<?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 is better value than most government</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.yrtk.org/2006/freedom-of-information-is-better-value-than-most-government/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.yrtk.org/2006/freedom-of-information-is-better-value-than-most-government/</link>
	<description>A guide to the Freedom of Information Act &#38; other access laws</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:01:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Td</title>
		<link>http://www.yrtk.org/2006/freedom-of-information-is-better-value-than-most-government/comment-page-1/#comment-4755</link>
		<dc:creator>Td</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:59:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.yrtk.org/2006/freedom-of-information-is-better-value-than-most-government/#comment-4755</guid>
		<description></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As Wat Tyler pointed out on his blog, <a HREF="http://burningourmoney.blogspot.com/2006/10/more-trough-snufflings.html" rel="nofollow">Burning Our Money</a>, £35m pa is peanuts in the scheme of things.</p>
<p>But according to the report, a large proportion of the costs can be attributed to internal reviews (you can request a review of a decision not to supply information): &#8216;On average internal reviews cost £1,208 compared to £254 for an initial request&#8217;.</p>
<p>So it seems to me that one way to reduce costs would be to cut down on the number of refusals!</p>
<p>The report claims that MPs are a key category of FoI requestor.  Unfortunately the report does not mention the proportion of requests made by MPs (however it does seem to single out journalists).</p>
<p>MPs have made complaints in Parliament about having to use the Act to request information that they believe should be supplied to them as a matter of course.  This suggests another potential saving.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
