New Labour has already added hundreds of new crimes to the statute books in the last 7 years - including of course selling bananas by the pound (and various associated offences - *marking* them up at 25p per pound is a separate offence, also with a jail term or £5,000 fine as maximum sentences).

The UKMA wishes to vastly extend the number of crimes which could be committed by the British people. It is quite hard to believe, but now that I have studied the recent UKMA report: 'A Very British Mess' in depth, here are *just some* of the new crimes proposed by them:

UKMA want a law to stop people advertising their office floor space in imperial and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop estate agents stating how many acres of land are for sale at a property and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people stating in adverts for their houses how long their garden is in feet and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop estate agents describing the size of rooms in a house for sale in feet and inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people advertising pizzas for sale in inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people buying curtain material in 48" and 54" drops and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop McDonalds, Burger King and other food outlets referring to 'halfpounders' and 'quarterpounders' and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop film companies and photo shops describing photo and picture sizes in inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop all weather forecasters and weather reporters referring to wind speeds in miles per hour, referring to visibility in miles, and to giving the Fahrenheit equivalents of Celsius temperatures and to giving the inches equivalent of rainfall in millimetres - and want criminal sanctions to enforce this (in their great mercy they stop just short of wishing to impose criminal penalties on newspapers for these same 'offences')

UKMA want a law to stop restaurants printing menus with descriptions such as '8oz. steak' and '12oz. steak' and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling paintbrushes with their width in inches marked on them and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling beds in feet and inches - the metric equivalent of 3', 4' 6" and 5' would have to be given - and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling sheds in feet (e.g. 8' sheds) and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people referring in adverts for cars to miles per gallon and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling or advertising carpets per square yard and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people referrig to anything imperial in any advertisement of any kind and want criminal sanctions to enforce this (thus the ads I posted a few months ago on this bulletin board would become crimes e.g. 'Jack Daniels Whisky is filtered through 10 feet of maple charcoal', 'Avoid the 50-yard dash', '634 feet of strech limo' etc.)

UKMA want a law to stop people buying televisions with screen sizes in inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this.

And that is not by any means a full list - space and time don't permit me to compile an exhaustive list.

They also want to complete the metrication of all Britain's 1 to 2 million road signs no later than 'early 2007'.

These facts can be readily checked in the UKMA Report which is on their website. When I realised just how far they wanted to go, the word 'fanatic' sprang to mind, which is why I've put it in the title of this posting.

Anyone from UKMA who reads this mesage is hereby publicly invited to deny - on this bulletin board - any of the above statements if they think they are incorrect

TB:
Dozens of New Crimes - The Heart's Desire of the UKMA Fanatics
July 21 2004 at 12:54 AM Tony Bennett

metre:
Talking about fanatics, he who is free of guilt....,a dicy subject, better left alone. Dozens of new crimes, you mean regulations, why? Just replace imperial with metric and not one new regulation is called for.

Metre, the country is never going to convert from imperial to metric unless it is forced to do so. We have discussed this before. And if it is forced to do so, criminal penalties are a necessity. How else can you force people to comply?

So to sum up in one sentance, they want laws enforcing the use of metric only in advertising and metric road signs.

You make it sound so dramatic - you could get a job writing for the Sun

Why read the Sun for that?
A quick once over of the UKMA report would satisfy anyone's need for sensational extremism.

Did they mention how they intend to stop people from "talking" imperial? Surely to complete the job there must be curbs on free speech.
For the moment there is no law on enciting religous hatred - but Blunkett is trying to get one through parliament. I wonder if the UKMA would rather that that particular law be shelved in favour of inciting the use of imperial measures such as "inch".

And before you criticise me - yes I realise that the UKMA are the extremist "awkward squad" and even most metric users/supporters wouldn't go as far as their ideas.

"For the moment there is no law on enciting religous hatred "

Except in Northern Ireland.

Enforcing the use of a single measurement system in advertisements / on signs etc is hardly extreme!

To compare it to laws against free speech is ridiculous.

<<<Enforcing the use of a single measurement system in advertisements / on signs etc is hardly extreme! >>>

Once there is a public consultation to do this then I'd be happy - until then it ranks on the same "carriageway" of free speech denial.

