"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
t...

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"BAC" wrote in message
...

snip

It really is time you accepted the realities of the situation.

LOL - I do accept the realities of the situation. Referendums in the
regions
concerned would show what those realities were, beyond dispute.



Wistfully thinking that you might have a valid point is not a
valid
form of arguing.


Assuming an inconvenient point to be invalid isn't a valid form of
rebuttal.

You have an invalid point in thinking that opinions in this country
are, as a rule, tested by conducting referenda.


If I were to think that opinions in this country are, as a rule, tested by
conducting referenda, I would be sadly mistaken. But I don't think that, and
have not said it, either. Some opinions, or preferences, or choices between
options are tested in the UK by conducting referenda. For example remaining
in the EEC, as it was called, whether to have mayors in some towns,
devolution in London, Scotland, Wales, and, recently, the North-East.
Referenda on devolution in other regions were proposed (but now abandoned,
it seems) and we have been awaiting a referendum on the Euro and now the
European Constitution. So, local, regional and national referenda on single
issue matters are part of the UK's democratic decision making process. I
don't think that's inaccurate or invalid, do you?

Now you may disagree with my suggestion that it would have been appropriate
to use the referendum mechanism to settle the hunting question, but your
disagreement, with respect, does not render the proposition invalid.