Another regional flag flap unfurls in Southwestern Ontario

A push to restrict flag-flying on civic property to government flags is headed to politicians in Chatham-Kent, just as it is on the other side of Southwestern Ontario.

A showdown over the issue looms next week in Norwich Township, where one civic politician is pushing for a ban on all but government flags on civic property while another is asking the five-member council to get behind another motion, apparently contradictory, declaring June as Pride month in the Oxford County community.

Now, another flap is unfurling in Chatham-Kent, two hours to the west, where another politician is pushing a government flags-only motion.

In an area of ​​Ontario where there’s been backlash to the Pride flag and headline-grabbing acts of vandalism, it may look like a blanket move to keep the LGBTQ community’s banner from flying.

But a social conservative on Chatham-Kent council who’s behind the latest motion insists she has nothing against any group, including the gay community, and that, if anything, she was motivated after a move by a local anti-abortion group to have its flag flown apparently fell on deaf ears.

“They had not received any response. That prompted me to do the motion,” said Coun. Rhonda Jubenville, who represents a largely rural ward on council.

She also ran in last year’s Ontario election for the New Blue Party, a socially conservative upstart on the political right.

“It’s being seen that I’m discriminating against other special interest groups. That wasn’t my intent. . . I am supportive of all flags,” she said.

“If there was a pro-choice flag — I don’t know if that even exists, but if there was — I’m OK with a pro-choice flag going up.”

Flying the Pride flag has become a fixture in many Canadian communities, a symbol of inclusion and celebration of the LGBTQ community that’s traditionally observed in June.

But pushback against gay pride declarations and the rainbow flag — including moves to ban all but official government flags — have flared in pockets of Southwestern Ontario for decades, most infamously in the mid-1990s when Dianne Haskett, then mayor of London, refused to issue a Pride proclamation or allow the rainbow flag to be raised at city hall.

Two years later, the Ontario Human Rights Commission ruled Haskett and the city had discriminated against the LGBTQ community and fined the city $10,000.

Last year, hate graffiti targeting the LGBTQ community was sprayed at the back of a gay couple’s Stratford restaurant and Norwich made headlines when several Pride flags were stolen or vandalized.

Later, some Norwich residents smoked after a man charged with stealing a Pride flag — the charge was later withdrawn — was allowed to address a council meeting where he compared the LGBTQ symbol to something out of Nazi Germany.

With symbols looming so large in today’s politics, municipalities should have a transparent policy about flag-raisings, said a retired political and public administration professor from Toronto Metropolitan University, who believes society is in a “charged moment” with respect to social issues.

“We know that cultural politics. . . are extraordinarily contentious these days,” said Myer Siemiatycki.

“It could relate to any number of issues and questions, including gender identity and perceptions of past historical wrongs. Any number of these culture wars can be fought over signs and symbols.”

Even the NHL is grappling with such issues, he said, including some players not wanting to take part in Pride-themed nights.

Restricting flag-flying by municipalities is a “default option” to contain controversy, he said, but it also can leave out many worthy causes.

Jubenville wants Chatham-Kent council to back her motion Monday to limit flag-flying at Chatham-Kent’s civic complex and all its other sites to the Canadian, Ontario and municipal flags.

Flags for other groups and movements have been flown in the past, but others haven’t been allowed, she maintains. Under her motion, allowing only government flags would “avoid controversy and discrimination while encouraging inclusion of all Chatham-Kent residents.”

“This motion had nothing to do with Pride. It had nothing to do with anybody,” she said, insisting she wouldn’t support any flag that promotes hatred or violence.

But the head of a local umbrella group for the LGBTQ community said while a flag-flying policy makes better sense than just approving any flag requests that come along, it’s “short-sighted” to ban all community group flags.

“(The motion) is an all-or-nothing thing, and I think that’s a dangerous stance to take,” said Marianne Willson, president of CK Pride.

Approving all flags also is a slippery slope, she noted, citing as an example any banner that would question women’s legal reproductive rights.

“Equality is not equity,” said Willson.

“I think the motion should be defeated. I think a new motion should be introduced that a flag policy is developed to have the parameters to apply a social justice lens, so that it complies with the Canadian Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms,” she said.

In the meantime, she said, Chatham-Kent should stick with allowing the mayor’s office to make flag-flying decisions, and any group that asks for one should get a response.

Chatham County. Brock McGregor said he supports flag-raisings in Chatham-Kent, and that “abandoning this important symbolic action would be a mistake.”

He said he also believes in adopting a policy to ensure flags align with a civic commitment “to promote human rights, diversity, inclusion, equity and justice.”

“It is clear that flag-raisings should not be used to promote violence, hate, or to diminish or curtail a specific group’s rights. A policy, with this as a focus, is anti-discriminatory,” McGregor said.