Re: Adding B次元官网网址榬oyalB次元官网网址� not time well spent, Letters, Aug. 24, 2011.

I would like to respond to Don WilkesB次元官网网址� letter.

IB次元官网网址檒l begin by addressing the re-institution of B次元官网网址渞oyalB次元官网网址� to CanadaB次元官网网址檚 navy and air force but not the army.

Prior to the 1968 integration of the military services into one unified structure we had a Royal Canadian Navy, a Royal Canadian Air Force and a Canadian Army (no royal).

The reason the army in and of itself was never B次元官网网址渞oyalB次元官网网址� is because many Regiments within the army were designated as Royal.  Examples include the Royal Canadian Regiment, the Royal Canadian Dragoons, the Royal 22nd Regiment and Royal Canadian Artillery.

Interestingly with the disbandment of the RCN, RCAF and Canadian Army, those regiments continued to exist and retained their royal designation.

They remain today, with the same royal name that they have always had. In the army then, and in the army today, pride and a sense of belonging are more toward oneB次元官网网址檚 regiment than to the army as a whole.

Whether the particular regiment is B次元官网网址渞oyalB次元官网网址� or not has no bearing on a soldierB次元官网网址檚 pride or sense of belonging to that regiment.

Reinstating B次元官网网址渞oyalB次元官网网址� to the navy and air force is an acknowledgement of this countryB次元官网网址檚 military history and heritage. It will result in little if any functional change to how our armed forces conduct business.

In this country we encourage ethnic diversity.  Many segments of our society celebrate their ethnicity and traditions.

Why is it then that those of us who are of British heritage are accused of wanting to subjugate Canada to mother England when we acknowledge our heritage?

I have not heard anyone ever complain about the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Royal Winnipeg Ballet, the Royal Bank of Canada, the Royal Colwood Golf Club nor any B次元官网网址渞oyalB次元官网网址� anything else.

Why complain about the navy and air force getting back what was stripped from them years ago?

Ken Hanlan

Colwood