# Canada 150th Anniversary of Confederation Medal



## CCCB (22 Aug 2016)

Having lurked these forum for many years, I am fairly confident I know what the response will be; however, I did a search and turned up no results on the subject.

What are everyone's thoughts on the government's decision to not continue the tradition of issuing a commemorative medal on the occasion of the nation's 150th Anniversary next year?  

The Centennial medal (1967) was issued by a Liberal government, with the 125th (1992) medal being issued by a Conservative government.  Sounds bipartisan enough?  What makes the 150th different?

Let's spare the 'Why isn't the Army buying boots?!?!' or 'The Jubilee medals were unfairly administered!!!!' comments if we can, since these awards are not administered by the military until they're approved in the first place, which the 150th hasn't been.


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Aug 2016)

Fair enough.  Personally, I don't feel the need for a meaningless "gimmie" medal for myself.


----------



## Lightguns (22 Aug 2016)

67 was a general issue, 92 was issued to generals, LOL.  Seriously, who cares, they should have one every 100 years and that's it.  The centennial was fine and correct, the 125 was political.


----------



## George Wallace (22 Aug 2016)

Well......Speculation did start way back in 2011:



			
				dapaterson said:
			
		

> "Fiasco" is such a... well... appropriate word.
> 
> On the plus side, we've also got 2017 to look forward to, for the "Canada 150" medal that will go alongside the Canada 125 medal, no doubt.


----------



## Journeyman (23 Aug 2016)

CCCB said:
			
		

> Having lurked these forum for many years, I am fairly confident I know what the response will be; however.....


I'm curious what you believe the response will be.... _and why_   (I'm inquisitive that way)     op:


----------



## kratz (23 Aug 2016)

Maybe the government doesn't want Justin Beiber to wear more bling than elected officials after the 150 celebration.   [


----------



## CCCB (23 Aug 2016)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm curious what you believe the response will be.... _and why_   (I'm inquisitive that way)     op:



Well, as with any long-standing forums with a small-ish but dedicated membership who are all from (broadly) the same societal demographic (in this case the military), people tend to hold similar opinions and values.  That creates a bit of an echo chamber.  The majority of posts from the Diamond Jubilee thread exemplify what I was referring to:

Generally:

- "This is a waste of money, I want boots!!!"

- "I don't care about tradition, the army needs to focus on modernizing!!!!"

- "The buttons and bows brigade are at it again!!!!"

- "These medals are badly administered!  When I was a Cpl only the CO, RSM and his homies got them!!!"

And variations thereof, etc, etc.  

Since it appears the medal is not being awarded, we can all agree it isn't a waste of money.  I would contend that it wouldn't be a waste of money if it were awarded, and no, I don't need a "gimme medal" either.  I'm just acutely aware of a tradition being snuffed for what appears to be a political reason.  

It also bears mentioning that everything "buttons and bows" comes from a separate pot of money than boots (or the B fleet, or any number of our collective procurement ailments....), and is executed by a separate branch within the staff system.  I've never understood the chorus of calls for "re-prioritization" here when a topic similar to this comes up, as if a large enterprise such as defence can't have simultaneous and independent priorities.

I was curious what people's thoughts were on the rationale behind that decision (when the history of Centennial medals would suggest they are bipartisan), and was hoping we could move beyond the usual talking points.


----------



## Lightguns (23 Aug 2016)

All money comes from the taxpayer, regardless of which pot our political masters put the money in.  Like I said, 100 years is fine.  Every 25 years IS a waste of money, regardless of where the money comes from.


----------



## Ludoc (23 Aug 2016)

CCCB said:
			
		

> Having lurked these forum for many years, I am fairly confident I know what the response will be; however, I did a search and turned up no results on the subject.
> 
> What are everyone's thoughts on the government's decision to not continue the tradition of issuing a commemorative medal on the occasion of the nation's 150th Anniversary next year?
> 
> The Centennial medal (1967) was issued by a Liberal government, with the 125th (1992) medal being issued by a Conservative government.  Sounds bipartisan enough?  What makes the 150th different?


I hardly think doing something twice in 150 years constitutes a tradition.


