图片源于：https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/city-manager-refuses-to-name-staff-behind-toronto-symbols-removal
Paul Johnson has come forward to wear the coat.
In a letter put out for June’s city council meeting, Toronto’s city manager said he approved the removal of the Etobicoke coat of arms from a west-end civic centre – but he did not shed any light on the subsequent unannounced removal of the pre-amalgamation Toronto coat of arms.
“The balance were removed on the direction of protocol staff following discussions with city divisions including the Indigenous affairs office,” the letter, which came in reply to an administrative inquiry by Councillor Stephen Holyday, said.
The letter did not mention any other employees by name, such as Richard Berthelsen of the protocol unit or Selina Young, who heads Indigenous affairs. Both were shown in reporting by the Sun, which Holyday cited as the basis of his inquiry, to have done much of the work to plan the coats of arms removals.
City representatives had previously refused to name anyone as responsible for the removals.
“It didn’t tell much, and I wasn’t expecting a whole lot,” Holyday told The Toronto Sun. “I am pleased that there’s clarity on who made the decision. … It doesn’t explain why things were taken down, put away.”
In his letter, Johnson wrote that the old Toronto coats of arms were removed for the same reasons cited at an executive committee meeting for getting rid of the Etobicoke symbol. It also confirmed the Sun’s reporting that the Toronto symbol was taken down at seven city properties.
The Etobicoke symbol, referred to as “offensive imagery” in city documents, was removed after as few as four complaints were made in the span of 50 years, none of them specifying problems with the image.
A city report that preceded the coat of arms’ removal cited those complaints and the government’s stance on human rights and “reconciliation.”
Meanwhile, the Sun reported the city has never documented a complaint about the old Toronto symbol.
Johnson’s letter said there are “no plans to remove or replace other symbols at this time,” but said the city will “continue to review” the matter.
The protocol unit has a list of coats of arms in Toronto and even prominent examples such as a large stained-glass artwork at Old City Hall and a plaque on the cenotaph outside are officially in limbo, listed as set for removal but simply too difficult and expensive to deal with.
Holyday called that de facto position “sort of a half-job” that “becomes more and more difficult to explain over time.”
He added that if more symbols do get removed, “questions have to be put before council and put through a process that includes public consultation and an opportunity for public feedback.“
City council did not take a position on this,” he said. “The executive committee’s only position was to look no further beyond a report that was filed with them. They didn’t actually make a decision.”
Holyday said he saw a parallel with the discussion surrounding the renaming of Yonge-Dundas Square to Sankofa, which came up at the same session of council.
Taking a “non-position allows them to go to both sides of the constituency and claim to be on their side, when in fact they’re on no one’s side,” Holyday said.
“When I asked the mayor (Olivia Chow)_… about her thoughts on other assets named Dundas, she said she had no plans, and when I asked her directly as to whether or not she supports the renaming of Dundas St., I couldn’t get an answer. So that council discussion remains up in the air or up in limbo.”
Chow did not respond to the Sun’s request for comment.
jholmes@postmedia.com
