quote unquote “founding races” of Canada, which he considered to be English and French settlers.
Indigenous people must have slipped his mind.
Pearson in contrast wanted the flag to honour Canadian history, while also removing colonial symbols that could threaten unity and anger Quebec nationalists.
What happened when the unstoppable force of Pearson met the immovable object of Diefenbaker?
A very long Parliamentary debate.
June turned to July as Diefenbaker held a filibuster with no end in sight.
He stated the Pearson Pennant didn’t honour Canadian traditions, which he stated were British and Christian.
He demanded a referendum on the new flag, which Pearson refused.
Parliamentary sessions were extended through August to keep things moving but it was of no use.
As a compromise, Pearson yielded to creating a special flag committee on Sept. 10, 1964.
This would be a 15-person panel made up of seven Liberals, five Conservatives and one member from the three minor parties in Parliament, which had six weeks to create a new flag.
Herman Maxwell Batten, a Liberal MP from Newfoundland was chosen as the chair.
Liberal MP John Matheson told the press,
“We are going to have a new flag by Christmas. It is going to be a distinctive national flag and it will be based on this historic and proud emblem of Canada, the maple leaf.”
Canadians were asked to submit their designs for a new flag, and they answered the call.
Flags, some good, some okay and some, a bit odd were submitted. Personally, I liked the flag that featured John, Paul, George, and Ringo in the corners, separated by St. George’s Cross.
The Beatles were huge in 1964, so there were a couple of designs featuring the Fab Four.
Over the course of 35 intense meetings members reviewed 3,541 entries or about 100 flags per meeting, averaging a dozen or more per hour.
2,136 featured the maple leaf, 408 featured the Union Jack, 389 had the beaver on it and 359 had the Fleurs-de-lys.
But…as the flag committee’s deadline drew near a historian, Rhodes Scholar, and Second World War veteran was quietly putting together his idea for a flag.
George Stanley was born in Calgary in 1907. He went to Oxford, earned a Doctorate in Philosophy, and won the Spengler Cup with the Oxford Ice Hockey Team.
While at Oxford, he wrote his first book, the Birth of Western Canada: A History of the Riel Rebellions. During the Second World War, he served as an infantry training officer and military historian, eventually reaching the rank of Lt. Colonel.
After the war, he taught history at the University of Columbia and the Royal Military College.
While standing outside the Mackenzie Building, he looked up and saw the college flag flying in the wind which features two red bars on either side, and in the middle, there is an armor-clad arm holding three maple leaves under a crown.
Suddenly, a lightbulb went on.
Stanley had been following the whole flag issue for months.
On March 23, 1964, wrote to John Matheson stating that a new flag had to avoid national and racial symbols that could be seen as divisive in nature.
He considered a flag carrying the Union Jack or Fleur-de-lys inadvisable.
He submitted his design a week before the deadline. Two red bars on either side of a red maple leaf.
The only difference between what he designed, and the current flag is that his leaf had 13 points while the current one has 11.
Most of the members of the committee loved it, and it quickly became the top choice.
It was between the Pearson Pennant and the Stanley flag.
On Oct. 22, 1964, a series of votes were held. followed by some very impressive political maneuvering by the Liberals.
The first vote was for a referendum on the flag. It was put forward by the Progressive Conservatives on the committee and defeated nine to five.
The next vote for the creation of a national flag passed 14 to 0.
The third vote was on whether the Red Ensign should be the national flag which was defeated 10 to 4.
The last vote was for a new flag.
The Progressive Conservatives assumed that the Liberals would vote for the Pearson Pennant, but Pearson anticipated this.
He wanted an overwhelming vote in favour, so The Liberals spoke to the other parties on the committee; they all agreed on the Stanley flag.
When the vote came up, the Progressive Conservatives voted for it, assuming there would be a split.
They were quite shocked to see everyone’s vote for the Stanley design.
The Progressive Conservatives had been outfoxed.
In 1990, an actor playing MP John Matheson portrayed this moment in a Heritage Minute.
When John Diefenbaker heard about what had transpired, he was furious.
He told the press that the new flag looked too much like the flag of Peru quote.
“If we ever get that flag, we would have the Peruvians saluting it.”
The committee had chosen a flag, but it still had to make its way through Parliament and that wasn’t going to be an easy task.
As soon as it went up for debate, Diefenbaker launched a filibuster that lasted six weeks. It became one of the longest filibusters in Canadian history and was described as one of the ugliest debate periods in the history of the House of Commons.
During those six weeks, the Conservatives gave 210 speeches, more than double the amount of speeches given by the Liberals, NDP and Social Credit combined.
Diefenbaker’s furious opposition would prove to be his undoing.
With each passing day, the patience of Canadians everywhere was put to the test.
The year was coming to an end, and many simply wanted the whole debate put to rest. Some even felt the Progressive Conservatives were holding Parliament ransom.
There was growing unrest within Diefenbaker’s own ranks.