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Aug 2016)

CCCB said:
			
		

> Well, as with any long-standing forums with a small-ish but dedicated membership who are all from (broadly) the same societal demographic (in this case the military), people tend to hold similar opinions and values.  That creates a bit of an echo chamber.  The majority of posts from the Diamond Jubilee thread exemplify what I was referring to:
> 
> Generally:
> 
> ...



Seeing as you've been around here for a while and have observed the usual tone and content, I am curious as to why you thought you might get different responses than you see here.


----------



## dapaterson (23 Aug 2016)

Ludoc said:
			
		

> I hardly think doing something twice in 150 years constitutes a tradition.



Clearly, you're not in the Navy.   >


----------



## CCCB (23 Aug 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Seeing as you've been around here for a while and have observed the usual tone and content, I am curious as to why you thought you might get different responses than you see here.



Why endeavor to have a constructive, structured discussion on something pertinent to the members of this forums?


----------



## CombatMacguyver (23 Aug 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Fair enough.  Personally, I don't feel the need for a meaningless "gimmie" medal for myself.



I.... I.... wouldn't mind one....  [

 [


----------



## George Wallace (23 Aug 2016)

CCCB said:
			
		

> Why endeavor to have a constructive, structured discussion on something pertinent to the members of this forums?




 ???

Ah!  It is only a constructive, structured discussion if the members of the forum feel it is as pertinent as you do.  I understand.  Finding the idea frivolous, trivial and a waste of time and resources does not fall into an acceptable form of discussion in your eyes.


----------



## Remius (23 Aug 2016)

The last few commemorative medals caused nothing but derision, division and sadly lowered the worth of those medals by the way they were handed out.  If anything, the CAF has proven that it isn't mature enough to come up with a merit based system worth anyone's salt to hand these out.  Some people did indeed deserve them but because of how they were divided up (gender, time in rank or whatever) the whole thing became a laughing stock. 

If the CAF wants commemorative medals make them CAF specific and with specific criteria.  

Ex: Vimy 100th commemorative medal.  All serving army and air force personnel actively serving on the anniversary date of the battle of Vimy Ridge, or all Army and Airforce members currently serving in units with Vimy battle honour (medal can only be worn while serving with said unit).  Or whatever.

Trying to make these commemorative medals merit based opens too many cans of worms. 

Or make them available for purchase and people can buy them as keep sakes not to be worn on uniforms.  

Or coins, why can't we just get coins.

Overall though I'm not too worked up about the Liberal's decision to axe this.


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Aug 2016)

CombatMacgyver said:
			
		

> I.... I.... wouldn't mind one....  [
> 
> [



NP mate, I won't hold it against you.   :nod:


----------



## Journeyman (23 Aug 2016)

CCCB said:
			
		

> I was curious what people's thoughts were on the rationale behind that decision ....and was hoping we could move beyond the usual talking points.


I'm afraid those are mutually exclusive hopes, given that a significant percentage of people here apparently disagree with you.  You don't want to hear from them -- the "echo chamber" -- you want to hear from people who agree that we need to create more meaningless bling.  

This is apparently more critical since you believe 'traditions are being snuffed'.... based on politics.... especially in the realm of uniform accoutrements.  Somehow, despite being a long-time lurker, you've missed discussions on new/old rank badges, Div patches, etc, etc (plus that rockin' 1812 pin, although that doesn't qualify as a heartlessly crushed tradition, merely a waste of effort).


But if you want a non-echo chamber point, I'd offer that the _only_  reason for not going ahead with this medal would be to avoid upsetting some special-interest group:  Anyone who sees this as smacking of militarism?  Québec?   :dunno:   It certainly isn't because the Liberals have suddenly discovered fiscal responsibility.


----------



## Lightguns (23 Aug 2016)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I'm afraid those are mutually exclusive hopes, given that a significant percentage of people here apparently disagree with you.  You don't want to hear from them -- the "echo chamber" -- you want to hear from people who agree that we need to create more meaningless bling.
> 
> This is apparently more critical since you believe 'traditions are being snuffed'.... based on politics.... especially in the realm of uniform accoutrements.  Somehow, despite being a long-time lurker, you've missed discussions on new/old rank badges, Div patches, etc, etc (plus that rockin' 1812 pin, although that doesn't qualify as a heartlessly crushed tradition, merely a waste of effort).
> 
> ...



