There is a desperate tone about much of the recent UKMA report, as they begin to realise that they are miles away from achieving their dreams of a metrically pure United Kingdom, which are disappearing inch by inch over the horizon.

According to UKMA, some are 'without excuse' over compulsory metrication.

Those in the UKMA's firing line include local authorities and the European Commission.

Here's a couple of examples from 'A Very British Mess' - first:

"It may be true that the European Commission did not object to the revised Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 because the Commission felt it to be politically expedient to turn a blind eye to the U.K. Government's obvious failure. This does not excuse it" (Para 7.17(d)).

And here's another:

"The existing law on price marking and weighing/measuring loose goods at the point of sale should be enforced. Following the rejection by the European Court of Human Rights of the appeal by the so-called 'metric martyrs', there is no longer any excuse for local authorities to defer enforcement of compliance action" (Para 7.9(a)).

<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >> Return to Index

"They Are Without Excuse" - UKMA
July 21 2004 at 6:03 PM Tony Bennett


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a desperate tone about much of the recent UKMA report, as they begin to realise that they are miles away from achieving their dreams of a metrically pure United Kingdom, which are disappearing inch by inch over the horizon.

According to UKMA, some are 'without excuse' over compulsory metrication.

Those in the UKMA's firing line include local authorities and the European Commission.

Here's a couple of examples from 'A Very British Mess' - first:

"It may be true that the European Commission did not object to the revised Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2002 because the Commission felt it to be politically expedient to turn a blind eye to the U.K. Government's obvious failure. This does not excuse it" (Para 7.17(d)).

And here's another:

"The existing law on price marking and weighing/measuring loose goods at the point of sale should be enforced. Following the rejection by the European Court of Human Rights of the appeal by the so-called 'metric martyrs', there is no longer any excuse for local authorities to defer enforcement of compliance action" (Para 7.9(a)).

metre:
It's all a matter of interpretation. If you think the country can revert to imperial again then you do live in fantasy land. That poses the question, how can anyone justify to teach and use 2 measurements in a world that does just fine with one.

There is a desperate tone about many of Tony Bennetts recent postings. Almost as if he finally realises that he is fighting a losing battle.

Wishfull thinking Andy - go for a walk!

<<<That poses the question, how can anyone justify to teach and use 2 measurements in a world that does just fine with one>>>

Much of the world uses imperial measures, even in "metricated" countries.

re (Andy): "There is a desperate tone about many of Tony Bennett's recent postings. Almost as if he finally realises that he is fighting a losing battle".

REPLY: ROTFL x 10!

I look forward to ROFL many times when that announcement about road signs is made...

I take it you believe in cryogenics then?

re (Andy): "I look forward to ROFL many times when that announcement about road signs is made..."

REPLY: Such an announcement may very well be made sooner or later. But given that in the last independent consumer survey in April 2002, 86% said they wanted road and footpath signs to stay in miles, yards, feet and inches, against just 8% preferring kilometres and metres [entirely consistent with other surveys on the subject], that would rather prove what a lot of us are saying about the fundamentally undemocratic character of the present government, wouldn't it?

Well, the choice may come down to spending a billion pounds or so on metricating road signs, or a billion or so on vital life-saving hospital equipment. Will you still ROFL at that?

<<<REPLY: Such an announcement may very well be made sooner or later. But given that in the last independent consumer survey in April 2002, 86% said they wanted road and footpath signs to stay in miles, yards, feet and inches, against just 8% preferring kilometres and metres [entirely consistent with other surveys on the subject], that would rather prove what a lot of us are saying about the fundamentally undemocratic character of the present government, wouldn't it? >>>

Most of these surveys are extremely biased towards retaining imperial units. If the public were given more information a far higher percentage would be in favour. Also, people naturally resist change - but afterwards they realise the benefits. How many were in favour of decimalisation at the time? How many still think it wasn't beneficial?

<<<Well, the choice may come down to spending a billion pounds or so on metricating road signs, or a billion or so on vital life-saving hospital equipment. Will you still ROFL at that?>>>

This is probably the main reason it hasn't been done yet. Because it is a lot of money and obviously there are more important things for the government to spend the money on. This does not mean it shouldn't be done, just that it is hard to justify prioritising it over other things.

