View Single Post
  #19  
Old 20-09-2017, 02:32 PM
ChiswickEagle's Avatar
ChiswickEagle ChiswickEagle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 5,793
Rep Power: 19378090
ChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy dietChiswickEagle came here looking for the peace and quiet; the healthy air and the healthy diet
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Aguila View Post
The Constitution was voted on and ratified - 87% in favour and 9% against: To view the link you have to Register or Login

I agree the government should have sought a "political solution" (a bribe) three or four years ago, but the conflict suits both sides.

They can't allow a referendum as you know - or change the constitution to allow referendums. For one thing it would mean 17 referendums and 17 bribes, and for another thing it would expose the country to a pretty absurd degree of uncertainty - communities would just demand a referendum every time they wanted anything. It would completely still intenral and external investment.
Perish the thought that a referendum might have that effect.
Reply With Quote