Light just went on!  This is the best reasoning I heard yet.  This current crowd has set a course of being seen as non militaristic, bring the kiddies along for honour guard inspections, ignoring the salutes of air crew when departing the Liberal Holiday Air 1.  Yes, there is an anti military air about them.


----------



## medicineman (23 Aug 2016)

Isn't the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result?  For example - lurking here, listening to us and our pretty singular opinion on the subject, and then asking about something in the same vein...:evil:

MM


----------



## brihard (23 Aug 2016)

These random commemoration medals are silly. They don't end up getting awarded in any manner that ultimately gives them a generally accepted meaning. Why make jubilee / birthday medals and hand them out on on a pretext of 'merit but without any real oversight or accountability? We already have a lot of excellent options for recognizing meritorious service from commendations at various levels up to decorations and the order of military merit. All it takes is a modest amount of staff work and some patience. Maybe leadership at all levels should be more encouraged and supported in using our existing honours system rather than waiting for a frebie medal that they can hand out like a sticker sheet of gold stars.

Just my two cents...


----------



## mariomike (23 Aug 2016)

CCCB said:
			
		

> I'm just acutely aware of a tradition being snuffed for what appears to be a political reason.



I don't follow party politics, but it's nice to see someone started a new medal ( real or imaginary ) thread! Because the Queen's Diamond Jubilee Super Thread is stalled after only 23 pages.


----------



## McG (23 Aug 2016)

CCCB said:
			
		

> It also bears mentioning that everything "buttons and bows" comes from a separate pot of money than boots (or the B fleet, or any number of our collective procurement ailments....), and is executed by a separate branch within the staff system.


Wrong.  CAF "buttons and bows" comes from vote 1 or vote 5 money; there is not a special appropriation from parliament for this.  If DND allocates money to a fashion project, that is money that DND could have allocated to operational equipment.  The project is also executed by the same staff who could be working on operational clothing (either introducing something new or averting the constant stock-out that seems to happen with in-service clothing).  DSSPM is the staff responsible for all clothing, PPE, individual kit, and "buttons and bows" for the entirety of the CAF.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Aug 2016)

We'll likely be doing this all over again in a few(?) years with a Coronation Medal. :


----------



## Lightguns (23 Aug 2016)

recceguy said:
			
		

> We'll likely be doing this all over again in a few(?) years with a Coronation Medal. :



Darn, gonna miss that one.  But of course there will not be enough to go around.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (23 Aug 2016)

Start sucking up to your local MP or MPP. They each get 100 to hand out as baubles to their faithful.  ;D


----------



## Lightguns (23 Aug 2016)

recceguy said:
			
		

> Start sucking up to your local MP or MPP. They each get 100 to hand out as baubles to their faithful.  ;D



Funny story, Bud Bird, PCon, my MP at the time was defeated a year later.  My neighbour, at the time, cleaned his building, she comes home with 2 125 medals that were in the trash of his office clean out.  She pawned them for 25 bucks each.  I guess he couldn't find enough people to like! 

Fixed the political affiliation


----------



## Eye In The Sky (23 Aug 2016)

MEDALS should be given out for things like this.  Or this.

Earned thru some act, deed, sacrifice, something like that.

The "125 gong" and things like that aren't true medals (to most of us, at least, that I know).  We have a different name for them.

_Shit-nickels_.

The worst thing about shit-nickels?  If someone can get enough of them, when they're standing in DEU on Remembrance Day, things like that, Joe and Jane Public see them the same as someone wearing GCSs with 2 bars, a SWASM and a MMV, for example.  But the "gong wearer" might have on the 125, 2 of the QJs and a CD.  Add a "safe driving" pin and voila.   ^-^

I don't and won't have the biggest rack on any parade I'm ever on, but I'm proud to say I also won't be wearing anything like a 125 or hopefully, 150 gong.  If they do come out with them, give mine to Bieber or some kid who made a cool science project.

 :2c:


----------



## mrcpu (29 Aug 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Fair enough.  Personally, I don't feel the need for a meaningless "gimmie" medal for myself.


I agree.  A medal should be earned not randomly handed out.  

