<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Freedom of Information</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2007/02/freedom-of-information-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2007/02/freedom-of-information-2/</link>
	<description>The inside track since 2003</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 13:01:42 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2007/02/freedom-of-information-2/comment-page-1/#comment-25404</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 02:46:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=955#comment-25404</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m glad you find the Freedom of Information Act act useful, and I&#039;m pleased to hear you have used it in order to uncover facts when other routes were closed to you.

I have to wonder why you consistently supported the The Freedom of Information Amendment (Bill) 2007 private members bill, which exempts Parliament
and MPs from the same transparency as we may scrutinise other public bodies, at every point through its passage.

Please don&#039;t tell me it&#039;s to protect the privacy of constituents&#039; correspondence, because you should know that&#039;s already covered by the Data Protection Act. 

Since you&#039;re a frequent user of the Freedom of Information Act, and describe it as &quot;part of the democratic fabric of the nation&quot;, I&#039;d be very interested to hear why you believe Parliament should be exempt from it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m glad you find the Freedom of Information Act act useful, and I&#8217;m pleased to hear you have used it in order to uncover facts when other routes were closed to you.</p>
<p>I have to wonder why you consistently supported the The Freedom of Information Amendment (Bill) 2007 private members bill, which exempts Parliament<br />
and MPs from the same transparency as we may scrutinise other public bodies, at every point through its passage.</p>
<p>Please don&#8217;t tell me it&#8217;s to protect the privacy of constituents&#8217; correspondence, because you should know that&#8217;s already covered by the Data Protection Act. </p>
<p>Since you&#8217;re a frequent user of the Freedom of Information Act, and describe it as &#8220;part of the democratic fabric of the nation&#8221;, I&#8217;d be very interested to hear why you believe Parliament should be exempt from it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Martin Stabe &#187; links for 2007-02-15</title>
		<link>http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/2007/02/freedom-of-information-2/comment-page-1/#comment-2372</link>
		<dc:creator>Martin Stabe &#187; links for 2007-02-15</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:29:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tom-watson.co.uk/?p=955#comment-2372</guid>
		<description>[...] Tom Watson MP: Freedom of Information Britain&#8217;s original blogging MP: &#8220;The Freedom of Information Act &#8230; [has] become part of the democratic fabric of the nation &#8230; To change it now, would be folly. &#8220; (tags: foi foia parliament) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Tom Watson MP: Freedom of Information Britain&#8217;s original blogging MP: &#8220;The Freedom of Information Act &#8230; [has] become part of the democratic fabric of the nation &#8230; To change it now, would be folly. &#8220; (tags: foi foia parliament) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
