Visiting Salisbury to attend a public meeting of the UK Independence Party - well reported in the Daily Telegraph letters page - I noticed that the height-restriction warning signs at the entrance to the car park showed "1.9 metres" with no Imperial equivalent. I spoke to Salisbury Council "Parking Services" where a lady checked with "the relevant department" and told me action would be taken by them. After further questioning, she told me that a Mr Peter Hutton of the "Signs Department" would be responsible. I spoke to Mr Hutton the next day, but he had not received the message and admitted that he had never heard of TSRGD and had no idea that the signs are illegal. He promised to look into the matter. I do not visit Salisbury often so could anyone local keep an eye on things to see whether the signs are changed?

UKIP strikes again!

If anyone saw the "Political Slot" on Channel 4 at 7.55pm today, it would be obvious to them that the UKIP is the only hope if we are to extricate ourselves from this undemocratic, authoritarian, dishonest and inept Europe that we have been tricked and deceived into joining.

You've forgotton the terrible British attitude of "Hi everyone, I'm British, please feel free to walk all over me"

and that pathetic attitude of "The rest of Europe is trying to take us over and destroy our culture"

Is our national identity so weak that using different currency or measurements would make us less British?

If we had never joined the EU we would now be metric anyway. Going metric has nothing to do with Europe.

<<
and that pathetic attitude of "The rest of Europe is trying to take us over and destroy our culture"
>>

Last year, when working in Italy I overheard part of a conversation between a German supplier and an Italian customer - they were speaking in English!

While the English language is becoming the lingua franca of Europe, the British system of measuremetn certainly is not.

exactly. and language is surely a more important part of your culture than measurements. We have a massive advantage within Europe that it is going to be OUR language that is used as the language of business,and as everyones second language. But we get so worked up about going metric, which we would have done even if we had nothing to do with the rest of Europe and more quickly because people wouldn't have had the excuse that someone was forcing us to do it. All a bit pathetic really.

I find it so frustrating when people think that being proud to be British means being anti everything European (or something seen to be European eg metric). Unfortunately the tabloids have made this a popular view.

"Unfortunately the tabloids have made this a popular view."

The problem is that the British press (tabloids as well as quality papers) is mainly owned by some very anti-European conglomerates.

Take for instance arch-Eurosceptic media baron Rupert Murdoch, whose News Corporation owns BSkyB and about one-third of British newspapers, including The Times, The Sunday Times, The Sun, News of the World and News International.

He is said to be Eurosceptic mainly because of the European Commission's opposition to monopolies, which is exactly what Murdoch is trying to obtain. It goes without saying that his editors in chief are not allowed to be in favour of the EU, the euro, metrication or anything that is experienced as pro-European.

His influence is so huge that he causes grown cabinet ministers to think more than twice before proposing policies contrary to his views.

Conrad - Stop being do anti-murdoch! Some of the stuff you put there really doesn't make sense. But, yes, the "Sun" is anti-euro - errrr that's about it!
P.S. Big business tends to be pro-euro whereas the more numerous small businesses tend to be anti-euro.

And FOR THE LAST TIME ANDY!:-

"I find it so frustrating when people think that being proud to be British means being anti everything European (or something seen to be European eg metric). Unfortunately the tabloids have made this a popular view."

I am *P*R*O* European.
I am *A*N*T*I* EU.
I am *P*R*O* choice
I am *N*O*T* anti -metric
I do not worship every word the newspapers say
I am not a minority!

Unfortunately it *IS* the EU's fault that metrication would be so divisive, in the 70's the forming EEC/EC/EU wanted a commitment from GB that we'd go metric simply to allow us into that cartel.

Put it this way, as an example, *ALL* my european colleagues quite like our "quirky" measurement system and are keen to learn it (except one Italian colleague, if truth be told). They EVEN CONVERSE WITH EACH OTHER in miles when referring to distance on GB roads as they are keen to "learn the lingo". Believe me, it's rather amusing to hear a new french collegue who hasn't been here long to say - in a VERY french accent - "She eez only pretty because she wears an eeench of makeup".

Strangely enough whenever I wander around europe I like to learn the more "local" individual things that create identities - it's part of diversity.


Andy - looks like you are buying what one particular tabloid paper is teaching (preaching) you about eurosceptics - this can be confirmed by you mentioning your favourite newspaper.

