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).