City hall wraps itself in flag of murkiness

So city hall has run its new policy on flag raisings and proclamations up the proverbial flagpole. Has anyone saluted?

Last week, council voted unanimously to adopt a new policy to determine who gets to fly their flag at one of three guest flagpoles at city hall.

The new policy prohibits “controversial” flags and proclamations, as well as those that are “politically and religiously motivated.”

Council will no longer decide on flag raisings or proclamations. That duty falls to city clerk Joanne Sproule, who might be considered for a raise in this month’s budget deliberations just based on this extra duty.

Rejections can be appealed to council under the new policy, but the clerk’s office must navigate the granting or rejection of requests.

The bureaucrats in the clerk’s office must now decide what is controversial, as well as what is motivated by religion or politics. That’s probably not in any employee’s job description, capable as Sproule and her staff are.

Depending on how this policy is interpreted, it could reduce the flags and proclamations to diseases of the week.

Smaller Saskatchewan cities like Prince Albert and Yorkton have ceased the practice of offering a guest flag, although Yorkton is hammering out a new policy.

Saskatoon’s new policy stems from the rejection last year of a request from a pro-life or anti-abortion (depending on your point of view) group for a proclamation and possible flag raising.

Council moved to mass approval of proclamations and flag raisings 25 years ago after a tied vote resulted in the rejection of a request to fly the Pride flag.

The policy in place since 1978 referred solely to proclamations and contained only a few common-sense restrictions, like promoting hatred or illegal activity and containing libellous or obscene statements.

It’s easy to see why religion was included in the rewrite, because the city wanted to avoid the possibility of a flag with a cartoon fetus begging for life flying at city hall.

Prince Albert delayed flying the flag of a prolife group in 2017. That resulted in a successful lawsuit and the city was ordered in June to pay the group $6,000 for unequal treatment.

But does the community in Saskatoon support excluding religious flags and proclamations? The policy was drafted by the city solicitor’s office with no mention in the report of public consultation.

Would that mean Indigenous pipe ceremonies or dancing would not be allowed at city hall? Or does the phrase “religiously motivated” refer only to the flag or proclamation, thus allowing ceremonies with religious components once the request has been approved?

It’s also interesting to note the new policy prohibits the approval of requests that contravene the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms — which includes the guarantee of freedom of religion.

It will be interesting to see if those two clauses collide one day.

As for deciding which requests are politically motivated, that looks like another minefield.

Though few reasonable people oppose the Pride flag or related proclamations, some could see it as politically motivated. The issue of same-sex marriage featured prominently in this fall’s federal election campaign, for example.

Among the proclamations approved last week, for presumably the last time by council, were those for Restorative Justice Week and United Nations Day, which also included a flag request.

Were those politically motivated? Does the city clerk’s office possess telepathic powers to assess the thinking of the people behind requests?

As for the prohibition on granting requests that are deemed “controversial, contentious or divisive in the community,” that presents similar issues for interpretation.

The downtown bike lanes debate could be described by those words, so a cycling flag or proclamation could be interpreted as violating the policy.

That seems ridiculous, for sure, but the original change from 25 years ago was intended to remove from municipal government the responsibility of weighing the merits of requests.

City hall may find that ending proclamations and flag raisings remains the only way to be fair to all.