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk


----------



## PuckChaser (29 Aug 2016)

We should look at getting rid of the OMM then... seems more like an attaboy for being promoted to Colonel in a lot of cases.


----------



## medicineman (29 Aug 2016)

I guess if you stick around long enough to make it to Col (for some - there are many out there I feel earned it), isn't that considered merit enough?

MM


----------



## Ostrozac (29 Aug 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> We should look at getting rid of the OMM then... seems more like an attaboy for being promoted to Colonel in a lot of cases.



No, the OMM has an important role -- I confess that I do enjoy it when the GG publicly strips membership of the order following a senior officer's court martial. It fills a role in my life that I suspect in a previous time would have been filled by attending public executions.


----------



## Lightguns (29 Aug 2016)

Ostrozac said:
			
		

> No, the OMM has an important role -- I confess that I do enjoy it when the GG publicly strips membership of the order following a senior officer's court martial. It fills a role in my life that I suspect in a previous time would have been filled by attending public executions.



Yeah me too, I get that.


----------



## Journeyman (29 Aug 2016)

Ostrozac said:
			
		

> No, the OMM has an important role -- I confess that I do enjoy it when the GG publicly strips membership of the order following a senior officer's court martial. It fills a role in my life that I suspect in a previous time would have been filled by attending public executions.


That's not a very good argument for keeping the OMM;  however, I can see it as justification for bringing back public executions.     :nod:


----------



## trigger324 (29 Aug 2016)

I've always heard guys I work(ed) with bitch about and/or make fun of the US Military for giving way too many ribbons and medals out for useless things. Wouldn't this kinda be the same, that Canada's giving out useless medals with no real meaning? I'm talking about Jubilee medals too, for example.

That, of course, if they were giving this medal out.


----------



## mariomike (29 Aug 2016)

trigger said:
			
		

> That, of course, if they were giving this medal out.



Got to admit, for an imaginary medal, this is turning into a pretty good thread!


----------



## Haggis (29 Aug 2016)

If I mount an imaginary medal on my rack and wear it on parade, is that a service offence?


----------



## Jed (29 Aug 2016)

Haggis said:
			
		

> If I mount an imaginary medal on my rack and wear it on parade, is that a service offence?



Not if you wear it on the right breast.


----------



## MARS (29 Aug 2016)

[quote author=slayer/raptor ]

7 medals and not one of them a deployment one...plus the St-John commendations.
[/quote]

A bronze SSI, so more time at sea than a lot of folks in the navy. How much sea time you got there, pal?


----------



## slayer/raptor (29 Aug 2016)

MARS said:
			
		

> A bronze SSI, so more time at sea than a lot of folks in the navy. How much sea time you got there, pal?



Just 410 days on two tours, one of them on a combat mission, in 8 years. Oh and all my countless days in the field being in the combat arms... I'm sorry the army doesn't give out badges for days out in the field. 

And for the record, you turned this into a "us vs. them" pal. I merely pointed out someone who had 7 medals without one deployment.


----------



## PuckChaser (29 Aug 2016)

slayer/raptor said:
			
		

> I'm sorry the army doesn't give out badges for days out in the field.



Not days, only 8 hours out of 24 at sea or anchor counts. They also realized not enough bling went around on the first go for SSI issues, so they halved the requirements for them a year or so ago to make sure there was enough bling to go around.

You might have stumbled on the reason why the RCN wanted SSI. Bling to show deployments that aren't going to named Ops. They disregarded the fact that we don't normally award people medals for doing things like RIMPAC.


----------



## Monsoon (30 Aug 2016)

slayer/raptor said:
			
		

> And for the record, you turned this into a "us vs. them" pal. I merely pointed out someone who had 7 medals without one deployment without one deployment for which a medal was authorized.


FTFY


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Aug 2016)

It might be more egalitarian to award a medal for going 'days without access to a shower'. 

But then that would mean box loads would automatically be handed out to Phase III Infantry Officers....


----------



## Furniture (30 Aug 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Not days, only 8 hours out of 24 at sea or anchor counts. They also realized not enough bling went around on the first go for SSI issues, so they halved the requirements for them a year or so ago to make sure there was enough bling to go around.
> 
> You might have stumbled on the reason why the RCN wanted SSI. Bling to show deployments that aren't going to named Ops. They disregarded the fact that we don't normally award people medals for doing things like RIMPAC.



