The last few years have made it possible to grasp the extent to which commemoration is a hot issue that can sometimes arouse passions. From the toponymy to the imposing bronze statue, the commemoration presents itself as an extremely complex object both in the polysemy of its gestures and in the symbolic scope of some of its representations. The question of the national funeral, which is a commemorative activity, also comes up periodically in the news and is inevitably characterized by a significant lack of transparency and rigor in the granting or not of this national privilege. The symbolism contained in all acts of commemoration obliges us to exercise caution and to use all the tools at our disposal to approach them with impartiality, empathy and rigor.
On November 13, 2019, the National Assembly adopted a motion asking “the Government of Quebec to establish a national commemoration policy”. Presented by Catherine Fournier, the former MP for Marie-Victorin, the motion was adopted unanimously by parliamentarians. In 2022, Nathalie Roy, then Minister of Culture and Communications, tabled a document to serve as a frame of reference for the government commemoration. This document, which is not in itself a commemoration policy, nevertheless presents the fact that it is important for the government “to adopt clear and common guidelines” with regard to commemoration. Was the document intended to respond to the motion to which the government had given its consent? If so, we have every right to be sorry that the Government of Quebec does not seem to take commemoration more seriously.
Unfortunately, the document only presents guidelines. Thus, government commemoration remains at the mercy of arbitrary decisions and political and ideological choices, since nothing compels departments and agencies to comply with it. It is therefore impossible to achieve the desired coherence through all the government’s commemorative actions.
Several issues
We quickly notice that the frame of reference skilfully ignores the polarizing issues. For example, in terms of disputes over monuments, the frame of reference still sticks to generalities that border on banality in the eyes of any historian, concluding that “the resolution of conflicts around commemoration requires taking hindsight and a rigorous analysis allowing us to offer a solution adapted to each situation”.
In addition, the proposed definitions make it possible not to deal with issues related to commemorative activities carried out during a person’s lifetime. By specifying that “the object of the commemoration cannot be a living person”, we deliberately set aside a panoply of memorial issues. Take as a witness the parliamentary committee room bearing the name of former Prime Minister Pauline Marois found in the National Assembly of Quebec. This example does not relate to anything other than commemoration, contrary to what the definitions proposed in the government’s terms of reference may suggest.
We should also underline the absence in this document of any guideline concerning everything relating to state funerals, which ultimately fall of a decision by the Prime Minister, which is not based on any objective criteria.
Surprisingly, in a more global way, we do not deal with the process that should lead to a commemoration even though this process of analysis also participates in the symbolism of the commemoration exercise. Like the commemoration policies cited in Appendix I, it would have been more than desirable to set up a committee responsible for analyzing all commemoration requests on which specialists from various backgrounds and even citizens could sit. .
For now, commemoration remains an obscure and arbitrary practice within the Quebec government. The public must be able to know in advance what are the criteria guiding these symbolic processes, what is the progress of a commemoration file and for what reasons certain gestures have or have not been made. There is no question of how the government will be accountable for its decisions. Will notices of relevance be made public?
[…]
It would be desirable for the government to lay its cards on the table on its commemorative aims by ensuring that a future policy is proposed through a bill and that public consultations allow specialists to come and share their expertise. This would undoubtedly be a lasting action for Quebec that Mathieu Lacombe, the current Minister of Culture and Communications, could take.