One thing leads to another.

BTW - Did you know that Hitler only wanted a federal europe?

SteveH wrote

<<
Why read the Sun for that?
>>

I am confused - do people *read* The Sun or do they just look at the pictures?

Their political editor is the first one that MPs turn/talk to.

You work out the rest.

re (Andy): "Enforcing the use of a single measurement system in advertisements / on signs etc is hardly extreme!"


REPLY: O.K., so how far do you want to go with your bans?

If, after a new Metrication Act, 'The Times' re-published 'Network Rail's ad for its new luxury express trains - '634 feet of stretch limo' - would you want the Crown Prosecution Service bringing a criminal prosecution of the advertiser and the newspaper?

Would you want a prosecution of a lady who puts a card in a newsagent's window saying: 'Secondhand 3-ft. bed for sale' - and may be the prosecution of the newsagent as well?

Would you want to prosecute the newspaper that ran a personal ad: 'To John and Joan Robinson, a boy, James, weighing 6lb. 7oz.'? And the parents?

Or to prosecute a burger bar owner with with 'Quarterpounders - £1' written on the side of his van?


And when it comes to metrication of every single motorway, road, cycleway and footpath sign in the United Kingdom (never mind canal speed limits), do you want a team of officials going around hunting for every wooden footpath sign that says 'Chipping Sodbury - 3' or 'Upper Tweedale - 2' and converting them instantly to metric?


P.S. Mind you, we do already have a 'single system' of measurement in use on our roads i.e. British units - miles, yards, feet and inchedss. An excellent argument, surely, for keeping things as they are and, additionally, for repealing the present provisons in the Traffic Signs Regulations for authorities to erect optional - and hence confusing - signs in metric

REPLY: O.K., so how far do you want to go with your bans?

If, after a new Metrication Act, 'The Times' re-published 'Network Rail's ad for its new luxury express trains - '634 feet of stretch limo' - would you want the Crown Prosecution Service bringing a criminal prosecution of the advertiser and the newspaper?

No - this is not intended as an exact measurement anyway. Would I be able to sue if I measured it and found it to be 633 and a half feet?

<<<Would you want a prosecution of a lady who puts a card in a newsagent's window saying: 'Secondhand 3-ft. bed for sale' - and may be the prosecution of the newsagent as well?>>>

No, I would want a law requiring bed manufacturers to use metric units in their advertisements. I would never be in favour of regulating private advertisements.

<<<Would you want to prosecute the newspaper that ran a personal ad: 'To John and Joan Robinson, a boy, James, weighing 6lb. 7oz.'? And the parents? >>>

I would be in favour of requiring newspapers to use metric, but again a personal ad is personal and cannot be regulated.

<<<Or to prosecute a burger bar owner with with 'Quarterpounders - £1' written on the side of his van? >>>

I have no idea what the regulations are regarding burgers, but I would imagine most burgers sold as quarterpounders do not actually weigh a quarter of a pound anyway..I would guess that they are made in metric sizes anyway and as long as the size is clearly defined in metric so as not to rip off the consumer, I see nothing wrong with the word quarterpounder.

<<<And when it comes to metrication of every single motorway, road, cycleway and footpath sign in the United Kingdom (never mind canal speed limits), do you want a team of officials going around hunting for every wooden footpath sign that says 'Chipping Sodbury - 3' or 'Upper Tweedale - 2' and converting them instantly to metric?>>>

Road signs would need to be done pretty much instantly, but there would be no particular rush for converting footpath signs.

<<<P.S. Mind you, we do already have a 'single system' of measurement in use on our roads i.e. British units - miles, yards, feet and inchedss. An excellent argument, surely, for keeping things as they are and, additionally, for repealing the present provisons in the Traffic Signs Regulations for authorities to erect optional - and hence confusing - signs in metric>>>

Confusion is only there because we are caught between two measurement systems. To end the confusion we need to move towards using one system. We can either go backwards or forwards. What makes more sense in the long run?

"We can either go backwards or forwards. What makes more sense in the long run?"

What "backwards" is there?
Do you mean carry on using units that have worked perfectly well for ages?

Personally I prefer the current set up where officially we're a mixed unit country but realistically we're (almost) all imperial users.

