<?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: Disabled- and gay- only shortlists?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://davecole.org/blog/2007/06/01/disabled-and-gay-only-shortlists/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://davecole.org/blog/2007/06/01/disabled-and-gay-only-shortlists/</link>
	<description>Thoughts, notes and comments</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:44:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Vino S</title>
		<link>http://davecole.org/blog/2007/06/01/disabled-and-gay-only-shortlists/comment-page-1/#comment-248</link>
		<dc:creator>Vino S</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2007 16:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davecole.org/blog/?p=274#comment-248</guid>
		<description>My view, which i expressed in a blog post on my blog a while ago is that Parliament is there to represent the people _politically_ not demographically and so i do not see a reason for having too many shortlists that are restricted. If nothing else, it reduces the freedom of choice of local constituency parties.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My view, which i expressed in a blog post on my blog a while ago is that Parliament is there to represent the people _politically_ not demographically and so i do not see a reason for having too many shortlists that are restricted. If nothing else, it reduces the freedom of choice of local constituency parties.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