If you're going to say mean things about the Navy get the story straight. The first level of the SSI was reduced from 365 days to 180 days, all other level remain at full year increments. To put this in perspective, I have been sailing for 4 years on the left coast with two 8 1/2 month deployments as well as several sets of WUPS, MIDPAC/SOCAL Oiler, and trials. I am still 100 days short of two years for my Bronze SSI with all that time away. 

To the point of the thread, if someone deserves recognition for their hard work we should be awarding one of the merit awards that already exist. Handing out jubilee/anniversary medals as a reward for a good job is a lazy way to recognize our people.


----------



## Stoker (30 Aug 2016)

I can't imagine another service member who would disparage another for the medals they wear either if they are operational or non operational. That naval officer in the picture probably had a rewarding and interesting career, who cares what medals he is wearing or not wearing.

I consider my career pretty rewarding with a CD1 and OSM and that's with 2100 sea days and many more not counted. If the government decides to issue said medal then don't wear the thing and not disparage the ones that do.


----------



## slayer/raptor (30 Aug 2016)

I suppose I should comment on the actual topic of this thread. I disagree with the fact that we are not getting a 150th medal. I think commemorative medals have their place. The Diamond Jubilee medal was not bad, it was just poorly executed by Canada. I say Canada because I feel the Brits got it right where they gave it to ALL members of the armed forces that had at least 5 years in.


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Aug 2016)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Not days, only 8 hours out of 24 at sea or anchor counts. They also realized not enough bling went around on the first go for SSI issues, so they halved the requirements for them a year or so ago to make sure there was enough bling to go around.
> 
> You might have stumbled on the reason why the RCN wanted SSI. Bling to show deployments that aren't going to named Ops. They disregarded the fact that we don't normally award people medals for doing things like RIMPAC.



Not all of us.  I despise the SSI and wish I didn't have to wear one.  It's nothing but a dick measuring device for many, for starters.


----------



## Stoker (30 Aug 2016)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Not all of us.  I despise the SSI and wish I didn't have one to wear.  It's nothing but a dick measuring device for many, for starters.




Hey I respect your opinion on the SSI, but there is a lot of us see it as a tangible measure of the time spent away from home. I admit I used it for bragging rights but more in good natured razing than anything. Certainly no worse that many who bragg about how tours they did and people who haven't are less in their minds.


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Aug 2016)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> Hey I respect your opinion on the SSI, but there is a lot of us see it as a tangible measure of the time spent away from home. I admit I used it for bragging rights but more in good natured razing than anything. Certainly no worse that many who bragg about how tours they did and people who haven't are less in their minds.



And I respect your opinion as well, I just don't share it.


----------



## Halifax Tar (30 Aug 2016)

Chief Stoker said:
			
		

> Hey I respect your opinion on the SSI, but there is a lot of us see it as a tangible measure of the time spent away from home. I admit I used it for bragging rights but more in good natured razing than anything. Certainly no worse that many who bragg about how tours they did and people who haven't are less in their minds.



If only it actually measured what you pretend that it does.  

You aren't actually comparing the SSI to an operationally earned decoration are you ?  

Back on topic.  As for the 150 medal I stand in the everyone or no one corner.


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Aug 2016)

slayer/raptor said:
			
		

> Just 410 days on two tours, one of them on a combat mission, in 8 years. Oh and all my countless days in the field being in the combat arms... I'm sorry the army doesn't give out badges for days out in the field.
> 
> And for the record, you turned this into a "us vs. them" pal. I merely pointed out someone who had 7 medals without one deployment.



I have green time behind me as well as my blue time, so can speak with some knowledge on the subject.  Something to keep in mind about the time away that many of the sailors here endured is that it makes your time in the field pale by comparison as a rule.  While not so much the rule now, it was common for them to be away at sea for 200 plus days a year, every year.  My field tempo and the rest of the Brigade for that matter didn't come close to meeting the same pace as set by the navy.  You're outclassed, I'm afraid, even with today's less frequent sailing schedules.


----------



## ModlrMike (30 Aug 2016)

Part of the problem is clearly the nonsense system we have regarding commemorative medals. If they're commemorative, why are we attaching merit to them?