Re: Dozens of New Crimes - The Heart's Desire of the UKMA Fanatics July 21 2004, 8:11 AM

Bud:
Metre, the country is never going to convert from imperial to metric unless it is forced to do so. We have discussed this before. And if it is forced to do so, criminal penalties are a necessity. How else can you force people to comply?

metre:
What's the difference? The same penalties apply if you do not adhere to still existing imperial measurements.

Without quoting him specifically, SteveH accused UKMA of curbing free speech and, by implication, advocating oppression.

Steve also remarked that UKMA are extremists who do not represent the moderate pro-metric point of view.

I suggest to everyone here that you read what they actually say on the matter. Clearly they have given it a great deal of thought as the following web page shows.

http://www.ukma.org.uk/Campaign/Freespeech.htm

I for one do not regard them as oppressive. They are only calling for regulations to favour metric units in circumstances that are either comparable to existing laws or extended in such a way as to be clearer and more specific.

Tony Bennett,

I call upon you to identify where in the UKMA report it calls for criminal sanctions as a means of enforcement in each and every one of the circumstances you quote above at the beginning of this thread.

re (Stan): "I call upon you to identify where in the UKMA report it calls for criminal sanctions as a means of enforcement in each and every one of the circumstances you quote above at the beginning of this thread".

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

REPLY: I could say: 'Get a copy of the UKMA Report and look it up for yourself'.

But just for starters, here's this extract:

"Despite the fact that the current Price Marking Order requires goods offered for sale to be priced in metric units at the point of sale, there is some confusion over whether and how far advertising is governed by the Order. As a result, Trading Standards Officers are reluctant to intervene, and some retailers have taken advantage of this situation to adopt an aggresive policy of advertising goods in whatever measures (Imperial or metric) appear to show their goods to be better value for money. For example:

carpets may be advertised per sq yd...

vegetables may be advertised per lb...

The result of this practice is to mislead the customer (while remaining strictly within the law) and thus gain a commercial advantage...

UKMA considers that the remedy for this unsatisfactory situation is to bring advertising explicity within the scope of the Price Marking Order. It should be illegal to advertise goods for sale giving prices, weights, quantities or other measures exclusively in Imperial units...metric units should be the only units permitted in advertisements as well as on price labels"

(Paragraphs 7.10 to 7.13)

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

Or how about this:

"UKMA believes that the only way to resolve this situation [the alleged 'measures muddle' in property measurement - ed] is to require property advertisements to give exclusively metric distances and areas...we see no benefit in a transitional period during which supplementary indications would be permitted..."

(Paragraph 7.26)

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

Or this:

"UKMA believes that the Government should take the lead and make it mandatory for publicly-funded bodies, like the Meteorological Office and local authorities, to use exclusively metric units in weather reports and forecasts (including in their press releases). The appropriate units which should be used are:

...
...
...
...
wind speed; kilometres per hour (km/h)"

(Paragrpah 7.28).

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

Finally, if UKMA do not want to impose criminal penalties to deal with all the matters I listed in my posting, let them visit this bulletin board and do so. Indeed, Stan, to take a leaf out of your book, I publicly *call* on them to do so

re (Tony B): "Finally, if UKMA do not want to impose criminal penalties to deal with all the matters I listed in my posting, let them visit this bulletin board and do so. Indeed, Stan, to take a leaf out of your book, I publicly call on them to do so"

REPLY: I understand that there is a UKMA poster on this bulletin board. The lack of a reply to my challenge may be taken as confirming that I was absolutely correct in identifying 16 uses of British weights and measures that the U.K. Metric Association wishes to ban by the use of severe criminal penalties. Four days have elapsed so far since my challenge was issued

London Borough of Tower Hamlets

Senior Metric Enforcement Officer: Scale PO2-5 (£36,480 - £44,120 plus London Weighting and Allowances *plus* Conviction Bonuses)

Required immediately to enforce the 2006 Metrication Act. The person appointed:

1) will need to demonstrate previous knowledge of enforcement techniques, preferably a Trading Standards Officer with previous experience in bringing criminal proceedings against recalcitrant traders selling goods to customers in pounds and ounces.

