THE GREAT KILOMETRE COCK-UP

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

Kilometre "cock-up"
by Matthew Woodcock

A LEADING York councillor today labelled City of York Council's embarrassing mistake in putting up 30 wrong rights of way signs as the "kilometre cock-up".

Labour councillor Brian Watson warned council chiefs to be more careful in future after the signs were put up with distances in kilometres instead of miles.

"I always work in miles because of the speedometer on my car", Coun watson said.

"I can't believe they got it wrong. They should take more care in future".

Anti-metric campaigners argue it is illegal to put up any highway signs with metric measurements, including those on public rights of way, under section 131 of the 1980 Highway Act.

Peter Rogers, a supporter of Active Resistance to Metrication (ARM), welcomed the council's decision to replace the signage. "Each time we are successful, it is a small but significant step towards eradicating them from our country", he said.

"The imperial weights and measures of this country are part of our traditions and part of our culture.

"The attempts to impose metric signs is one by stealth and deception
and has been going on for many years".

Council chiefs admitted they got it wrong.

A spokeswoman said: "We can confirm that 30 new signs were erected with distances given in metric measures.

"This was a genuine error and, as soon as it was brought to our attention, we took measures to amend it.

"Giving information on a footpath sign such as the distance and destination is discretionary and we thought the public would appreciate this extra detail.

"The Ordnance Survey maps that we use to measure the footpaths are metric and the walk packs that we sell describe walks in kilometres, so it made sense to the officer who ordered the signs to give corresponding information".

The council said it would not replace all the signs, but has ordered plastic discs displaying the imperial distances and these would be placed over the metric numbers over the next few weeks at a cost of £229".

Updated: 11:21 Friday, August 19, 2005

Now I wonder who wrote this?

http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=104&ArticleID=1118395

"Miles better
Metric row is sign of the times

THE creeping introduction of metrication has disturbed many, not least those traditionalists who prefer pounds to grammes, or miles to kilometres.
However, if this switch to be extended to road or footpath signs, the Government must first argue the case successfully. Thus far, it has failed to do so. But, if Ministers do attempt to hasten this change, which would cost £1bn nationwide, according to estimates, their stance will not be helped by the furore caused by the introduction of metric signs on various paths in York and North Yorkshire. It has caused such a controversy that the offending signs are now having to be replaced, or altered, at significant expense. And if such a fundamental change were to be made, then clearly it could only be done after a proper consultation and on a
nationwide basis, not through individual local authorities acting on their own initiative.
If Ministers have any sense, they will realise that they are miles better off, both politically and financially, sticking with a tried and tested system.
18 August 2005"

re (Stan): "Now I wonder who wrote this? -
http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=104&ArticleID=1118395

"Miles better - Metric row is sign of the times" -THE creeping introduction of metrication has disturbed many, not least those traditionalists who prefer pounds to grammes, or miles to kilometres...

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

REPLY: Well, not me, Stan. Nor anyone else I know, for that matter. But then, given that 86% of the country do not want our system of miles, yards, feet and inches on our road signs disturbed, there are tens of millions who agree with the viewpoint of ARM on this topic

I'll bet that if the roads signs were to change right now, a very small minority out of that 86 % would even bother to complain. People may claim to choose something, but if you take their choice away and replace it with something equal or better they accept it and move on.

The only way to prove that 86 % really want to keep miles that badly would be to change the signs and see if that 86 % starts a strong protest going and demands a return, or if that 86 % all joins ARM and converts the signs back as fast as they were changed to metric.

How many Irish are complaining about the change to km/h compared to how many would have said they don't want the change previous to the change?

<<<But then, given that 86% of the country do not want our system of miles, yards, feet and inches on our road signs disturbed, there are tens of millions who agree with the viewpoint of ARM on this topic >>>

You don't REALLY believe that do you, Tony?

There is a big difference between PREFERRING imperial signs, and OBJECTING TO metric ones!

You could be right about 86% for the former. For the latter it will be a tiny, tiny minority.