It really should be an everyone or no one situation.

I know the "buttons and bows" police will have me for this, but even if the CF were on the hook for 100,000 medals. At $25-$40 to produce we're talking a pittance in the grand scheme of things.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (30 Aug 2016)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> . . .  but even if the CF were on the hook for 100,000 medals. At $25-$40 to produce we're talking a pittance in the grand scheme of things.



Even though the CF may be the prime wearer of buttons and bows in Canada (and may be the originator of many of our medals) a "Buck and a Half Medal", being a nation wide commemorative award (like all the other of its ilk) would have originated and been funded through the Heritage Minister.  It was the same in the UK with the Jubilee medals.  As well, not only were the medals (the Gold and Diamond variety at least) widely distributed within the armed forces, the same criteria was applied to any government employee who could conceivably be considered in a uniformed service.  So you would possibly have to include all police, fire services, EMS, Coast Guard, corrections, et al within the calculation on top of the civvies well liked by MPs.  Even then, there will be groups that feel excluded, much like some in the UK  who felt excluded from "the integrity and exclusiveness of the medal" - however 450,000 is not that exclusive.


----------



## dapaterson (30 Aug 2016)

Regardless of the decision - Canada 150 or not, all or some, the CAF will somehow survive and pull through.

Much ado about not much of anything.


----------



## mariomike (30 Aug 2016)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Much ado about not much of anything.



Three pages, and counting, of ado!


----------



## rmc_wannabe (31 Aug 2016)

At the rate they're going with getting medals set up for named Operations,(*cough* Reassurance and Unifier *cough*) I can assume it would most likely end up being a 152 or 153 medal when it starts making its way onto the chests of the "deserving." :

Unless they expedite commemoration medals over all others ;D


----------



## medicineman (31 Aug 2016)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Three pages, and counting, of ado!



I was about to comment that I can't believe we're still talking about this...

op:

MM


----------



## Lightguns (31 Aug 2016)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Part of the problem is clearly the nonsense system we have regarding commemorative medals. If they're commemorative, why are we attaching merit to them?



Because unlike '67, they are not making enough for all uniformed troops which is really how official commemoratives have been distributed prior to 1992.  Thus in order for the receivers not to look like the unit suck units they attach conditions.


----------



## Old Sweat (31 Aug 2016)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> Because unlike '67, they are not making enough for all uniformed troops which is really how official commemoratives have been distributed prior to 1992.  Thus in order for the receivers not to look like the unit suck units they attach conditions.



The centennial medal was not on general distribution. In fact it was awarded on a very limited basis; in A Battery 1 RCHA only one or two members received it, out of an establishment of over 150 all ranks.


----------



## Lightguns (31 Aug 2016)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> The centennial medal was not on general distribution. In fact it was awarded on a very limited basis; in A Battery 1 RCHA only one or two members received it, out of an establishment of over 150 all ranks.



Really?  Interesting all my ex brothers in law (3) have it.  They were Ptes in RHC at the time, two at Altershot and one at Gagetown.  One of my current brothers in law has it, he would have been a MP Pte at Halifax or Debert at the time.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (31 Aug 2016)

Neither was the Queen's silver Jubilee medal in 1977: Limited distribution also. So I don't understand the reference to 1992, Lightguns. 

Personally, I agree that for commemorative medals, it should be general distribution to anyone who serves in the "commemorated event" year and has completed his/her basic. It's not like we have so many medals and ribbons in the CAF that we have to worry about running out of space on our dress uniforms ... unlike some other countries that shall remain nameless.  :-X


----------



## Lightguns (31 Aug 2016)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Neither was the Queen's silver Jubilee medal in 1977: Limited distribution also. So I don't understand the reference to 1992, Lightguns.
> 
> Personally, I agree that for commemorative medals, it should be general distribution to anyone who serves in the "commemorated event" year and has completed his/her basic. It's not like we have so many medals and ribbons in the CAF that we have to worry about running out of space on our dress uniforms ... unlike some other countries that shall remain nameless.  :-X



I seem to be misinformed or transposing British distribution with Canadian.  There seems to be no general distribution in Canada history, so my argument is moot.  Anyone know if the Coronation Medal was general distribution?  I heard only for Canadians on parade during the coronation.