George Nowlan, a Progressive Conservative MP from Nova Scotia said,
“The Liberals have got to use closure to get us off the hook. We can’t just quit; our people would never forgive us.”
Pearson did not invoke closure as his party had done during the Trans-Canada Pipeline debate in 1957, which led to Diefenbaker’s election victory.
Pearson knew if he waited long enough, someone would break.
And that is exactly what happened.
On Dec. 9, 1964 Leon Balcer, the high-ranking Quebec lieutenant, and deputy leader of the Progressive Conservatives had had enough, and he invited the Liberals to invoke closure.
The Liberals gladly accepted and forced a vote.
On Dec. 15, a motion of closure passed by 152 to 85 and at2:15 a.m. Balcer and the other Progressive Conservatives from Quebec voted in line with the Liberals and the committee’s recommendation of the Red Maple Leaf.
Canada’s new flag passed 163 to 78.
Then the House of Commons stood up and sang O Canada, but Diefenbaker and two other Progressive Conservative MPs remained seated and loudly sang God Save The Queen instead.
Soon after the vote, Matheson wrote to Stanley quote,
“Your proposed flag has now been approved by the Commons 163 to 78. Congratulations, I believe it is an excellent flag that will serve Canada well.”
But Diefenbaker, defiant to the end, said,
“A flag by closure, imposed by closure.”
In his journal on Dec. 21, 1964, Diefenbaker wrote,
“The Progressive Conservative party, Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, stood alone in the House of Commons against the removal of the Union Jack from Canada’s national flag. We fought for what we believed was right. We have lost.”
The break by Balcer never healed. He had served with the Progressive Conservatives since 1949 and held three cabinet portfolios under Prime Minister Diefenbaker.
None of that mattered. He left the party stating there was no place for a French Canadian and sat as an independent until 1965 when he chose not to run for re-election.
As for the new flag? It was approved on Dec. 17, 1964 in the Canadian Senate by a vote of 38-23.
Diefenbaker said to Pearson,
“You have done more to divide the country than any other prime minister.”
That may be an exaggeration, but it really was a divisive issue for many.
To get the flag approved by the end of the month, the House of Commons sat for 248 days, double the amount of time Parliament usually sat for and a good portion of that time was devoted to the Great Canadian Flag Debate.
On Jan. 28, 1965, Queen Elizabeth II approved the Maple Leaf flag by signing a royal proclamation, while Diefenbaker and Pearson were in London attending the funeral of Sir Winston Churchill.
The flag was inaugurated at an official ceremony on Parliament Hill in the presence of the prime minister, the Governor General, cabinet members and other Canadian MPs on Feb. 15, 1965. Photo of the day show Diefenbaker shedding a single tear as the flag went up the flagpole.
Pearson once again wore his medals from the First World War, to show the Anglophone war veterans who opposed the flag that he was one of them.
Matheson said the new flag was,
“The handiwork of many loving hands, extended over a long period of Canada’s history.”
According to Pearson’s wife Maryon, the new flag being raised on Parliament Hill was her husbands’ proudest moment as prime minister.
On Feb. 15, 1996, Prime Minister Jean Chretien celebrated the first National Flag Day of Canada.
In his speech, he said,
“The maple leaf flag pays homage to our geography, reflects the grandeur of our history and represents our national identity. Our flag thus honours Canadians of all origins who through their courage and determination, have helped to build and are continuing to build our great country, a dynamic country that is open to the future. Let us be proud of our flag. Let us recognize how privileged we are to live in Canada, this magnificent country that encompasses our history, our hopes, our future.”
The Red Ensign hasn’t disappeared. It can still be found in connection with some veterans’ organizations and both Ontario and Manitoba’s flags use versions of the Red Ensign on their provincial flags.
And if you want a Canadian flag that has flown over Parliament itself, you can get one free of charge, but the waiting list is a bit long, if you put your name in now you should receive the flag by 2124.
There is one more part to this story, and it comes from the man who hated the new flag.
John Diefenbaker.
The Great Canadian Flag Debate was the beginning of the end for John Diefenbaker.
After losing the 1965 election, a coup in his own party led to his ousting as leader in 1967, and he was replaced by former Nova Scotia premier Robert Stanfield.
For the next 12 years, Diefenbaker sat as a backbencher which is nearly unheard of in Canadian history.
On Aug. 16, 1979, Diefenbaker died, having outlived Pearson by seven years.
In a funeral he had planned down to the smallest detail, Diefenbaker’s body lay in state in the Hall of Honour in Parliament for two and a half days while 10,000 Canadians walked past.
Then began a slow journey by train to his final resting place in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.
And when his casket was lowered into the ground, it was draped in the Canadian Maple Leaf flag.
But…
Just over top of that flag, was the Red Ensign.
Information from Canadian Encyclopedia, Canadas History, Wikipedia, CBC, Canada.ca, RCINet.ca, Macleans, The Flags Of Canada, CRWflags.com