Peculiarly enough, andy, I have just unwittingly answered this question of yours in another thread when I was talking to metre.

re (Andy): "Most of these surveys are extremely biased towards retaining imperial units..."


REPLY: Andy, you have not one shred of evidence for making that statement.

Each of those surveys was conducted by independent and internationally respected organisations like ICM and BRMB.

They do not ask biased questions, although sometimes clients have a say in asking a certain question in a particular way.

This was *not* done in the case of *any* of the questions asked on the imperial -v- metric issue as can plainly be seen from the survey questions themselves or by studying the BWMA's 'The Weight of Public Opinion' which summarises the findings of six surveys.

If you want to justify your claim, please post on this bulletin board *any* question used in the surveys and explain precisely why it is biased. I will happily allow you some time to do this as I am as certain as I can be that you have made your allegation of 'bias' without even knowing what *one* of the questions was.

The pro-metric brigade constantly hope that their preferred system will eventually also be preferred by the British public, but time and again people of all ages say by a huge, sometimes overwhelming, majority that they do not wish to proceed with compulsory metrication and that they use and prefer customary measures.

It is a serious indictment of the pro-metric side in general and the UKMA in particular that they resort to fraudulent claims that survey questions are 'biased', for the simple reason that this helps them avoid confronting the harsh reality that independent findings are thoroughly embarrassing to their case and to their ambitions.

It is generally referred to as 'being in denial'

OK, I concede, the questions themselves are not biased, but the information available to the average person (i.e the 99.99% of the population who have no real interest in weights and measures) is heavily biased and the population as a whole have been misled as to the reasons for Britain going metric. All the average person hears is things like some market trader being fined for not using kilos. For someone who hasn't heard the whole story, the initial reaction is going to be "thats out of order, lets fight for the right to keep pounds and ounces"

If the tabloids had been on the other side and had been running scare stories for years about the damage failing to go metric is doing to Britain, then public opinion would no doubt be different.

Andy,
Doing a poll on measurement preference is not like a question about an issue in another country, about which people can be misled (like WMD).
Weighing and measuring is all around us. It is like colour. People choose one colour over another; it is not a case of being "right" or "wrong" as in "true" or "untrue".
If someone prefers the inch-scale, then it is what they prefer. It is "right", but only in so far as it relates to them. One person's preference for the inch-scale does not make someone else's preference for centimetres wrong - or vice-versa.

Tony Bennett: "Well, the choice may come down to spending a billion pounds or so on metricating road signs, or a billion or so on vital life-saving hospital equipment. Will you still ROFL at that?"

Too late, the government already spent it on a war with Iraq.

Tony Bennett: "Well, the choice may come down to spending a billion pounds or so on metricating road signs, or a billion or so on vital life-saving hospital equipment. Will you still ROFL at that?"

Too late, the government already spent it on a war with Iraq.


(sorry for posting again, but the first time round, the system left off my username, so I had to repost and type it in manually, what a pain).

SteveH: "Much of the world uses imperial measures, even in "metricated" countries."

Would you give us some examples of this?

Andy: "Most of these surveys are extremely biased towards retaining imperial units..."

I have to agree. Just as if there were a survey asking people what language they preferred to use, the no.1 choice would be English, not because people have thought about it, studied into languages and concluded that English is the best language in the world, but because that is what people are used to in this country and so they just choose English without thinking, as most people are too lazy to change. Same with the Imperial/Metric question, people are used to imperial due to lack of progress by government and shops in changing over, so people are still used to an antiquated system that most of the world has abandoned, and are too lazy to learn a new system -- probably because the imperial system was so hard to learn when they were young that they think learning metric will be harder, or like a lot of working class people I know of, they are just unwilling to learn anything, their attitude being, "I left school and I don't need to learn anything else." I think this is why most people would say they prefer imperial. They are just too lazy to learn something new.

Ilove the name, KiloQuad- you do know that the kiloquad is an Imperial measure though, don't you?

http://www.unc.edu/~rowlett/units/dictQ.html

Quad: one (US) quadrillion BTU.

By the way, what is wrong with that unwillingness to change when the current system works well?

Working well in the current context of W&M is a relative term.

People don't know any different, they've lived with the current mess for so long they think its normal.

