Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard the Lionheart
Oh, I have, but this is a serious question which you have failed to respond to. Are you evading the issue? The question I posed is meant to encourage serious debate.
|
Yes, it is a serious - and a valid - question, but you're unlikely to get the kind of answer you want for two reasons: (1) the EDP's position is not as you see and describe it; and (2) the answer would be different according to the circumstances of the time. This matter of timing or sequence is an element which you discount Richard, which you are perfectly entitled to do, but it is not reasonable to criticise others who do not see the situation in the static way in which you seem to.
Perhaps I can illustrate the effect of timing on an answer? Were a chief executive to publicly admit that his company was in grave financial difficulties, he would immediately lose any opportunity to continue to try to save his company and it would be effectively bankrupt. Similarly, there are situations in politics when some adjudge it wiser to hold a particular position, which is not to say that they oppose other positions but regard them as unsuitable at present.
You keep trying to drive the EDP into restricted positions, which was fair enough when you were a member. However, you are no longer a member, but you now have a party which we understand fully reflects your position AND your own section on this forum. Do I need to go on . . . ?
As an ex-member of the EDP, I'm pretty sure what would be the party line should such a referendum be called, but there is no obligation to state it just now, there really is not!
---------------------------------