And a United Nations spokeswoman said that any vote on Independence should be a "clear expression of the will of the people", suggesting Britain could find itself under pressure from the international community to use the referendum mechanism in Bermuda as opposed to greenlighting the Progressive Labour Party proposal to decide the issue at a General Election.

Speaking to the Dr. Gary Sussman, director of Research and Programme Development at the Harold Hartog School of Government Policy at Tel Aviv University in Israel, who was recently involved in the UN referendum on Cyprus, gave a brief historical overview of the situation.

"Historically, Britain seldom used referenda or plebiscites to determine the fate of territories, except when they were indifferent, because otherwise they might not have got the result they wanted.

"Generally, political elites tend to use referenda when they feel comfortable they're going to win, the exception to the rule normally being when there is a really burning or salient issue, and a ruling party or coalition is deeply divided over the issue.

"They can be used to keep a political party together. For example, Britain never had a referendum until 1975, when there were divisions within the ruling Labour Party over the question of Europe, then in 1979 over Northern Ireland. More recently, they were used to decide the question of devolution in Scotland and Wales.

"However, it is increasingly and widely believed that there should be a referendum on issues of sovereignty, by what is known as 'the logic of appropriateness': that it's only the right thing to do.

"There's this deep notion, firstly from (18th-century French philosopher Jean-Jacques) Rousseau, that the people are sovereign. One could argue that there's a moral test to let the people decide, certainly on issues of sovereignty and Independence.

"If it's clear to the governing power that the people don't want it, then one could argue that they are imposing something against the will of the people, dictating a tyranny of the minority. If the British are allowed to vote on the euro, only a currency, because giving up the pound would affect their feelings of sovereignty and national pride, why would people not be entitled to a referendum on independence?"

Dr. Sussman knows something about issues of principle: the was unable to speak to him last week because he was being held in an Israeli military prison for refusing to serve in the Occupied Palestinian Territories in his capacity as an officer in the Israeli Defence Forces.

While the UK Government will not confirm that a referendum is the best, and clearly the most popular, way to assess the enthusiasm of Bermudians for Independence, it takes a very positive view on that method of assessing the will of the people on matters closer to home.

Last week, reported that "Labour Leader Tony Blair has joined forces with Liberal Democrat Charles Kennedy to push for a 'yes' (postal) vote in the North East Assembly referendum . . . Labour says it wants to give the North East (of England) its own voice (in a regional assembly) for the first time."

the other hand, the Labour Government has appeared more reluctant to support referendums when it was less sure that it would get the answer it wanted. On October 18, reported that "originally, referendums were planned in the North West and Yorkshire and Humberside too, but in July the Government announced it was postponing them because of problems with postal voting in those areas. The decision was attacked as a cynical move to avoid contests in the two regions least likely to deliver a 'yes' vote."

Also, the UK government will not necessarily take "no" for an answer, if that is not its preferred result. Back in April of this year, reported that "Tony Blair has hinted he could hold a second referendum on the European Constitution if the public said 'no' the first time round."

Dr. Mads Qvortrup, professor of sociology at Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen, Scotland, and author of , told the that the British government was having to deal with a new reality on matters of sovereignty.

"Traditionally, British governments did not take the referendum route, for a number of political reasons, and because their use seemed inimical to the British system of government. But that has changed over the last 30 years.

"Since (former Conservative Prime Minister) Ted Heath's vote on Northern Ireland, which was boycotted by the Catholics, it has been more or less the policy of different British governments that there has to be a clear majority vote on sovereignty matters.

"(Then-Hong Kong Governor) Chris Patten wanted to have a referendum to see if the majority of the residents of Hong Kong approved of becoming part of China before the handover in 1997, but that didn't happen because the Conservative Government did not want to upset China.

"The recent referendum in Cyprus was not successful from the point of view of the UN, but the UN has clearly endorsed referendums, on the presumption that whenever you have a decision on sovereignty, you need to ask the people. It's not enough to have the elites assert that they have the mandate of the people, you need to have an explicit mandate for sovereignty questions."

"The UK government really opened this Pandora's box when the Labour Government was divided over the question of Europe, back in the Seventies. Up to that time, conventional thinking was that referendums were, if not unconstitutional, certainly 'un-British', in that all matters had been delegated to the supposedly superior wisdom of elected politicians.

"That argument no longer holds much water. There has been a greater demand for direct democracy, particularly since the collapse of the Soviet Union, when countries like Estonia and Latvia and Lithuania used referendums to express their clear preference for Independence.

"That has had an influence on the international community. So that, the 'Good Friday' agreement reached by the political elites in London and Dublin and Belfast in 1998 had to be approved by a majority of both the Unionist and Republican communities in Northern Ireland. You have also seen referendums be used for UK devolution, and in the new countries recently joining Europe.

"Until Blair came to power, there were no regulations in the UK governing referendums, but now they are part of the constitutional framework. Of course, Blair tried to avoid a referendum on the European constitution, but the Conservatives argued successfully that 'if this is not a constitutional issue, what is'? So, it was politically opportune for Blair to bow to the pressure, but it was inevitable because, in the end, there's a very clear moral argument for referendums.

