Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ubc-vision.CDN Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!ubc-vision!mack From: mack@ubc-vision.CDN (Alan Mackworth) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: A Letter to Brian Message-ID: <760@ubc-vision.CDN> Date: Fri, 14-Dec-84 13:23:18 EST Article-I.D.: ubc-visi.760 Posted: Fri Dec 14 13:23:18 1984 Date-Received: Sun, 16-Dec-84 21:42:52 EST References: <756@ubc-vision.CDN> <885@ubc-cs.UUCP> Reply-To: mack@ubc-vision.UUCP (Alan Mackworth) Organization: UBC Computational Vision Lab, Vancouver, B.C., Canada Lines: 17 Summary: ************************************************************************ In article <885@ubc-cs.UUCP> robinson@ubc-cs.UUCP (Jim Robinson) writes: >It would appear that the 84% of Canadians that support the freeze >have as about as much say in how things are run as the approximately >75% of Canadians that support the return of capital punishment or >the majority of Canadians that support removal of Japanese car >import quotas. Initiatives anyone ? > But the 75% in favour of the noose have been guaranteed a full scale debate in the house and a free vote (no whips) in the life of this Parliament. Seems to me that a bilateral, verifiable freeze is at least as important and the consensus of the people is clear. I'd settle for a full scale debate and a free vote. I do not favour binding initiatives for the reason given by Martin Taylor: the majority can be totally wrong and uninformed - we elect MPs to act in our enlightened self-interest (not against it).