Soldiers and rescue personnel are silhouetted against a Canadian flag prior to a speech by then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper, in 2011, in Resolute, Nvt.Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press
- Title: Flags of Canada
- Author: Stephen J. Harper
- Genre: Non-fiction
- Publisher: Sutherland House
- Pages: 82
Stephen Harper inherited his fascination with vexillology, the study of flags, from his father, Joseph. In this, his third book, Canada’s 22nd prime minister puts his passion on paper. Over just 82 pages (plus illustrations), he describes the evolution of the flags of New France and of British North America, and recounts the century-long debate that eventually produced the Maple Leaf, which celebrated its 60th anniversary on Feb. 15.
In telling these stories, Harper is also telling the story of Canada. For, as he observes, any debate over a flag is really a debate “about identity, history and the collective narratives in which one believed.”
And yet, Flags of Canada is devoid of flag-waving, and is not a celebration of the Maple Leaf, one of the world’s most easily identifiable and attractive national emblems. Some might have hoped for something more rousing in these troubled days.
Harper also avoids, for the most part, praising or condemning the various banners that have represented the country. Past narratives, he observes, “have portrayed the advocates of certain designs as heroes, while those preferring other designs come across as villains or deluded naysayers. These caricatures are a disservice to history.”
Instead, he sticks to the facts as to why each flag once represented a particular place and time, only to give way to another, and then another. Although the author offers his own thoughts on the appropriateness of certain choices, any opinions are carefully considered: “A worthy opinion should have the facts as a minimum benchmark,” he writes. I leave it to the reader to decide whether that statement alludes to a certain politician south of the border.
Harper observes that the banner grasped by the unicorn on Canada’s coat of arms is not, in fact, the flag of France in the years before the British conquest of New France. There was no national French flag at that time, France being more the realm of its absolutist monarch than a nation as we understand the term today. Its kings used different flags for different occasions, though one increasingly used in both France and New France was the Pavillon blanc, a white ensign, or naval flag, with or without additions of fleurs-de-lis or the royal shield.
While there is much debate over what flags flew and when in New France, “what we do know is that the inhabitants of New France clearly identified white as their national colour,” Harper writes, just as red was seen as the national colour of the English. These identifications would greatly influence the debate over the national flag centuries later.
Both before and after Confederation, British North America mostly used two flags: the Union Jack and variations of the Red Ensign. Prime minister John A. Macdonald advocated for the latter as the de facto national banner of the new dominion, and it flew above Parliament with his blessing. Canadian troops fought under the Red Ensign in two world wars, and the Government of Canada used the flag at international events and on buildings overseas.
But there were, as there always are, divisions. One concerned what should be included in the flag’s shield. Another was whether the Red Ensign should be subordinate to the Union Jack, which many lovers of the British Empire preferred.
And Quebec’s position continually shifted. When the Union Jack was favoured, French Canada preferred the Red Ensign. When the Red Ensign was favoured, Quebec rejected its British heritage. When debate heightened in the 1960s over what a new national flag should look like, Quebeckers shrugged, insisting only that it contain no British symbols.
Lester Pearson campaigned to be Liberal prime minister on the promise of delivering a new flag for Canada, and after he won introduced such legislation in 1964. His proposed design consisted of three maple leaves on a white background with blue bars on either side (“from sea to sea”). Conservative leader John Diefenbaker passionately opposed the Pearson pennant, as it was quickly dubbed, and filibustered the legislation until, in frustration, the prime minister sent the matter to a Parliamentary committee.
The final choice came down to the Pearson pennant and another candidate, a variation on the flag used at the Royal Military College. That proposal featured a single red maple leaf on a white background with red bars on each side.
In the final secret ballot the Conservatives on the committee voted for the red-and-white flag to prevent unanimous support for the Pearson pennant. Unbeknownst to them, the Liberals had decided to also vote for the maple leaf design.
Diefenbaker, however, was still opposed to it, and the debate continued in the House until his own Quebec MPs rebelled against him. The old leader wept when the new flag was raised on Parliament Hill.
(Those who want to read a more detailed account of the flag debate should seek out a copy of I Stand for Canada: The Story of the Maple Leaf Flag, by Rick Archbold, which was published in 2002.)
Harper regrets that the Union Jack, and not the Red Ensign, was designated as the country’s secondary flag. As for the Maple Leaf itself, “my own perception, witnessing the flag of Canada flying at international institutions and world events, is that it holds up very well against the range of national flags. Its pattern is strong, unique, and rooted in history.”
The book ends with Harper considering the possibility that future generations may seek to make changes to the banner. He thinks that unlikely. “It seems that the flag of Canada is as likely to endure as the country itself.”
Long may it wave.