"The strong international consensus that such issues have to be decided by referendum will probably dictate that the UK government will require that a referendum be held to decide whether Bermuda becomes Independent. A referendum is the litmus test of support for Independence.

"For governments, the chances of getting a referendum through diminish with the number of years they are in power. (Late Labour Prime Minister Harold) Wilson and Blair were successful with referendums in their first year of power, but (former Labour Prime Minister James) Callaghan's government failed spectacularly in 1979, as did some of the European referendums when they were held late in governmental terms, because trust is diminished over time, and people become less likely to follow a government's recommendations.

"In my experience, five years in power is the magic threshold, after which the chances of getting a referendum through is less than 15 per cent on average, if you look around the world. One of the very few examples of a successful referendum after five years in power was (the late French President) Mitt?rand's referendum on the ratification of the Maastricht treaty, which only scraped through by 0.1 per cent."

UN spokeswoman insisted that neither the UN Secretariat nor the Decolonisation Committee took a partisan view on these matters, but pointed out that the resolutions of the Committee and the UN Charter itself gave considerable guidance on the different ways in which colonies or dependent territories could achieve Independence.

"From the point of view of the Special Committee (on Decolonisation)," said the UN spokeswoman, who preferred not to be identified by name or country of origin, "all of its opinions are reflected in its decisions, in the published resolutions.

"With reference to Bermuda and the subject of Independence, keep in mind that 'Decolonisation' doesn't always equal Independence. In addition to the Charter, there are two resolutions on the matter that are considered the basis for the future, and one of them,1514, states that all peoples have the right to self-determination.

"The other accompanying resolution, 1541, lists the three options available for self-determination: integration with another state, free association with another state, or Independence.

"There is one more important point in this whole decolonisation process: the UN Charter puts the onus on the administering power (the UK) as the responsible party for bringing its colonies to a certain level of self-determination. Chapter 11 of the Charter is the 'declaration regarding non-self-governing territories', and it is very carefully worded.

"It doesn't predetermine what each territory would want to do. The main thing is that whatever choice is made is the conscientious choice of the people, that they what they are doing."

The spokeswoman referred to a meeting of the Special Committee on Decolonisation held in June 2004 in Papua New Guinea, during which the situation regarding Bermuda was discussed, and it was decided "to follow closely the territorial consultations on the future status of Bermuda and to facilitate assistance to the Territory in a public educational programme, if requested, as well as to hold consultations and to make all necessary arrangements to have a visiting mission to the Territory".

The participants in that meeting prepared a draft resolution for the UN General Assembly with respect to Bermuda and ten other island territories, "recognising that all available options for self-determination of the Territories are valid as long as they are in accordance with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned . . . (and) mindful that United Nations visiting missions provide an effective means of assessing the situation in the Territories and of ascertaining the wishes and aspirations of the peoples thereof regarding their future status."

Asked whether the UN Decolonisation Committee was aware that the Bermuda Government had asked that its members not visit the island, the spokeswoman responded: "The UN is just an organisation of members, and the member is the UK, and an article in the () stating that the local government doesn't want the Committee to visit has no official standing.

"A letter has to be sent by the UK government. These things take time; there's no rush. At the beginning of next year, in our working paper, we will mention that according to the press on a certain date, it was reported that the local government said this or that.

Asked whether it was normal for a territory to ask that the Committee not visit, the spokeswoman was a model of diplomacy.

"I wouldn't like to judge. People say so many things. When something is written in a document that's communicated, then it becomes something tangible. As the member, the UK will guide the Committee on these relations. We will what appears in the press, but we will only act on an official communication.

"The question always is, and also for Bermuda, how self-determination will be fulfilled. If the decision is a conscious choice of the people, then that means that the colony has self-determination. Then the UK will advise the Committee that the people of Bermuda chose to take a certain action, and that it was an expression of their self-determination.

"If you look at the precedents, you will see that there were different ways of doing it. The UN Charter makes it plain that the interests of the people are paramount."

a press release dated October 5, 2004, the UN Fourth Committee (Special Political and Decolonisation) reported that UK representative Simon Williams informed the meeting on that date that "his country continued its informal co-operation with the Special Committee. The most positive recent development was the proposal for a visit to Bermuda with a view to considering movement towards that Territory's delisting."

In addition to ten UK territories, the Decolonisation Committee oversees three US, American Samoa, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands; one French, New Caledonia; one New Zealand territory, Tokelau; and Western Sahara.

In his doctoral thesis for the London School of Economics, "When the shapes the The Use of Referendums in Settling Sovereignty Issues", Dr. Sussman wrote that: "The rise of the referendum and the sovereignty referendum are inextricably linked to the emergence of the ideas of sovereignty, popular sovereignty, nationalism, and self-determination."

He quoted Philip Goodhart, the author of : "It is plain that the holding of a plebiscite does not provide a panacea for the problems of sovereignty; but one lesson that can be drawn from experiences in all parts of the world is that the surest recipe for provoking trouble is to proclaim the virtues of self-determination and then fail to consult the people."