You'd be surprised Andy - and I'm talking about reactions from people who don't normally take part in the debate.

re (Stan): "You don't REALLY believe that do you, Tony? There is a big difference between PREFERRING imperial signs, and OBJECTING TO metric ones! You could be right about 86% for the former. For the latter it will be a tiny, tiny minority".

REPLY: I welcome the concession - after all, the figure was one that resulted from an independent market research exercise. I concede your general point that all of those 86% would not object strongly to metric signs going up - though I think, with Stimpy, that you will find it is a lot more than 'a tiny tiny minority'.

But assuming the 86% preference figure is more or less correct, can you give me any valid reason whatsoever for ignoring people's clear preference on this matter?

Isn't that what democracy is all about?

Yes, a handful of people - not 86% of the population as Tony is claiming!

I'm willing to believe that if you questioned Brits with:

"Which do you prefer: mph, miles and yards or the european system of km/h, km and metres?"

....around 85 to 90% will go for the former.

... and if you poll said:

"If the Government decided to introduce kilometres and km/h on ou r road what would your reaction be:

1) Couldn't care less
2) I would oppose it
3) I would support it

I think that (1) would get the majority vote by a large margin.

<<<I'm willing to believe that if you questioned Brits with:
"Which do you prefer: mph, miles and yards or the european system of km/h, km and metres?"
....around 85 to 90% will go for the former.>>>

I agree. (although you can leave the word "european" out since it is not the european system.)

This would largely be because of the anti-metric propoganda shoved down our throats for the last few decades.

However, as Martin says, a survey giving the option of "couldn't car less" would tell the real story.

Although I would not agree fully on Martin's point that most would probably say "wouldn't care less" I implicitly agree with both of you that the wording of the question has an affect on the answer.

I'm glad you brought that up as if there ever was a vote on the euro, the constitution etc it will all come down to the question used.

<<<I'm glad you brought that up as if there ever was a vote on the euro, the constitution etc it will all come down to the question used.>>>

Definately. The Australian referendum on retaining the Queen as head of state was effectively won by wording the question a certain way -even though general polls suggest that most aussies want a republic

With a poll on units of measurement I think the margin for error is particularly large because the majority of people have no strong feelings on the matter, and can be swayed easily one way or the other depending on how the question is worded.

The flaws of a survey on measurements in Britain are very obvious, but some people keep on churning out the same statistics...

Early days I know, but I see that the 'pro-metrics' are already dodging my key question. I predict there will be no satisfactory answer to it -ever. Not even from the combined intellectual talents of Andy, Anonymous, Beranger, Daniel Jackson, euric, Lord Howe, martin, metre, Stan and any member of the U.K. Metric Association (alphabetical order, btw).

Just to remind you, here was my question to Stan:

QUESTION

"But assuming the 86% preference figure is more or less correct, can you give me any valid reason whatsoever for ignoring people's clear preference on this matter?"

I just ran over my own puppy.

Andy - I think the aussie referendum was two things:-

1) Wording
2) Cold feet at the ballot box

#2 is important - it was the reason why major won the general election here. People go about shouting that they'll "chuck this lot out" or "get rid of her" and then when its time to do that little cross they think - erm - erm - perhaps not.

I worked in N London at the time and all the (young) aussies there wanted to retain the Queen. I wonder if there is a generation issue here with all the middle-aged crimbos bemoaning our collective head of state?

<<<"But assuming the 86% preference figure is more or less correct, can you give me any valid reason whatsoever for ignoring people's clear preference on this matter?" >>>

Sorry - missed that post.

Firstly, I disagree it is a "clear preference"

This is a very superficial survey, and given the anti-metric propoganda shoved down peoples throats constantly over the last few years, the outcome is always going to be biased.

I am confident that if properly given both arguments, people would vote in favour of completing metrication.

But, if both sides had a fair hearing, and it was put to a vote and the imperial side won, that would be fair enough.

re (Andy): "This is a very superficial survey, and given the anti-metric propoganda shoved down people's throats constantly over the last few years, the outcome is always going to be biased".