Re: "They Are Without Excuse" - UKMA July 24 2004, 10:43 AM
BWMA:
Andy,Doing a poll on measurement preference is not like a question about an issue in another country, about which people can be misled (like WMD).Weighing and measuring is all around us. It is like colour. People choose one colour over another; it is not a case of being "right" or "wrong" as in "true" or "untrue". If someone prefers the inch-scale, then it is what they prefer. It is "right", but only in so far as it relates to them. One person's preference for the inch-scale does not make someone else's preference for centimetres wrong - or vice-versa.

metre:
Your colour example shows the fuzzy thinking imperialists come up with to defend cumbersome units. Do you seriously believe that choice of colours can be equated with choice of measurements? If so, please tell me which colour is inherently better than another. Has white an inbuilt advantage over green, yellow, or grey? You would do well to read KiloQuads post on this thread that lucidly explains why people want to hang on to the familiar.

There's no reason why one colour is inherently better than another; that's our point. If someone chooses to use feet rather than metres, that is their choice. You cannot say a metre is inherently better than feet, unless you are referring to your own experience. Another person's experience might be different.

and his experience is self-admittedly imperial!

<<SteveH: "Much of the world uses imperial measures, even in "metricated" countries.">>

You asked for proof - take a look at the "International" thread.

(And I'm not talking about clothes size, TV sizes, international flight, some sports etc)

Re: "They Are Without Excuse" - UKMA July 26 2004, 12:50 PM


There's no reason why one colour is inherently better than another; that's our point. If someone chooses to use feet rather than metres, that is their choice. You cannot say a metre is inherently better than feet, unless you are referring to your own experience. Another person's experience might be different.


metre:
Agreed, the metre is no better than the foot, but that is forgetting the totality of the system which the metre is part of. It takes a stubborn soul to maintain that the metric system is not superior to imperial. To maintain that metric is only preferred b/c it has been forced on people in the past, is to insult the intelligence of nearly all the people living on this planet today. I keep continually asking for somebody on your side to show me one metric site that airs dissatisfaction with the metric system, or vice versa.

"Working well in the current context of W&M is a relative term.

People don't know any different, they've lived with the current mess for so long they think its normal."



The "current system" being Imperial/English, Stan.

<<<People don't know any different, they've lived with the current mess for so long they think its normal."

The "current system" being Imperial/English, Stan.>>>

I'm not sure you appreciate how different the situation is here in the UK to that in the US. In the US people use the system they are taught as a child so it is a system and it works.

In the UK people learn one system and end up using another. The system they have learnt, they don't know how to use, and the system they use they don't understand.

That is why it is a 'mess'

hmmmm, I live in West London....

Yes, there is a mess, but that mess is not the Imperial system, the mess is metric and imperial co-existing in strange ways. That mess was created by compulsory metrification, not the Imperial system. It appears **you** have lived in this mess for so long that you can't actually remember why we are in it in the first place!!

So, given you admit there is no mess in the US, why should the US continue converting? The only reason I can think of is to create a mess which the introduction of metric for everything can magically cure.

<<<hmmmm, I live in West London....>>>

Sorry! For some reason I thought you were american, was thinking of someone else...

<<<Yes, there is a mess, but that mess is not the Imperial system, the mess is metric and imperial co-existing in strange ways.>>>

Agreed

<<<That mess was created by compulsory metrification, not the Imperial system. It appears **you** have lived in this mess for so long that you can't actually remember why we are in it in the first place!!>>>

The mess was created by *failure* to introduce compulsory metrication. Where metrication has been enforced eg. petrol sold in litres, there is no mess. We should either have stayed imperial, or gone fully metric. Whereas staying imperial was hardly a realistic option, it would in my opinion be preferrable to the current sitaution as at least people would undertstand the measures they use.

<<<So, given you admit there is no mess in the US, why should the US continue converting? >>>

Are they converting? I guess they will eventually but they seem to be a lot further behind us

"To maintain that metric is only preferred b/c it has been forced on people in the past, is to insult the intelligence of nearly all the people living on this planet today"

I still find that hilarious - all those people in countries that are 100% truly metric (is there one) complaining bitterly about being insulted! Ah well, once a troll....