2) will take legal proceedings against pizza shop owners for describing pizzas in inches, home owners for referring to their lounges and gardens in feet and weather forecasters for using Fahrenheit.

3) will be required to trawl through every local newspaper and magazine for illegal weights of babies in the personal columns and illegal descriptions of heights and weights in the personal ads, and visit newsagent shop windows for illegal dimensions of beds, sheds, TVs and other household items, and be generally proactive in devising ways of enforcing 100% metrication across the Borough.

4) will be required to check local weather forecasts.

Equal Opportunities: A track record of commitment to promoting equality in all respects (except equal treatment of customary weights and measures) will be required.

Please Quote Ref: EC/80/181

Ask for Ivor Newact-Tobashyouwith or Mustafa Metre
Tel: 020 1760 5280

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adverts like the above would gladden the hearts of the metric zealots. And it'll really be necessary. Why, only this evening, I turned on the BBC Radio 4 weather forecast at 5.55pm, and lo and behold, the first measure I heard was: "The weather will warm up this week and could reach the eighties by the weekend".

[REMINDER: "UKMA believes that the government should take the lead and make it mandatory for publicly-funded bodies, such as the Meteorological Office and local authorities (and therefore the BBC - ed.) to use exclusively metric units in weather reports and forecasts (including in their press releases)" - UKMA Report, Para. 7.28]

The UKMA haven't said yet what the penalty for such infringements might be, and if both forecaster and the broadcasting medium would have to pay any penalty

Tony,

Irrespective of whether there is or is not a UKMA poster here, I can see elements in your rhetoric that are factually incorrect.

For a start this:
<<
REPLY: I understand that there is a UKMA poster on this bulletin board. The lack of a reply to my challenge may be taken as confirming that I was absolutely correct in identifying 16 uses of British weights and measures that the U.K. Metric Association wishes to ban by the use of severe criminal penalties. Four days have elapsed so far since my challenge was issued
>>

The report does not address the issue of penalties (criminal or otherwise) for breaches of any legislative ammendments or regulations they propose.

They merely say that the final changeover to metric can only be achieved by compulsion, backed up by a government lead campaign of public information.
In other words it should be openly explained and justified, not just suddenly imposed and then try to hide behind EU directives.

I do have more to say on the points you raise above but I don't have time right now.

I'll get back to you.

"UKMA believes that the government should take the lead and make it mandatory for publicly-funded...etc "

You forget to mention the financial dis-incentivc that they believe the govt should put on those groups should they say "inch".

Would they have quotas?

Accidental use of the word "inch" - £40.00 reduction in funding.
Reoffence - £400.00
A feature, or object that exclusively uses imperial - 2 months funding.
etc

re (Stan): "I do have more to say on the points you raise above but I don't have time right now. I'll get back to you"


REPLY: Thank you. My aim has been to highlight the fact that those behind UKMA - however many or few they are - cannot achieve their aims without force - and of necessity that will mean a number of new criminal penalties.

Even under current legislation, on 1 January 2010, a Trading Standards Officer can walk into a shop that says: "Sausages, £2.21 a kilo, 99p a pound", take a photo of the now-illegal word 'pound', and prosecute him and get him fined. In the land of Magna Carta, known the world over as 'The Mother of Parliaments'!

No doubt UKMA will be shy of specifying just how severe the penalties would be for describing a pizza as 10", or for stating that a lounge is 19 feet long etc.

You only have to count the number of times the words 'enforce', ' comply', 'coerce' etc. are used in the UKMA Report to see what their true agenda is

Tony,

I was going to deal with your comments point for point but on reflection I think that's a waste of time as you were merely trying to emphasise the compulsion aspect.

Not all of it necessarily means criminal penalties, some are purely regulatory as in the case of publicly funded bodies and local authorities etc.

The case of house sales and the requirement to give room sizes etc in metric could be incorporated in the Home Information Pack requirement which the government is already planning to introduce into the housing market. I doubt whether non-compliance in that area will end up sending people to jail.

Although UKMA do insist that all product descriptions should be metric, they don't prescribe any sizes or quantities. Hence it's quite wrong to accuse them of banning the sale of 48" or 54" curtains. They would mereley have to be described as 122 cm, 137 cm. Some shops are doing this already so its no great hardship. All they want to see is everybody sticking to the same rules which will never be done by voluntary means.