REPLY: Genius! Andy, you are close to having invented the perfect 'auto-response' whenever one encounters an opinion poll giving the 'wrong result' on any issue.

Here it is:

"This is a very superficial survey, and given the anti-[FILL IN THE BLANK SPACE] propoganda shoved down people's throats constantly over the last few years, the outcome is always going to be biased".

And, hey, you could even apply it to referendum results, like the 55% of French people and 63% of Dutch people who voted 'No' to the European Constitution:

"This is a very superficial result, and given the anti-European Constitution propoganda shoved down people's throats constantly over the last few years, the outcome was always going to be biased".

The possibilities are limitless!

If I were you, I'd drop a line to the Patents Office right now!

(Before I do)

re (Andy): "This is a very superficial survey, and given the anti-metric propoganda shoved down people's throats constantly over the last few years, the outcome is always going to be biased".


REPLY: Genius! Andy, you are close to having invented the perfect 'auto-response' whenever one encounters an opinion poll giving the 'wrong result' on any issue.

Here it is:

"This is a very superficial survey, and given the anti-[FILL IN THE BLANK SPACE] propoganda shoved down people's throats constantly over the last few years, the outcome is always going to be biased".

And, hey, you could even apply it to referendum results, like the 55% of French people and 63% of Dutch people who voted 'No' to the European Constitution:

"This is a very superficial result, and given the anti-European Constitution propoganda shoved down people's throats constantly over the last few years, the outcome was always going to be biased".

The possibilities are limitless!

If I were you, I'd drop a line to the Patents Office right now!

(Before I do)

What's all this talk about anti-metric propaganda in Britain? Is BWMA really that much stronger than UKMA? If not, who else is generating the propaganda?

Stimpy wrote

<<
Andy - I think the aussie referendum was two things:-
>>

Speaking to my Aussie friends, he issue was what sort of a republic do the aussies want - one in which the president is a true figure-head elected by the people (and knowing the Aussies, often a retired sportsman of the ilk of the late Sir Donald Bradman, though I do not know what his personal views were). The referendum in fact offered the Aussies a republic in which the president would be a politician who had been "put out to grass".

The young aussies I spoke to voted to keep the Queen because of two things:

1) They believed (as contract workers) they'd get a better deal if we shared a head of state.


and


2) The social scene in the UK was a strong influence on why a lot of them came over - and that can be seen as directly related to sharing a destiny and a history. A close relationship.

Personally I hope that they never ditch the Queen, however I'm not sure that Charles will be anywhere near as popular as Elizabeth unless he makes some big changes in the next few decades.

What annoys me is the way we all file through that ghastly 12 star euroflag customs at Heathrow airport while our closer relatives (aussies) are herded through another area with Ugandans, Americans, Chinese etc etc as if we don't care about them anymore.

<<<And, hey, you could even apply it to referendum results, like the 55% of French people and 63% of Dutch people who voted 'No' to the European Constitution:>>>

Not really. Since the propoganda in France and Holland was mostly FOR the constitution. And they still voted against it.

<<<What's all this talk about anti-metric propaganda in Britain? Is BWMA really that much stronger than UKMA? If not, who else is generating the propaganda?>>>

BWMA and UKMA are insignificant. 99.9% of the public will not have heard of either.

The propoganda is generated by the newspapers - the ones with the largest circulation are rabidly anti-EU and, with metrication having become associated with that, anti-metric as well.

Have you ever picked up a copy of our best-selling newspaper, Bud? Its really quite shocking the amount of influence it has.

As for the pro-metric propoganda which you would expect from the government. There has never been any. The BBC sticks strictly to a neutral stance on units (they even still give Fahrenheit temperatures on weather forecasts when hardly anyone still uses them)

The government has NEVER explained metrication, never told us why. The first people hear about it is when a new law comes in and suddenly makes it illegal to use an imperial measure.