Andy

"In the UK people learn one system and end up using another"

No - Imperial was reintroduced into the curriculum in the 90's. I was educated in the 80's when they saw fit to deny me an education about all those "words" that people spoke around me. Still, it mattered very little, since imperial is so simple and adaptable I managed to get that education "naturally", despite no teacher teaching it. Makes you think doesn't it -like how long it took me to learn how to read an inch ruler or how to get my girlfriend "a little bit pregnant" ;-)

Andy

"Where metrication has been enforced eg. petrol sold in litres, there is no mess. "

What's the economy figure of your car?
What do you fill it with? (litres or pounds and pence?)


"Are they converting? I guess they will eventually but they seem to be a lot further behind "

There was once a time when UK roads were metric free and US roads were "going metric".

Pay particular attention to the word "once".

<<<

What's the economy figure of your car?
What do you fill it with? (litres or pounds and pence?)>>>

I fill it with pounds and pence like most people do, only using the price per litre to compare prices.

You're not going to tell me that people used to fill it with x gallons, because that was a more meaningful measure, are you?

No - then as now I suspect the monetary value was used.

I bet that before automatic pumps they "asked" for rounded gallons or rounded money-worth though.

So do you think petrol stations should be allowed to show price per gallon if they want?

Maybe when buying fruit and veg its not quite so important comparing differnt prices, but its the same principle

<<So do you think petrol stations should be allowed to show price per gallon if they want?>>

Yes, and Asda already do.

<<Maybe when buying fruit and veg its not quite so important comparing differnt prices, but its the same principle >>

Unit pricing is always the easiest - eg 3 bananas, 4 apples etc (on price per banana, price per apple, etc). That is the way I buy things. What I am against is people telling those that prefer to get there bananas to the pound that they are wrong and should use kilogrammes instead.

<<<Yes, and Asda already do.>>>

Maybe in tiny writing somewhere in addition to the main price per gallon...what I mean is the main display price that you see on big lit-up signs. Don't you think it would be a bit confusing? Of course if a gallon was smaller than a litre petrol stations would be trying to get away with this..

<<<Unit pricing is always the easiest - eg 3 bananas, 4 apples etc (on price per banana, price per apple, etc). That is the way I buy things.>>>

I buy like this as well, so do most people.

<<<What I am against is people telling those that prefer to get there bananas to the pound that they are wrong and should use kilogrammes instead.>>>

They are not wrong - there just has to be one standard measure so that ordinary people (i.e those who don't have an issue with measurement) can easily compare prices. If someone is so stubborn that they refuse to learn that a pound is half a kilo and insist on asking for a pound they can still do so as long as the seller still knows what a pound is

<<<Yes, and Asda already do.>>>

"Maybe in tiny writing somewhere in addition to the main price per gallon...what I mean is the main display price that you see on big lit-up signs. Don't you think it would be a bit confusing? Of course if a gallon was smaller than a litre petrol stations would be trying to get away with this.."

This is the exact sign I am talking about, but only Asda do it.


<<<What I am against is people telling those that prefer to get there bananas to the pound that they are wrong and should use kilogrammes instead.>>>

"They are not wrong - there just has to be one standard measure so that ordinary people (i.e those who don't have an issue with measurement) can easily compare prices. If someone is so stubborn that they refuse to learn that a pound is half a kilo and insist on asking for a pound they can still do so as long as the seller still knows what a pound is"

But when you get both units being used, one above or to the left of the other - the issue goes away.

Besides, who needed to change it in the first place? What was wrong with the original "standard"?

<<<
This is the exact sign I am talking about, but only Asda do it.
>>>>

Really? I've never seen petrol advertised by the gallon (well, not for about 15yrs anyway)

<<<But when you get both units being used, one above or to the left of the other - the issue goes away.

Besides, who needed to change it in the first place? What was wrong with the original "standard"?>>>

I actually sympathise with that argument more than any other. If the process of metrication had never started, yes I would still be in favour of it, but I would totally see the arguments for leaving things as they are.

This is NOT the situation though. We are way too far down the line to go back. Using a mixture is ok for a while, but there has to be progress now towards one system - and the only sensible choice is metric.

<<Really? I've never seen petrol advertised by the gallon (well, not for about 15yrs anyway)>>

The two Asda's nearest me do - and the Gallon price is first.

