<?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: The 25 Million HMRC Records Debacle</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/</link>
	<description>a witty tagline explaining that I write mostly anything I feel on here so you've been warned: caveat lector</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:31:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: SharkMan &#187; The 25 Million HMRC Records Debacle</title>
		<link>http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/comment-page-1/#comment-2411</link>
		<dc:creator>SharkMan &#187; The 25 Million HMRC Records Debacle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:37:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/#comment-2411</guid>
		<description>[...] Check it out! While looking through the blogosphere we stumbled on an interesting post today.Here&#8217;s a quick excerpt Just several questions that I have to ask (and of course, have no-one to ask them TO). What format is this database in that it canâ€™t be manipulated simply and easily to give you a pared down version with just name and national insurance number? The reason the news channels give is that the HMRC officials worried about extra â€˜costâ€™ in generating the version to give the National Audit Office. I think that putting a dummy version of the database (say, 5 full entries) on Rentacoder and paying $2 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Check it out! While looking through the blogosphere we stumbled on an interesting post today.Here&#8217;s a quick excerpt Just several questions that I have to ask (and of course, have no-one to ask them TO). What format is this database in that it canâ€™t be manipulated simply and easily to give you a pared down version with just name and national insurance number? The reason the news channels give is that the HMRC officials worried about extra â€˜costâ€™ in generating the version to give the National Audit Office. I think that putting a dummy version of the database (say, 5 full entries) on Rentacoder and paying $2 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Iguanaz &#187; The 25 Million HMRC Records Debacle</title>
		<link>http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/comment-page-1/#comment-2410</link>
		<dc:creator>Iguanaz &#187; The 25 Million HMRC Records Debacle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:35:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/#comment-2410</guid>
		<description>[...] Check it out! While looking through the blogosphere we stumbled on an interesting post today.Here&#8217;s a quick excerpt Just several questions that I have to ask (and of course, have no-one to ask them TO). What format is this database in that it canâ€™t be manipulated simply and easily to give you a pared down version with just name and national insurance number? The reason the news channels give is that the HMRC officials worried about extra â€˜costâ€™ in generating the version to give the National Audit Office. I think that putting a dummy version of the database (say, 5 full entries) on Rentacoder and paying $2 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Check it out! While looking through the blogosphere we stumbled on an interesting post today.Here&#8217;s a quick excerpt Just several questions that I have to ask (and of course, have no-one to ask them TO). What format is this database in that it canâ€™t be manipulated simply and easily to give you a pared down version with just name and national insurance number? The reason the news channels give is that the HMRC officials worried about extra â€˜costâ€™ in generating the version to give the National Audit Office. I think that putting a dummy version of the database (say, 5 full entries) on Rentacoder and paying $2 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SuperJogos - Todos os jogos da internet &#187; The 25 Million HMRC Records Debacle</title>
		<link>http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/comment-page-1/#comment-2409</link>
		<dc:creator>SuperJogos - Todos os jogos da internet &#187; The 25 Million HMRC Records Debacle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2007 22:32:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.richarddows.co.uk/2007/11/21/the-25-million-hmrc-records-debacle/#comment-2409</guid>
		<description>[...] The Movie Blog wrote an interesting post today!.Here&#8217;s a quick excerpt Just several questions that I have to ask (and of course, have no-one to ask them TO). What format is this database in that it canâ€™t be manipulated simply and easily to give you a pared down version with just name and national insurance number? The reason the news channels give is that the HMRC officials worried about extra â€˜costâ€™ in generating the version to give the National Audit Office. I think that putting a dummy version of the database (say, 5 full entries) on Rentacoder and paying $2 [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Movie Blog wrote an interesting post today!.Here&#8217;s a quick excerpt Just several questions that I have to ask (and of course, have no-one to ask them TO). What format is this database in that it canâ€™t be manipulated simply and easily to give you a pared down version with just name and national insurance number? The reason the news channels give is that the HMRC officials worried about extra â€˜costâ€™ in generating the version to give the National Audit Office. I think that putting a dummy version of the database (say, 5 full entries) on Rentacoder and paying $2 [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