So I don't think anyone can argue that both sides have been heard in Britain regarding this issue

<<<What annoys me is the way we all file through that ghastly 12 star euroflag customs at Heathrow airport while our closer relatives (aussies) are herded through another area with Ugandans, Americans, Chinese etc etc as if we don't care about them anymore.>>>

What a bizarre view! You should stand up for your rights, Steve. Just go through the other way - tell them you're not going anywhere near that hideous blue flag!

I thought you basically agreed with the principle of an EU in terms of free movement of people/goods?

From that comment, it seems your hatred goes a lot deeper.

I'm uncomfartable in their being a "supra nation" flag. That's how it's sold and that's how its generally rejected by most Brits.

<<they even still give Fahrenheit temperatures on weather forecasts when hardly anyone still uses them>>

Sheesh!
[Puts head in hands]

<<<I'm uncomfartable in their being a "supra nation" flag. That's how it's sold and that's how its generally rejected by most Brits.>>>

Its just a flag! I cannot see why you feel so threatened by it. Surely you don't think that they will scrap the flag of each member state and replace it with the EU flag?

I wouldn't say its 'generally rejected' by Brits judging by the ever increasing numbers of cars with it on their number plates.

Andy wrote

<<
The government has NEVER explained metrication, never told us why. The first people hear about it is when a new law comes in and suddenly makes it illegal to use an imperial measure.
>>

That was the job of the Metrication Board. However, in 1980, even as the EU directove on metrication was being debated by the Council of Ministers, Mrs Thatcher wrapped up the Metrication Board

What did the metrication board actually do? Thats a bit before my time.

re (Andy): "What a bizarre view! You should stand up for your rights, Steve. Just go through the other way - tell them you're not going anywhere near that hideous blue flag!"

REPLY: When returning from trips in Europe (whoops! - on the continent), I *always* avoid using the 'EU Citizen' customs gateway with its garish 'golden garotte'. I carry one of those hideous maroon 'European Comnmunity Passports' - because I have to - but within a cover that at least *looks* like the traditional British passport. And my passport contains a self-made adhesive notice pointing out that legally there is no such thing as an 'E.U. Citizen' and that I remain a British citizen only

re (martin): "Mrs Thatcher wrapped up the Metrication Board..."

REPLY: In addition to that achievement, she put the unions in their place, allowed millions to buy their Council houses, reformed the economy, and stood up to Europe, negoatiating a 'budget rebate' that's been worth some £40 billion to us Brits since she negotiated it at Fontainebleau 20 years ago.

But she made a fatal mistake. Introducing the poll tax

re (Andy): "I thought you basically agreed with the principle of an EU in terms of free movement of people/goods?"

REPLY: The main reason that criminal people-trafficking and the sale of illicit drugs have flourished in E.U. countries for the last 30 years

Andy asked

<<
What did the metrication board actually do? Thats a bit before my time.
>>

They co-ordinated the metrication process.

The "ownership" of legislation regarding units of measure lies with the Department of Trade and Industry. The Metrication Board was (I think) part of that department. In conjunction with other departments, they produced a timetable for what had to be metricated when, ensured that legislation regarding metrication was consistent and they were responsible for disseminating information and educating the public about metrication.

<<<REPLY: When returning from trips in Europe (whoops! - on the continent), I *always* avoid using the 'EU Citizen' customs gateway with its garish 'golden garotte'>>>

I honestly feel sorry for you.

<<<"Mrs Thatcher wrapped up the Metrication Board..."
REPLY: In addition to that achievement....>>>

You shouldn't view that as an achievement, because it has left us stuck between the two systems. If she was serious about ending metrication, what she should have done is reintroduce imperial education, reinstate imperial in areas where metric had replaced it, and renegotiated all future commitments to going metric.

<<<They co-ordinated the metrication process.

The "ownership" of legislation regarding units of measure lies with the Department of Trade and Industry. The Metrication Board was (I think) part of that department. In conjunction with other departments, they produced a timetable for what had to be metricated when, ensured that legislation regarding metrication was consistent and they were responsible for disseminating information and educating the public about metrication.>>>

well I can see why Maggie decided to abolish it.. I can't see any evidence that they achieved anything.