I'll see if there is a pic on the interwebnetwidewebthing - but I doubt there will be (what on earth would there be?)

I'll have a scout.

Good job carlyle/euric cannot post here, as he would see my text as being a liar and I cannot prove myself "not right" !!

<<Andy>>>>>>
The mess was created by *failure* to introduce compulsory metrication. Where metrication has been enforced eg. petrol sold in litres, there is no mess. We should either have stayed imperial, or gone fully metric. Whereas staying imperial was hardly a realistic option, it would in my opinion be preferrable to the current sitaution as at least people would undertstand the measures they use.
>>>>>>>>>>>>


What a load of pap!! Before the conversion process, there was no confusion, the process begins, there is confusion; you are looking at thsi from a pretty strange view, if you ask me. It is simple: before metric, no problem; in introducing metric, problems.

re (Andy): "Where metrication has been enforced e.g. petrol sold in litres, there is no mess..."

REPLY: Andy - think again. By enforcing litres at the pump, they have caused confusion because most of us still calculate fuel consumption in miles per gallon. Most people know how many gallons their petrol tank contains, not litres. Now milk and beer are sold in pints - but petrol, cans of beer, wine and soft drinks in litres.

Your phrase could be re-worded by putting the words in a slightly different order:

"Mess has only been caused where metrication has been enforced"

<<<What a load of pap!! Before the conversion process, there was no confusion, the process begins, there is confusion; you are looking at thsi from a pretty strange view, if you ask me. It is simple: before metric, no problem; in introducing metric, problems.>>>

So how come there hasn't been this confusion and mess in other countries that have gone metric?

If metrication itself is the problem, why is every country in the world that isn't already metric, planning to go metric?

<<<REPLY: Andy - think again. By enforcing litres at the pump, they have caused confusion because most of us still calculate fuel consumption in miles per gallon. Most people know how many gallons their petrol tank contains, not litres. Now milk and beer are sold in pints - but petrol, cans of beer, wine and soft drinks in litres.>>>

Thats what I'm saying. Its because we started metrication but didn't finish it that there is confusion. If we used km on the roads then we could use l/100km for fuel consumption

Andy, come on mate, how can this all be a fault of imperial? In other countries, there have been problems. Many there have not been, though- those countries were just more willing/able to force their populations to use metric. Also, bear in mind that in many of these countires, they had a confused system of W&M, whereas we have a standard and straightforward one- Imperial.

The notion that the pesent confusion is the fault of the Imperial system is idiotic.

er, I think you're misunderstanding me. when did I say it was the fault of imperial?

It is the fault of the government (s) for starting but not completing metrication.

If we had never started metrication, we would not be in this mess (although there would be other problems - but thats a seperate issue) and if we had done it properly like they did in Australia we would also not be in the current mess

I agree. Best thing was to stay Imperial. Now, we ought to reconvert to Imperial, as we are at a half-way house.

Then we would truly be the laughing stock of the world..

<<<Then we would truly be the laughing stock of the world>>>

You disappoint me Andy.

That sentence is usually used by those losing the argument and trying the "final weapon".

I actually liked and sympathised with your argument until that point.

Fella, think about what you are saying!

Are you honestly saying that someone in, say, Norway is going to start laughing when he sees in his newspaper that people in the UK will be using the world 'inch' a bit more?
And then this laughter from Norway slowly creeps around the world until all countries, including USA, start laughing at the UK?
Do you honestly think that the world cares about how many pounds of apples Brian Smith from Stockport buys?

I meant if we abandoned metrication altogether - that is about a lot more than how we buy our apples.

and I reckon people would have a good laugh at us if we took this backward step - but it will never happen so its a pointless argument

Back in the 70s, the US was actually quite serious about going metric. Since then, interest waned and it has pretty much been abandoned. I haven't noticed any other countries laughing about this.

I hear on the grapevine that someone in Bolivia had a small chuckle about it.

Re: "They Are Without Excuse" - UKMA July 29 2004, 8:33 AM

Bud:
Back in the 70s, the US was actually quite serious about going metric. Since then, interest waned and it has pretty much been abandoned. I haven't noticed any other countries laughing about this.

metre:
Most nations are quite happy if you keep on shooting into your own foot. It's only when you start messing up international metric order with your dismal hodgepodge of units that countries draw a definite line.

