Jean Charest And Stephen Harper In The News Assigment Canadian Politics/ Canadian Unity

Prime Minster Stephen Harper and Quebec Premier Jean Charest are both involved in a high risk wager with the voters in QuÐ"©bec for their support of one another's campaigns. Jean Charest has gained a lot of support from the public for his campaigning for the Kyoto protocol, and after a few months of failed attempts at getting federal funding, the prime minster who have previously described the Kyoto protocol as a scheme to "suck money from rich countries" finally caved in, and initiated a federal eco-trust that would fund provincial climate change. With Harpers government supporting Charest, both sides are put at risks due to the current battle on the unity front, whereas QuÐ"©bec being supported by Harpers government may cause Harper some votes elsewhere in Canada, whilst Charest may risk being seen as a mere tool for a right-wing federal regime. This paper will argue that the Premier Jean Charest is not in as large of a predicament as is the Prime minster Stephen Harper for the following reasons; Jean Charest is fulfilling some of his promises in a sense that he is enforcing the Kyoto protocol that he strongly campaigned for, Whilst Stephen Harper is yielding to something that he opposed in the past, on the other hand Harpers support of Charest campaign is for a federalist victory over that of a sovereignist one.

Jean Charest may have promised a lot of things in the past and did not fulfill them, but he was very affirmative when it came to the issue of the Kyoto Protocol, When Harpers government decided that it will not keep up to its Kyoto targets, and cut funding for the climate change programs, Charest insisted that QuÐ"©bec will meet its Kyoto protocol targets on its own, this puts Charest in a good view to the public and with the voters.

Stephen Harper on the other hand has voiced his opinion in the past in opposition to the Kyoto protocol, yet his government providing funds for QuÐ"©bec's eco-trust climate change program is a form of acknowledging he is wrong, or it may be viewed as an attempt to win over Quebec, at the same time, this move may cost him votes from other provinces. As well, the Harper government refusal to the bill that ensures that government will meet its Kyoto protocol may result in a non-confidence motion, which may mean that the Harper government being a minority would be held accountable and a new government would have to be formed.

Harpers support of Charest campaign may result in maintaining the peace on the unity front, and not allowing a sovereignist triumph. On the other hand if Charest loses, this will cause a federal-provincial problem and ruin Harpers career. A sovereignist victory may mean a revisit to referendum politics, and a national problem. While if the Federal Government and Charest wins then this would put the Bloc Quebecois in a worse position and the liberal party in a better position to fight recent federal-provincial battles.

The issue of the light alliance between Stephen Harper and