<?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: Question</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/question/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/question/</link>
	<description>In search of a European identity</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2012 12:16:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken</title>
		<link>http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/question/comment-page-1/#comment-391</link>
		<dc:creator>ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2005 09:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/26/question/#comment-391</guid>
		<description>The Guadian has also picked up on this point  
 
&quot;The draft proposes that voters will not be asked to ratify the constitution, but the treaty that establishes it. The distinction is unlikely to attract much attention once the campaign starts&quot; 
 
I dont read it that way but, obviously some do! </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Guadian has also picked up on this point  </p>
<p>&quot;The draft proposes that voters will not be asked to ratify the constitution, but the treaty that establishes it. The distinction is unlikely to attract much attention once the campaign starts&quot; </p>
<p>I dont read it that way but, obviously some do!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AlanK</title>
		<link>http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/question/comment-page-1/#comment-390</link>
		<dc:creator>AlanK</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2005 22:23:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/26/question/#comment-390</guid>
		<description>I suppose technically that even if we vote yes, it is possible that we could say that we approve of the treaty but not the constitution 
 
also the common foreign minister seems a little odd, as there is no common foreign policy, just look at iraq 
 
also does seem a shame they made the constitution itself so boring and long to read compared to most of the other constitutions available 
 
alan </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I suppose technically that even if we vote yes, it is possible that we could say that we approve of the treaty but not the constitution </p>
<p>also the common foreign minister seems a little odd, as there is no common foreign policy, just look at iraq </p>
<p>also does seem a shame they made the constitution itself so boring and long to read compared to most of the other constitutions available </p>
<p>alan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ken</title>
		<link>http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/question/comment-page-1/#comment-389</link>
		<dc:creator>ken</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:03:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jcm.org.uk/blog/2005/01/26/question/#comment-389</guid>
		<description>I don&#239;&#191;&amp;frac12;t think there is much room for argument, the title of the document is &#239;&#191;&amp;frac12;the treaty establishing a constitution for Europe&#239;&#191;&amp;frac12;. It does not strike me that there is an attempt to divide the issue but it is an interesting point. </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&iuml;&iquest;&amp;frac12;t think there is much room for argument, the title of the document is &iuml;&iquest;&amp;frac12;the treaty establishing a constitution for Europe&iuml;&iquest;&amp;frac12;. It does not strike me that there is an attempt to divide the issue but it is an interesting point.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