Compared to their South African and Australian counterparts they had very little authority which is why they did not achieve as much as they should have.

On the eve of them being abolished, they were on the verge of issuing requirements that metric units be used when goods were weighed in front of the customer (ie at markets). Had these been issued adn implemented, the so-called "metric martyrs" would never have happened.

The UK is not like S Africa.

---------


<<Its just a flag! I cannot see why you feel so threatened by it. Surely you don't think that they will scrap the flag of each member state and replace it with the EU flag?>>

I'm not frightened of it - but you cannot grudge me hating it.

<<I wouldn't say its 'generally rejected' by Brits judging by the ever increasing numbers of cars with it on their number plates.>>

Do you think that people are actively going out and purchasing replacement EU style number plates to replace ones without that flag?

With your logic the UK's people is actually about 80 to 90% anti-EU (go out and check 10 cars and tell me how many have that flag on them!)

<<<Do you think that people are actively going out and purchasing replacement EU style number plates to replace ones without that flag?>>>

Er, yes quite obviously - EU style number plates only became an option on new cars with the new '51' plate. Any older car with an EU-style plate has had it added deliberately.

Of course, people don't do this because they love the EU - they do it because the new plates look good.

<<<With your logic the UK's people is actually about 80 to 90% anti-EU (go out and check 10 cars and tell me how many have that flag on them!)>>>

as I said, the flag has only recently become an option so thats not really representative unless you check 10 brand new cars.

re (Andy): "left us stuck between the two systems..."

REPLY: Oh no! How much longer are we to remain 'stuck'?

re (Andy): "It's just a flag! I cannot see why you feel so threatened by it. Surely you don't think that they will scrap the flag of each member state and replace it with the EU flag?"

REPLY: Try saying 'it's just a flag' in Northern Ireland - or the United States. By the way, have you been to Scotland recently and seen what flag most of their local authorities fly atop their Town Halls?

Harlow had the E.U. symbol on all its 'Welcome to Harlow' signs on roads into Harlow. Until I bought a can of white paint, that is (those Welsh Language sign vandals have a lot to answer for).

P.S. Under British law, the E.U. symbol is an advertisement, not a flag, and planning permission is needed before it is flown

<<<REPLY: Oh no! How much longer are we to remain 'stuck'?>>>

Tony - I know I'm probably wasting my time, but try looking at the situation from a less selfish viewpoint. You learnt imperial measures, not metric. Younger generations learnt metric, not imperial.

<<<REPLY: Try saying 'it's just a flag' in Northern Ireland - or the United States.>>>

Thats different. The EU flag is simply a symbol of the EU. It has no political meaning.

<<<By the way, have you been to Scotland recently and seen what flag most of their local authorities fly atop their Town Halls? >>>

No. The scottish flag I would hope.

<<<Harlow had the E.U. symbol on all its 'Welcome to Harlow' signs on roads into Harlow. Until I bought a can of white paint, that is (those Welsh Language sign vandals have a lot to answer for).>>>

Good for you (I mean that seriously this time!) I see no reason for the EU flag on such a sign.

BTW, I am never in favour of using the EU flag to replace the national flags - in addition thats fine. I would like to see more flag-flying in England (of the St Georges cross, not Union Jack)

I've seen the advent of more and more nation-flag numberplates (in place of the EU ones)

Wales is full of Welsh type ones (with dragon etc).

Andy - do you honeslty think the EU one looks good?
I've noted that "barryboys" tend to put them on their 1.3L Vauxhall nova's (you know the one's that have 2 foot whale spoilers a massive exhaust and "proper" furry dice and nought to sixty at some point during the day). Hardly great company.

Personally - I'm glad it's become a "chav badge".

re (Andy): <<<Tony Bennett: Harlow had the E.U. symbol on all its...signs on roads into Harlow. Until I bought a can of white paint, that is>>> "Andy: Good for you (I mean that seriously this time!) I see no reason for the EU flag on such a sign. BTW, I am never in favour of using the EU flag to replace the national flags - in addition that's fine. I would like to see more flag-flying in England (of the St George's cross, not Union Jack)

REPLY: Well, I'm encouraged to see that. It occurs to me that some of our discussions on this board may be at cross-purposes.

