Abstract
This paper argues that the greatest threat to Canadian unity is not so much the absence of some of the characteristics that Daniel Kelemen claims are to be found in stable federations but the tendency of political leaders and parties to put forward contradicting “visions” of Canada. When such visions are used as templates for reforming the constitution, failures usually ensue. A strategy of disjointed incrementalism is a more prudent and ultimately more efficient way to proceed. It seems to be the strategy adopted by Prime Minister Harper and it could prove successful in easing some of the dissatisfactions experienced in both Quebec and western Canada.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