Steve - I accept your point, and I accept that there are other intelligent people like yourself who have valid reasons for disliking the EU and wanting to keep imperial measurements. I think this is a minority though - most peoples prejudice against the EU and anything loosely connected to it comes purely from the tabloids

<<Unfortunately it *IS* the EU's fault that metrication would be so divisive, in the 70's the forming EEC/EC/EU wanted a commitment from GB that we'd go metric simply to allow us into that cartel.>>

maybe the EU did want a commitment, but the decision had already been made anyway. As I've said before, I think if we'd never been a member of the EU we would now be much further towards full metrication, because peoples resistance to metrication is due to peoples misconceptions about the subject.

<<<Put it this way, as an example, *ALL* my european colleagues quite like our "quirky" measurement system and are keen to learn it (except one Italian colleague, if truth be told). They EVEN CONVERSE WITH EACH OTHER in miles when referring to distance on GB roads as they are keen to "learn the lingo". Believe me, it's rather amusing to hear a new french collegue who hasn't been here long to say - in a VERY french accent - "She eez only pretty because she wears an eeench of makeup". >>>

Of course they use miles when talking about distances on UK roads. It is impossible not to, when all road signs/speed limits are in miles. Just goes to show how easy it is to change, and how little difference it really makes. I'm sure you use kilometres when travelling around Europe.

<<<Strangely enough whenever I wander around europe I like to learn the more "local" individual things that create identities - it's part of diversity.>>>

this confirms that you are not in the majority that I was referring to - the majority of British holiday makers want to eat english food, speak english and don't respect the local culture. sad fact, but a fact none the less.

"...I think this is a minority though - most peoples prejudice against the EU and anything loosely connected to it comes purely from the tabloids"

I do not believe this to be the case - we'll have to agree to disagree


"I think if we'd never been a member of the EU we would now be much further towards full metrication, because peoples resistance to metrication is due to peoples misconceptions about the subject."

Our move to, away from, or "status'd quo'd" regarding metrication would have been solely dictated by the market - a method that I fully approve of. I reckon we would have had greater use of dual labelling so that we could tap into domestic, Euro and US markets.
Remember that the Eurozone don't like too much that we have a strong trading output to the US - a lot of this might be to do with the costs *for them* to allow dual labelling.


"I'm sure you use kilometres when travelling around Europe."

I'm au fait with 1 mile being ~ 0.6 miles, however when in large groups the most common thing I hear is, for eg, "Sol 15km - how much is 15km?" - and that was from the youngest in the party (21 yrs)!

"the majority of British holiday makers want to eat english food, speak english and don't respect the local culture. sad fact, but a fact none the less."

Again we'll have to disagree. I think most like to soak up regional variations. That's not to say that I haven't searched hard for a curry house or been unable to converse to a shopkeeper in, for eg, Italy!

The type you refer to are the "loud minority".

My most favourite activity whenever I'm abroad is to, quite literally, walk miles and miles. Nothing is more enjoyable and enlightening and good at undoing the damage of the alcholol from the night before.

The last big walk we did was from Hastings to Worthing (and then onto Oistins).

....in barbados!

<<
... would be obvious to them that the UKIP is the only hope if we are to extricate ourselves from this undemocratic, authoritarian, dishonest and inept Europe that we have been tricked and deceived into joining.
>>

The UKIP are not averse to a bit of trickery and deception either.

Like when they pretend to be protecting Britain's interests against the European monster by interfering with the process of metrication, perpetuating myths about its legal enforcement and unjustly re-inforceing the perception that it was forced on us by the EU.

The compulsory metric conversion regulations were passed to implement EC Directive 80/181. The 2010 ban on additional information is also in response to this Directive. Parliament has never legislated for compulsory metric conversion.

The fact that compulsory metrication in the retail sector occurred in response to EU directives is an accident of history.

It would have happened sooner or later even if Britain had not joined the EC/EU. A bill was prepared for it in the late 70s but the Callaghan government posponed it until after the 79 election. That bill was put together by the Metrication board as part of Britains own agenda independently of EC membership.

The bill was quashed, and the Metrication Board was disbanded the following year. What is curious is that the EC directive was signed in Brussels in December 1979, at the very time government policy changed at home. One wonders if the executive (or bureaucracy?) thought, "We'll never pass this through Parliament, let's get an EC directive".