Those that theoretically involve criminal penalties relate to the price marking order. UKMA call for this to be extended to cover advertising. It's debatable whether the order actually does exempt advertising as it stands. In the end it's a question of whether TSOs are prepared to enforce it in the absence of clear guidance.

Since you mention supplementary indications, I think you'll find that it is unlikely that a butchers shop will be served a notice purely for the sort of non-compliance you describe even after Jan 2010.

If you look at the pattern of prosections to date you'll find that they involve one or more of the following breaches of the PMO:

(i) No metric price indication at all. Trader is charging by the lb even though they have metric scales. I believe Colin Hunt was doing this and as a result he was making mistakes converting to metric for weighing purposes.

(ii) Use of non-metric scales. Trader may or may not be dual pricing, but still effectively charging by the lb. Steve Thoburn case.

I'm pretty sure that no one so far has been prosectued or warned merely for not sticking to the rule about relative prominence between a metric and a supplementary indication. As long as the trader correctly prices, weighs and charges by the kg Tranding Standards seem content with that. That is why Tesco have gotten away with it so far because they don't infringe the law as I described above. Indeed they maintain that they are within the law by means of the metric shelf edge label, even though adverts are Imperial only.

In conclusion I would point out that UKMA have no hidden agenda about compulsion. They call for it openly in the report. Some will entail criminal law enforcement but not without precedent. Just because they don't spell it out doesn't mean they are trying to deny it. What I'm sure they would object to is the use of emotive language to conjure images of some heavy handed police state where people are being jailed for trivial reasons. The rules people will have to abide by are no worse than many that exist already, indeed they could be welcomed if they were properly explained and enough time elapsed to see them in action.

RE: Tony's views

Tony states:-
"Even under current legislation, on 1 January 2010, a Trading Standards Officer can walk into a shop that says: "Sausages, £2.21 a kilo, 99p a pound", take a photo of the now-illegal word 'pound', and prosecute him and get him fined. In the land of Magna Carta, known the world over as 'The Mother of Parliaments'"

Yeah
My plans for 1/1/10 include
1) Having a good time after the bells at midnight
2) Waking up late
3) Going to watch my local football team play in whatever match is scheduled for the ne'erday derby - hopefully at home so no driving needed!
4) Celebrating beating said local rivals
5) Noting that I'm on holiday and that not one shop in Scotland is open
6) Going home
Plans for 2/1/10 include
1) Doing the same as above if the games are on the 2nd instead of the 1st
2) Noting that every shop in Scotland is still shut
3) Going home

Obviously, on the 3rd, I might apply for the job advertised by AnTonymous, but don't really think it will have appeared by then.

BTW, Tony - can you supply a real example of any Trading Standards job advert where a "Conviction Bonus Applies" - I must have missed all of them......

re (metre): "BTW, Tony - can you supply a real example of any Trading Standards job advert where a "Conviction Bonus Applies" - I must have missed all of them..."

REPLY: No. They'll be available as soon as the incoming Labour government gets its Metrication Bill through Parliament - probably about 2006 or 2007.

If there still is a Parliament then

Tony
I'm not Metre, Carlyle or Euric. I'll be quick enough to complain if anyone else uses my login name. If you want, ask the moderator to confirm that all the "Beranger" messages come from 1 computer and that none of the 3 above posters have ever used it.
I still refer to a 50p coin as a 10 bob bit, and ask for a pound of sausages at the butcher (which he serves me on a metric scale). Believe it or not, I have no problem with 1lb being marked on a 454g package and wish BWMA every success in retaining UK supplementary units on packaging.
I will be speaking from a pro metric stance though - there are shades of opinion throughout the debate. I hope to contribute my tuppenceworth.

Ooh you devil's advocate you!

re (Beranger): "I hope to contribute my tuppenceworth..."

