National commemorations | Separate the power from history

In newspaper archives, look for the words “no national funeral”. Dozens of articles will quickly appear about eminent Quebeckers, such as Jean Lapointe and, more recently, Victor-Lévy Beaulieu.

Why was the writer of Trois-Pistoles, a literary monument, was not entitled to it? Why does another giant, Serge Fiori, be offered this posthumous tribute?

The question is ultra -delicate. I don’t pretend to decide it here. Nor to criticize François Legault, who returns this difficult decision.

I only note one thing: the current system works very badly. As much for bereaved families as for the government.

In the case of state funerals, the criteria are clear. They are usually reserved for former prime ministers. According to the protocol, their coffin is covered with the Quebec flag, and their body is exhibited in Burning Chapel in the Legislative Council of the National Assembly.

But a great latitude exists for national funerals or commemorations. They are offered to “personalities who notably marked political life”, according to the government’s official website^⁠1.

This is a blurred criterion. A multitude of people may claim to have “marked” Quebec.

Of course, there is no objective way to find out who deserves such a tribute. But one could undoubtedly depoliticize the process and reduce, at least a little, the share of arbitrariness.

When a personality dies, the government must react. In a press briefing, the question happens quickly: will you organize national funeral?

Put yourself in place of the Prime Minister. If he refuses, he risks insulting the family. But if he too often offers this tribute, he will dilute the importance. And he has many other files to manage at the same time …

With his close guard, he must assess the heritage of the deceased and popular mood. This reflection is hot. It can be influenced by the passenger social context. Or even a need to please a segment of the electorate.

There is also public pressure. That of the media. And finally, that of the family. At the microphone of Penelope In the first time in 2023, the former Minister of Culture Christine St-Pierre had reported the pressure exerted during the death of the great filmmaker Gilles Carle, or René Angélil.

I weigh my words to write the following. In recent years, Quebecers have surprised that the impresario received this final tribute, while striking figures like Jean Lapointe or Victor-Lévy Beaulieu were not entitled to it.

And only one woman obtained this honor: Claire Kirkland-Casgrain, who was both the first woman to be a deputy, then minister and judge of Quebec.

The Parti Québécois had the good idea to depoliticize the process.

A historical commemoration is duration. It does not reconcile with political contingencies or fleeting popularity.

We could order a report to a small committee to identify practices in other states, establish criteria and propose mechanisms to decide. This exercise would not be heavy or expensive.

A committee made up of historians and representative experts in the company could decide, or formulate a recommendation to the Prime Minister who would have the last word.

The Order of Quebec thus proceeds. The choice of winners is made by experts.

An obstacle, however: the lack of time to decide. A committee should meet quickly to make its verdict shortly after the death.

He would then remain to be discreetly checked with the family if she wishes such a ceremony, and if she wants it secular or religious.

This process would be ideally at the Ministry of Culture. Currently, these ceremonies are managed by international relations, where the expertise for the protocol is located.

It is not easy to assess the impact of a deceased on his company, or the influence he will continue to exercise in the future. But one thing is certain: this reflection requires extract from the political maelstrom to reflect in the slow duration of history.

Consult the criteria to be entitled to national funerals