BWMA: One wonders if the executive (or bureaucracy?) thought, "We'll never pass this through Parliament, let's get an EC directive".

Haha, that's what they call wishful thinking !

The only reason why people in Britain are more opposed to metrication than in other countries, is because of the association with the EU. They think the EU only exists to deprive Britain of its right to govern itself.

If the decision to metricate Britain had been taken by Westminster, eurosceptic Britons would have experienced that decision as a "British" one, and as a result the opposition wouldn't have been so strong.

BWMA claims that the government, for fear of too strong an opposition, had an EC directive do the dirty work. Could anyone tell me please why there was almost no opposition in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and India ? An Ozzie friend of mine told me that the people down under considered metrication as a normal step in the evolution of their country. To them, it was a matter of progress.

I can’t stress it enough: if metrication would have been a personal decision most people would have supported it.

Conrad wrote

<<
An Ozzie friend of mine told me that the people down under considered metrication as a normal step in the evolution of their country. To them, it was a matter of progress.
>>

There was probably also a degree of pommie-bashing

Conrad,

re: "I can’t stress it enough: if metrication would have been a personal decision most people would have supported it".

QUESTION: Given the repeated evidence from a raft of recent independent surveys that British people, old and young, prefer customary weights and measures to metric by around 70% - 30% to 90% - 10%, what, please, is your *evidence* for your assertion?

Tony wrote: "QUESTION: Given the repeated evidence from a raft of recent independent surveys that British people, old and young, prefer customary weights and measures to metric by around 70% - 30% to 90% - 10%, what, please, is your *evidence* for your assertion?"

Tony, in those surveys people are never asked WHY they oppose metrication.
And THAT'S EXACTLY where it's all about.

No, it isn't about "why". It's about exercising a choice. The moment people have to justify that choice, we cease to be free.

It's important to understand the scope of that word 'compulsory' and the reason that a

purely voluntary approach failed during the 70s.

Firstly the legal compulsion only affected circumstances where it is normal to regulate or

specify which units are used. The process of metrication in Britain did not introduce any

new laws involving criminalisation where it didn't previously exist, except for the choice

of unit(s) being enforced.

What people do at a personal level according to individual preference has nothing to do with

metrication at an official level in trade and industry, public services etc.

Secondly the reason why some compulsion was necessary had to do with certain areas of the

retail sector. Most of British Industry changed over voluntarily and were able to capitolise

on the economic benefits of the avoidance of dual working.

However the situation in retail was very different. Some had difficulty with the fact that

the metric unit was larger than the imperial counterpart. Carpet retailers in particular who

started to sell in square metres found that they could boost trade by reverting back to the

square yard, because it is a smaller unit. Petrol retailers on the other hand where quite

willing to change from gallons to litres because it was far smaller.

Hence the change-over in that sector was patchy and without compulsion it would not happen

by itself. In spite of this the traders were willing to go along with it provided that a

clean changeover in the form of a legal cut-off date for imperial was enforced. Traders

could not be expected to price in metric unless they were confident that their rivals would

do the same.

The British government were reluctant to do this in spite of warnings from the Metrication

board surveys and consultations. By the late 70s there was the additional evidence from the

experience of other Commonwealth countries who had completed the changeover all requiring

some degree of compulsion to help them over that last hurdle. Hence the belated attempt to

do so by the Labour government of the day, but bedevilled by the turmoil of the times and

the loss of political nerve, decided to leave it till after the upcoming election.

Ironically, had they prodeeded with it at that time, it would have passed with very little

opposition and history would have been very different.

<<<No, it isn't about "why". It's about exercising a choice. The moment people have to justify that choice, we cease to be free.>>>

Of course it is about "why"

To exercise a choice people should be given the facts. No-one can deny that there is a lot of misinformation regarding metrication in Britain.

If the British people were told the whole truth about metrication, then given a vote on whether we should go metric or not, and still chose imperial, I would be completely happy with that.

I think we all know that if this was the case the people would choose metric.

I find it quite funny that the more agressive pro-metric people use the EU as a whipping boy for why Brits don't "speak the lingo" and the more aggressive pro-imperial people use the EU as a whipping boy for why Brits are being forced to "speak the lingo"!

Is this the 1st time in my life when I start feeling sorry for the EU?


errr, no!

Let people choose - they're instinctively right!