REPLY: I look forward to that, no doubt your 2d.-worth will contain more than an ounce of common sense, so long as no-one on this board wants their pound of flesh, we'll all be miles better for honest debate, after all an ounce of fact is worth a ton of opinion and we've got acres of space on this board for the discussion, mind you, so long as we inch forward together in progress until we're all six feet under... [Message terminated by the Internet Metric Enforcement Commission*]

P.S. Sorry about the (uninentional) identity confusion


* The Commission (Chairman Lord Lowe) was set up by the Metrication Act 2006

Speaking as an unashamed prometric, pro-compulsory metricator (excuse me while I finish pulling up me jack boots) I don't give a toss about hearing these sorts of phrases:

<<
REPLY: I look forward to that, no doubt your 2d.-worth will contain more than an ounce of common sense, so long as no-one on this board wants their pound of flesh, we'll all be miles better for honest debate, after all an ounce of fact is worth a ton of opinion and we've got acres of space on this board for the discussion, mind you, so long as we inch forward together in progress until we're all six feet under... [Message terminated by the Internet Metric Enforcement Commission*]
>>

It's sad that we can't have a rational debate about metrication without the opponents making unwarranted assumptions and exaggerating that which we propose. It seems that anti-compulsory metrics are compelled to make their case by fairy stories and invention.

re (Stan): "...unwarranted assumptions and exaggeration..."


REPLY: Stan, I posted the following list on this thread a few days ago. Not one of my statements has been challenged by anyone on your side, including UKMA members. You and your pro-metric supporters want legislation to enforce all of the following (if you don't, I invite you once more to say so:

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


UKMA want a law to stop people advertising their office floor space in imperial and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop estate agents stating how many acres of land are for sale at a property and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people stating in adverts for their houses how long their garden is in feet and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop estate agents describing the size of rooms in a house for sale in feet and inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people advertising pizzas for sale in inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people buying curtain material in 48" and 54" drops and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop McDonalds, Burger King and other food outlets referring to 'halfpounders' and 'quarterpounders' and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop film companies and photo shops describing photo and picture sizes in inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop all weather forecasters and weather reporters referring to wind speeds in miles per hour, referring to visibility in miles, and to giving the Fahrenheit equivalents of Celsius temperatures and to giving the inches equivalent of rainfall in millimetres - and want criminal sanctions to enforce this (in their great mercy they stop just short of wishing to impose criminal penalties on newspapers for these same 'offences')

UKMA want a law to stop restaurants printing menus with descriptions such as '8oz. steak' and '12oz. steak' and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling paintbrushes with their width in inches marked on them and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling beds in feet and inches - the metric equivalent of 3', 4' 6" and 5' would have to be given - and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling sheds in feet (e.g. 8' sheds) and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people referring in adverts for cars to miles per gallon and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people selling or advertising carpets per square yard and want criminal sanctions to enforce this

UKMA want a law to stop people referrig to anything imperial in any advertisement of any kind and want criminal sanctions to enforce this (thus the ads I posted a few months ago on this bulletin board would become crimes e.g. 'Jack Daniels Whisky is filtered through 10 feet of maple charcoal', 'Avoid the 50-yard dash', '634 feet of strech limo' etc.)

UKMA want a law to stop people buying televisions with screen sizes in inches and want criminal sanctions to enforce this.

And that is not by any means a full list - space and time don't permit me to compile an exhaustive list...

As far as I'm aware, UKMA are a pressure group, in the same way as BWMA are a pressure group. Both sides have a right to campaign for their own agenda (I'm not a member of either body)
Your recent postings imply that Trading Standards are also desperate to have new legal sanctions against imperial measurements - Can you name any recent Trading Standards Institute press release on this matter? The last one on W&M that I remember was one calling for a full pint to be delivered in pubs....

Yeah!

Bring in the "pint line mark" pints!!

Blimey - I can't imagine a Scot being served a short measure!!!

Tony, I refer you to my previous posting of July 29 2004, 3:00 above, which was my reply tour list.

I thought I made it clear that not all your claims were justified as being a reference to criminal penalties.

I also made it clear that the UKMA don't deny legal enforcement in some circumstances.

I'm not prepared to go over it all again so I suggest you re-read it.

If you persist in your imaginary scenarios and present them unconditionally as being representative of the UKMA campaign policy then no one can stop you.

