<?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: Another Lib Dem boost from ICM</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2270/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2270</link>
	<description>Opinion polling and political analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 19:29:05 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John B Dick</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2270/comment-page-1#comment-588441</link>
		<dc:creator>John B Dick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 23:49:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2270#comment-588441</guid>
		<description>This has gone off topic, but you could have more AND fewer legislaters if devolution was completed with an English Parliament and a smaller federal parliament.

MEP&#039;s (!!) would get out and about constituencies as Alec wants on the issues most constituents engage with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This has gone off topic, but you could have more AND fewer legislaters if devolution was completed with an English Parliament and a smaller federal parliament.</p>
<p>MEP&#8217;s (!!) would get out and about constituencies as Alec wants on the issues most constituents engage with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alec</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2270/comment-page-1#comment-588431</link>
		<dc:creator>Alec</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 22:04:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2270#comment-588431</guid>
		<description>@Neil A - I think it&#039;s a poorly thought out move done for party political advantage for both the Tories and LDs. The cost savings are miniscule, but I would agree that there is a real need to make MPs work much better. We&#039;ve had a really good example recently of the problems with the child protection legislation thta would have crippled volunteer groups. All parties supported it, but MP&#039;s failed to grasp its impact. This was because they fail miserably to scrutinise legislation and have very little contact with the real world. I would make constituencies half the size, introduce a quorum for House business, and work out ways to get MPs into constituencies more of the time.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Neil A &#8211; I think it&#8217;s a poorly thought out move done for party political advantage for both the Tories and LDs. The cost savings are miniscule, but I would agree that there is a real need to make MPs work much better. We&#8217;ve had a really good example recently of the problems with the child protection legislation thta would have crippled volunteer groups. All parties supported it, but MP&#8217;s failed to grasp its impact. This was because they fail miserably to scrutinise legislation and have very little contact with the real world. I would make constituencies half the size, introduce a quorum for House business, and work out ways to get MPs into constituencies more of the time.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alec</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2270/comment-page-1#comment-588429</link>
		<dc:creator>Alec</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 21:55:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2270#comment-588429</guid>
		<description>AW - thanks. I thought that sounded rather fanciful, although questionmarks over the independance of the sites might be a more appropriate criticism I guess.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AW &#8211; thanks. I thought that sounded rather fanciful, although questionmarks over the independance of the sites might be a more appropriate criticism I guess.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Luvvies, Labour&#8217;s Lost &#171; The Horsell&#39;s Mouth</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2270/comment-page-1#comment-588422</link>
		<dc:creator>Luvvies, Labour&#8217;s Lost &#171; The Horsell&#39;s Mouth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 21:28:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2270#comment-588422</guid>
		<description>[...] find the link on the BBC website &#8211; maybe they&#8217;ve seen sense and pulled it &#8211; but this poll, which states 41% of people think Brown is almost certainly going to lose is bad, bad news. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] find the link on the BBC website &#8211; maybe they&#8217;ve seen sense and pulled it &#8211; but this poll, which states 41% of people think Brown is almost certainly going to lose is bad, bad news. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anthony Wells</title>
		<link>http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/2270/comment-page-1#comment-588401</link>
		<dc:creator>Anthony Wells</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 15:07:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/?p=2270#comment-588401</guid>
		<description>Alec - there&#039;s only been one so far, and it was published on the PoliticsHome website last autumn. The idea is bonkers anyway, since it wouldn&#039;t work - it would still count as a gift in kind and be declarable expenditure.

It&#039;s a bizarre theory. If Michael Ashcroft wants to buy big polls of marginal seats he doesn&#039;t need to spend money on buying several websites to commission them on his behalf, he just needs to phone up a pollster and commission a private poll - after all, that&#039;s what he did at the last election when he commissioned loads of private polling from YouGov and Populus to write his book.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Alec &#8211; there&#8217;s only been one so far, and it was published on the PoliticsHome website last autumn. The idea is bonkers anyway, since it wouldn&#8217;t work &#8211; it would still count as a gift in kind and be declarable expenditure.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s a bizarre theory. If Michael Ashcroft wants to buy big polls of marginal seats he doesn&#8217;t need to spend money on buying several websites to commission them on his behalf, he just needs to phone up a pollster and commission a private poll &#8211; after all, that&#8217;s what he did at the last election when he commissioned loads of private polling from YouGov and Populus to write his book.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