I don't have a problem at all with co-operation with other nations. I don't in the least have a problem with learning things from other nations - after all, with our maritime history, we've done that more than most other nations. I could even - just about - live with the degree of integration that we have with other E.U. countries at present.

The problem really comes with the E.U. of the future - and where we are heading.

Here are some facts. You may question some of them. But it is because of these that I want us to get out of the E.U. now, while we can.

1. Those who set up the E.U., and are masterminding its development, want the E.U. to become a single nation, despite their protestations to the contrary

2. The Treaties of the E.U. commit us to 'ever-closer Union' - and this process takes place week in, week out

3. There is a body of E.U. law continuously being built up, called the 'acquis communautaire'. It is irrevocable, and grows week by week. As it grows, nations have progressively less and less control over their own affairs

4. On any reckoning, the E.U. costs us billions a year

5. There is deliberate process of 'Europeanisation' going on, on which much time and money is spent

6. The plan in the E.U. Constitution to give us dual nationality and E.U. citizenship is but a stage on the way to depriving us of our birthright - our national citizenship

7. The E.U. wishes to abolish jury trial aad abolish 'habeas corpus' and bring in trials across the E.U. by professional judges, i.e. state judges, alone. The current anti-terror bill is trying to slip in 3 months' detention without trial, something the E.U. have been aiming to achieve across the E.U., for years, as part of theoir 'Corpus Juris' scheme, first launched in 1998.

You may support all of this. I don't, which is why I feel constrained to oppose it.

And on the metric issue, no-one has ever in the entire history of these boards ever shown a convincing reason why we *need* to go any more metric than we are already.

Are the 86% of us who prefer to keep miles, yards, feet and inches on our road and footpath signs all 'selfish', according to your definition. I don't think so

Tony said

"But assuming the 86% preference figure is more or less correct......"

Why should posters to the thread have to assume anything?

If Tony's figure is correct, he should be able to direct us to recent poll figures that strongly suggest that "86% of the country do not want our system of miles, yards, feet and inches on our road signs disturbed"

Looking at the BWMA "consumer surveys" page, I note that the figure 86% does not appear.

http://www.bwmaonline.com/Consumer%20Surveys.htm

I also note that in the one survey question that asked "imperial, metric or both" (albeit in relation to food packaging & cookery books), the vast majority wanted both systems to be used (21% imperial only, 7% metric only & 70% both)

If Tony will provide reliable evidence to support his assertation that "86% of the country do not want our system of miles, yards, feet and inches on our road signs disturbed", I will certainally attempt to address his question regarding "people's clear preference"

Tony also said

"By the way, have you been to Scotland recently and seen what flag most of their local authorities fly atop their Town Halls?"

Are you referring to the Saltire, the Union flag or the EU flag here Tony?

Last time this subject came up, you suggested that Scots Councils flew the EU flag, I asked you to name one council that did. You didn't manage to.

Have you found one?

Some councils fly only the Saltire (but fly the Union flag on certain occasions)

Some councils fly the Union Flag (but fly the Saltire on certain occasions (in my opinion, today should have been one of them!))

Some fly both flags mentioned directly above.

Some fly all 3 flags mentioned above.

Your point is??????

Have you been to Scotland recently??????

I have ;-)

<<<If Tony's figure is correct, he should be able to direct us to recent poll figures that strongly suggest that "86% of the country do not want our system of miles, yards, feet and inches on our road signs disturbed"
>>>

I think its time for a new poll to be performed.
I'm surprised that none have been done for a while.

Wait! Could it be that to most it's a non-issue and the current status quo causes no-one to raise the subject at all ever?

Surely not!

<<<Could it be that to most it's a non-issue>>>

Exactly. And if its a non-issue to most people, then I find it hard to believe that 86% of people object to the word "metres" appearing on a signpost!