----------



## Old Sweat (31 Aug 2016)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> I seem to be misinformed or transposing British distribution with Canadian.  There seems to be no general distribution in Canada history, so my argument is moot.  Anyone know if the Coronation Medal was general distribution?  I heard only for Canadians on parade during the coronation.



I joined in 1957, so it was before my time. However, I recall seeing a few people wearing it, most of whom were not in the contingent that marched in the parade.


----------



## George Wallace (31 Aug 2016)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> I joined in 1957, so it was before my time. However, I recall seeing a few people wearing it, most of whom were not in the contingent that marched in the parade.



Would they have been some of the "Queen's Cpl's" who were presented medals by the Sovereign during a visit?


----------



## Old Sweat (31 Aug 2016)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Would they have been some of the "Queen's Cpl's" who were presented medals by the Sovereign during a visit?



As some were fairly senior officers, probably not. It seems to me that commemorative medals, other than the ones given to GOFOs, COs and RSMs, were used to recognize people for doing a good job. 

Some people considered it a mixed blessing. Brig EAC Amy, who was commanding 4 CIBG in 1967, noted that he would have to have his medals remounted, and his ribbons adjusted. This was at his own expense, by the way. Before the event, he had 16 medals, starting with DSO, OBE, MC and then a bunch of service medals and a CD.


----------



## jollyjacktar (31 Aug 2016)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> I seem to be misinformed or transposing British distribution with Canadian.  There seems to be no general distribution in Canada history, so my argument is moot.  Anyone know if the Coronation Medal was general distribution?  I heard only for Canadians on parade during the coronation.



My dad had that medal in his set.  I don't believe he was on parade during the Coronation.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (31 Aug 2016)

Lightguns said:
			
		

> I seem to be misinformed or transposing British distribution with Canadian.  There seems to be no general distribution in Canada history, so my argument is moot.  Anyone know if the Coronation Medal was general distribution?  I heard only for Canadians on parade during the coronation.



Cobbled together from both the VAC site and the DND site.

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/remembrance/medals-decorations/commemorative-medals
http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/honours-history-medals-chart/medals-chart-index.page



> King George V Silver Jubilee Medal (1935)
> There were 7,500 medals to Canadians, of which 1,154 were to the Canadian Forces. A total of 85,235 were issued.
> 
> King George VI Coronation Medal (1937)
> ...


----------



## MAJONES (31 Aug 2016)

Sorry, this whole thread makes me think of this commercial....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47xusWONoAc


----------



## kratz (1 Sep 2016)

Well, 

It appears a Canada 150 medal is not entirely mythical.

The Legion is issuing it's own commemorative version of the medal,
since the government has declined officially to note the event.

http://rcl110.ca/UserFiles/File/CHURCH%20PARADE/Canadan%20150.jpg


----------



## Journeyman (2 Sep 2016)

kratz said:
			
		

> It appears a Canada 150 medal is not entirely mythical.
> The Legion is issuing it's own commemorative version of the medal...


Well, for the folks wanting a 'gimme medal' _and_  those concerned with the Legion's dwindling membership, it seems like a perfect solution.   

Call ENDEX and lock the thread.     :cheers:


----------



## McG (2 Sep 2016)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Call ENDEX and lock the thread.     :cheers:


This thread has at least three more bad and/or stupid suggestions left in it.

... And for the sake of momentum, here is one now:

Let's replace CDS and L1 Comd commendations with a 150 medal for one year.  Not only does this resolve the distribution question, it save all recipients from having to arrange those little commendation pins on their uniforms.


----------



## Journeyman (2 Sep 2016)

MCG said:
			
		

> Not only does this resolve the distribution question, it save all recipients from having to arrange those little commendation pins on their uniforms.


Ahhh....and the medal-mounting folks can then enjoy the same benefits as the badge-embroiderers and the HQ sign-painters!


----------



## dapaterson (2 Sep 2016)

Or how about awarding it to every serving member of every Reserve unit whose average paid strength is less than half the heritage they claim.  So, for example, a unit that parades forty people and claims direct lineage to the start of WWI would get it, since 40 is less than half the heritage they claim.


----------

