<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Devolution again</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/01/07/devolution-again/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/01/07/devolution-again/</link>
	<description>Conservative Party Member of Parliament for Wokingham</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Oct 2008 15:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Marek</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/01/07/devolution-again/#comment-176</link>
		<dc:creator>Marek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Jan 2007 12:08:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=40#comment-176</guid>
		<description>I've never understood the Conservative Party's emphasis on the Union. I recall that John Major, on the final day of his last general election campaign, flew all round the UK to make some point about the dangers of devolution. If so many conservatives are against a federal europe then why are they so insistent on a unitary UK? It seems inconsistent.

Yes, let the people decide in a gradual manner. Similarly, it's high time that any proposed enlargement of the EU should be the subject of a referendum.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never understood the Conservative Party&#8217;s emphasis on the Union. I recall that John Major, on the final day of his last general election campaign, flew all round the UK to make some point about the dangers of devolution. If so many conservatives are against a federal europe then why are they so insistent on a unitary UK? It seems inconsistent.</p>
<p>Yes, let the people decide in a gradual manner. Similarly, it&#8217;s high time that any proposed enlargement of the EU should be the subject of a referendum.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: A Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/01/07/devolution-again/#comment-173</link>
		<dc:creator>A Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 22:07:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=40#comment-173</guid>
		<description>John,
It's not just devolution that is a dogs breakfast, Lords reform is similarly ill thought out. Why not look at a comprehensive reform of Parliament.
Seems to me that the Commons could be exclusively English and reduced to around 250 MPs. The Lords could then be the House of the Union, being largely or wholly elected covering issues that would benefit from cross country co-ordintation (such as defence, environment, illegal invasions etc) and legislative revision.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John,<br />
It&#8217;s not just devolution that is a dogs breakfast, Lords reform is similarly ill thought out. Why not look at a comprehensive reform of Parliament.<br />
Seems to me that the Commons could be exclusively English and reduced to around 250 MPs. The Lords could then be the House of the Union, being largely or wholly elected covering issues that would benefit from cross country co-ordintation (such as defence, environment, illegal invasions etc) and legislative revision.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jorgen</title>
		<link>http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/2007/01/07/devolution-again/#comment-172</link>
		<dc:creator>Jorgen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Jan 2007 12:27:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnredwoodsdiary.com/?p=40#comment-172</guid>
		<description>There are a number of tangible and intangible advantages in keeping the Union. It is therefore well worth trying the system you suggest. It is, however, necessary to change the number of Scottish MPs to a number that correspond better to their size.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are a number of tangible and intangible advantages in keeping the Union. It is therefore well worth trying the system you suggest. It is, however, necessary to change the number of Scottish MPs to a number that correspond better to their size.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