<<<REPLY: Well, I'm encouraged to see that. It occurs to me that some of our discussions on this board may be at cross-purposes.>>>

You need to stop assuming that everyone who supports metrication is an EU-fanatic. The two don't go hand in hand.

<<<On any reckoning, the E.U. costs us billions a year >>>

but surely it also saves money and creates jobs.

<<<And on the metric issue, no-one has ever in the entire history of these boards ever shown a convincing reason why we *need* to go any more metric than we are already. >>>

and no-one has ever in the entire history of these boards ever shown a convincing reason why, having started the process of metrication, we should stop it part way.

<<<On any reckoning, the E.U. costs us billions a year >>>
<<but surely it also saves money and creates jobs.>>

On balance it costs us money - that's the whole basis of net contribution/receiving based upon a country's wealth.

Besides (on 'jobs') - those who are suffering the highest unemployment are those who are more heavily "in" the EU than "out" of it, so to speak.

<<<Besides (on 'jobs') - those who are suffering the highest unemployment are those who are more heavily "in" the EU than "out" of it, so to speak.>>>

Yes but how do you know that is because of them being in the EU? If they weren't in the EU their situation might be better or worse.

And don't go comparing Germany/France to Norway/Switzerland!

Beranger,

This reply from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport to an Englishman, Mr Young - and his verbatim comments below - may be of some interest to you:

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

An email received from the Dept. of Culture, Media and Sport:

Dear Mr Young,

Thank you for your e-mail dated 4 October about the flying of the St George's Flag which has been passed to me for reply.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport issues guidance to all Government Departments on the days for flying the Union Flag. These include State Opening of Parliament, Remembrance Day and the Birthday of Her Majesty the Queen and other members of the Royal Family. On St George's Day all Government Buildings in England that have more than one flag pole, are instructed to fly the Flag of St George alongside the Union Flag, provided the Union Flag is flown in a superior position.

The Houses of Parliament only has one flagpole, therefore the Union Flag is the only flag flown on the appointed flag flying days. Additionally it is not considered appropriate to fly the St George?s Flag on the Houses of Parliament as the UK Parliament is responsible for issues that affect the entire UK and of course is made up of MPs representing constituencies from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, as well as England.

In Scotland, the Union Flag is flown in the superior position on all Government buildings on the appointed days for flag flying, with the Scottish National Flag, the Saltire being flown on buildings with two or more flag poles. The only exception is St Andrew's Day, when on buildings with multiple flagpoles the Saltire is flown in the superior position to the Union Flag.

Yours sincerely

Laurence Street
Architecture and Historic Environment Division

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

So, to summarise:

On St Andrew's Day, the Scottish flag should be flown in a SUPERIOR position to the Union Flag.

On St George's Day, the English flag should be flown in an INFERIOR position to the Union flag.

The Scottish flag is flown over the Scottish Parliament.

There is no Parliament that it is acceptable to fly an English flag over.

...because there is no Elnglish Parliament

(however there is a muslimone - but the less said about that the better!)


<<Yes but how do you know that is because of them being in the EU? If they weren't in the EU their situation might be better or worse.
>>

My knowledge does not extend that far - I can only comment on current situations that have arisen by the increased "EU-ization" of certain states and it appears that the more "EU-like" a country becomes the more in trouble it gets. Of course I'm only basing that on the current situation and thus all that could change but so far it looks quite consistent.

Hey, perhaps Danny can tell us about how the EU affects different countries in Europe, starting with the european state called "google" ;-)

Tony

And your point is?

re (Beranger): "Tony - And your point is?"

REPLY: Not every single one of my postings 'makes a point'. If they do not, they generally add information. As this one did

The comments of a writer in one of England's regioanl newspapers:

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

Adopting metric measures would make car travel simpler

From: Philip Hall, Harborough Road, Kingsthorpe, Northampton.

YOUR comment "Miles better. Metric row is sign of the times" (Yorkshire Post, August 18) refers to an estimated cost of £1bn to metricate British roads.