Yeah, and you can see that happening all the time.

The Sudan crisis is a good example, the number one priority is that people say metric words.

Get Real!

I make this comment in response to the reference to the Sudan Crisis.

All of us who keep posting on this forum are expressing our views on a narrowly focussed interest on the issue if measurement. It has wide implications to be sure but we devote a lot more of our time thinking about it than than most of the population (either side of the Atlantic).

Nothing wrong with it, we just happen to be interested in the subject.

But I would advise posters (on either side) not to try and claim the moral high-ground in relation to humanitarian crisis or bigger issues generally.

Whatever is said it can always be turned round!

Yeah, frankly I don't much like these rhetorical points about metric Naziland or whatever. It's kind of tedious.

What else is tedious is arguing amongst board members.

<<What else is tedious is arguing amongst board members>>

Isn't that what a discussion board's for ?

No Steve, presently it has gone seriously downhill.


"nuggh, u r d!vvi"
"Nah, u iz divvi"
"HA! u'zall divviiies"



That is about the level of much of the debate 'tween various presently.

...wonder why that might be...

Just for the record it would cost Britian more to reconvert to imperial than to finish converting to metric. At the current moment it seems the government is content in wasting its money. If the government stopped wasting it's money and just left a few things like road signs in imperial, and left the industry metric, then it would be taking the most cost effective route.

<<
Just for the record it would cost Britian more to reconvert to imperial than to finish converting to metric.
>>

Where did you come up with that?
I would think that it would be most cost effective for the government to step out and let laissez faire decide which system to use in each particular sector of the economy. Of course, the government should take steps to ensure fairness, whichever system is being used.

Re: "They Are Without Excuse" - UKMA August 6 2004, 11:49 PM

Roth:
Just for the record it would cost Britian more to reconvert to imperial than to finish converting to metric. At the current moment it seems the government is content in wasting its money. If the government stopped wasting it's money and just left a few things like road signs in imperial, and left the industry metric, then it would be taking the most cost effective route.

metre:
Now that would be really costly in extra mistakes made that cost maybe lives, health and money. And that does not include tedious conversions day in day out. Metric will win out for many and very good reasons.

<<Just for the record it would cost Britian more to reconvert to imperial than to finish converting to metric>>

I assume you have a mandate from the people then?
Why not ask what people would prefer?

(BTW - I totally dispute that claim, considering that liberalising anything causes less costs)

What I was saying is that since the large majority of Britian's industry is metric, switching back to imperial would be far to costly. I agree with you Bud, in that not everything needs to be converted into metric. It would also seem to be the most cost effective route for Britian to take. Afterall britian's roads signs have used miles for song long, other people in Europe should know that Britian uses miles by now. Why waste the money to switch them to metric. The roads won't suddenly become better if the switch is made.

Well said, Roth. I think that those areas in which it is beneficial to convert to metric should convert. International trade, some types of engineering etc. These areas have already converted, and did so without any governmental pressure, because it was in their interest. Anything beyond that will cost more than it is worth.

Roth wrote

<<
other people in Europe should know that Britian uses miles by now
>>

A French driver who drives in Germany has to contend with a different language. A French driver who drives in Britian has to contend with a different language, driving on the other side of the road and using a different set of units of measure. Reomving one of these differences will aid road safety.

re (martin): "A French driver who drives in Germany has to contend with a different language. A French driver who drives in Britain has to contend with a different language, driving on the other side of the road and using a different set of units of measure. Removing one of these differences will aid road safety".

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REPLY: Evidence for the statement, please, not assumptions.

Where are the official statistics relating to the number of foreign drivers who had accidents because of (a) not speaking English or (b) driving on the wrong side of the road or (c) different measurements? Or, to make it easier for you, statistics relating to accidents by English drivers abroad?

If you cannot support your statement, we must treat it as an unwarranted assumption.

Judging by road accident statistics from some European countries, many other factors appear to come into play, including national temperaments (sorry, can't go any further down that road due to the Commission for Racial Equality's bans on mentioning national stereotypes)

<<A French driver who drives in Germany has to contend with a different language. A French driver who drives in Britian has to contend with a different language, dri