> That would mean that (rougly) one-third of it is based on non-customary specs. That reminds me of the last umpteen times Denmark has had referendums regarding the EU, where a 50-and-a-bit % majority has been allowed to 'win'. Am I the only one whom this strikes as unjust?

What exactly do you mean by unjust? I thought the whole point of the referendum was to allow a direct democratic vote on a subject. How does it become unjust that the majority of the population (even if it's only a 50% + 1 vote majority) 'wins' the referendum? Especially as the loosing side on these referenda were the most heavily financed, publicised and supported by the media, there is no suggestion that the Danish people were co-erced into that decision. Quite the opposite, in fact.

If the Danish referenda (on closer integration with Europe and the European single currency) were to have been won by the "yes" camp with less than 50% percent of the vote, I would have considered that unjust. Both Ireland and Britain are going to hold referenda on the same subject, and I would hope that supporting the majority view is not seen as "unjust".

winter"Yay! I managed to post this without mentioning the Treaty of Nice!"mute