This is utter nonsense. No one has an accurate or reliable figure but estimates from government sources indicate that the cost in today's money is likely to be about £100m at most, probably less if a gradual replacement strategy is adopted for distance signs.

Also, it beggars belief that anyone should say we must stick to a "tried and tested system" as if metric was some new invention. Most of the countries throughout the world have had metric road signs and speed limits for decades. Ireland has recently converted with no problems.

We live in the 21st century and children have been educated in metric for the past 40 years. It is time the Government did the decent thing and enabled a whole generation to put their knowledge to good use with the ease and simplicity of metric for travel by car.

Further to Tonys "But assuming the 86% preference figure is more or less correct......"

A rough measure of preferences could be obtained by counting the numbers of Bed and Breakfast signs that had references to distance on them.

I'll admit that the following is a very small sample, but on a 35 mile drive this afternoon, I saw 2 references to miles, 1 reference to yards & 5 references to metres on signs advertising B&B's.

I make that a 62.5% preference for metric.

I have carried out a survey of B & B and Hotel signs in Scotland - in 2003 - and agree that there are quite a few metric signs there, though my rather more comprehensive survey of over 100 signs put the figure at around 30%.

Preference doesn't come into it, really. The owners ask the planning authorities for permission to erect these signs - and are told that they should really be putting the distances up in metric. The B&B owners, not wishing to offend the council planners, do what they're advised to do.

Two years ago, ARM commissioned a sign-painter to repaint two signboards to 'The Red House', a pub/restaurant at Longstowe, south Cambridgeshire, with the legend '100 yards', rather than the '100 metres' which had originally been painted on the signs. When we asked the owner why he'd got his signboards painted up with distances in metres, he said: "The bloke who did the sign-painting told me that they had to be in metric these days"

Tony B:
"REPLY: Well, not me, Stan. Nor anyone else I know, for that matter. But then, given that 86% of the country do not want our system of miles, yards, feet and inches on our road signs disturbed, there are tens of millions who agree with the viewpoint of ARM on this topic"

Stan:
I note your remark above somewhere that you expected an answer to this. I've only just seen it hence the delay in responding.

Firstly I'm not prepared to take it as given that 86% of people agree with ARM. You are not typical of the way people in Britain think about this issue and I think it's arrogant of you to claim otherwise.

That said I'm not claiming to speak for the general population either, nor am I shy of saying that I don't think popular demand should be the basis on which the job of metrication should be completed. Imperial measurement standards never came about that way so why should we expect it of the metric system.

In spite of that I am very much in favour of a public debate on this and the issues being raised and properly discussed. Our political leaders are (to be fair to them) in a difficult position on this. It's hard now for them to do the right thing in the present circumsances with it all being mixed up with the EU nonsense. But if the whole thing was aired properly and the reasons for the change put before people I am confident that on the whole the change to metric road signs would be supported.

re (Stan): "...if the reasons for the change [of road signs into metric] were put before people..."

REPLY: *** But what are these reasons? ***

Nobody apart from the three men, one woman and a dog from the UK Metric Association is clamouring for hundreds of millions of pounds to be spent on tearing up some 2 million road signs which everybody understands (or ought to, if they're allowed to drive on our roads).

OK, since none of the metric zealots like yourself on these boards can ever answer the question, let me provide the answer.

It's to satisfy the aim of you and a tiny handful of others like you to obliterate Imperial weights and measures. Because you don't happen to like or appreciate them.

Instead of dissembling about 'helping childen who only learn metric' and coming up with other supposed justifications, why don't you just admit it?

Yes, to satisfy your lust for the complete obliteration of customary measurements, you would rather we spent hundreds of millions of pounds on a wholly unnecessary conversion of 2 million road signs than, say, invest that money in self-help schemes in the poorest parts of the third world.

Shame on you

Tony

I would disagree re your point regarding the planners. I suspect that every sign I saw had no planning permission whatsoever!

I'm driving from one coast to the other tomorrow - I'll keep count.......