But if you have any integrity you might at least acknowledge that UKMA also intend to build a consensus of opinion by trying to sell the idea to the public not just persuade influencial people to use their authority. Look at their web site
not just the report.

re (Beranger): "Can you name any recent Trading Standards Institute press release on this matter? The last one on W&M that I remember was one..."


REPLY: Within weekss of the European Commission on Human Rights stating that Steve Thoburn had no case under the European Convention on Human Rights (January I think), the Local Government Association, which represents Trading Standards, issued a circular to all local authorities advising Trading Standards Officers to make a top priority of prosecuting traders still weighing and selling
in pounds and ounces.

Thankfully, they have collectively and completely ignored that advice! - which is why UKMA is so furious, stating in its recent report that 'they have no excuse' left for failing to prosecute

SteveH
Are you suggesting Scots are mean? I'm complaining to the ECHR tomorrow! lol

Tony
1) Where did Lacors ask for it to be made top priority - could it be your selective reading again?
2) I asked whether TSI have released any press releases on the subject - please name one if you can?
3) I don't need to make reports to the Fiscal as I am unaware of any Imperial equipment in trade use in my area. I'm on here as a private individual who is willing to chat - not as a spokesman for Lacors or TSI.

<<
But if you have any integrity you might at least acknowledge that UKMA also intend to build a consensus of opinion by trying to sell the idea to the public not just persuade influencial people to use their authority.
>>

Stan, the UKMA would be very wise to try to build public support for metrication, but in reality there will always be opposition. A completely voluntary changeover is unrealistic and impossible. All the countries that have ever converted to metric have had to use compulsion to some degree or another. I am sure the UKMA realizes this.

Which is precisely the contradiction in Stan's position. He knows that metric must be compulsory, but does not want to admit it. UKMA similarly try to have it both ways; they talk about convincing the public, inferring that they accept that people have a right to disagree, but lobby for the right to disagree to be taken away. The point of conflict is when compulsion clashes with people's rejection of UKMA's views. That is the issue that the report needed to address - and it didn't.

<<
Which is precisely the contradiction in Stan's position. He knows that metric must be compulsory, but does not want to admit it. UKMA similarly try to have it both ways; they talk about convincing the public, inferring that they accept that people have a right to disagree, but lobby for the right to disagree to be taken away. The point of conflict is when compulsion clashes with people's rejection of UKMA's views. That is the issue that the report needed to address - and it didn't.
>>

Wrong, completely wrong.

The complete changeover to metric can only be achieved by compulsion. UKMA say this, so do I!

The problem isn't that we are not prepared to admit it. It is being forced to counter the tabloid newspaper style attempts to misprepresent the issues.

BWMA, or Tony Bennett have not so far taken responsibility for misleading an MP into thinking that the penalty for selling in lb oz is a prison sentence.

Until you acknowledge that there is no more to be said.

What proof do you have that the BWMA mislead anybody? Do you have a transcript of their talks with this MP? As for Tony, with all due respect to him, what he says to anybody is irrelevant as far as the BWMA are concerned as, to my knowledge, Tony is not the chairman, treasurer etc of the BWMA. Until he is on the ruling council or whatever, what he says is not the issue as far as the BWMA are concerned. Somebody please correct me if I am wrong as to Tony's position. :)

Re: Dozens of New Crimes - The Heart's Desire of the UKMA Fanatics August 5 2004, 1:45 PM

BWMA:
Which is precisely the contradiction in Stan's position. He knows that metric must be compulsory, but does not want to admit it. UKMA similarly try to have it both ways; they talk about convincing the public, inferring that they accept that people have a right to disagree, but lobby for the right to disagree to be taken away. The point of conflict is when compulsion clashes with people's rejection of UKMA's views. That is the issue that the report needed to address - and it didn't.

metre:
There are two ways to achieve proper metrication. Present British American and Canadian attempts fall way short of achieving anything but costly and dangerous measurement mayhem.

1.A political party can go into an election advocating metrication. Given that mandate it can use compulsion to achieve it. Had Bill Clinton decided to do that in his second term people would have voted for it.

2. Governments can actively propose metrication based on compulsion. To do so it has to be prepared to hard sell that proposition with the emphasis on school children's plight of having to waste precious time on learning an outdated system next to a modern and almost universally used one. If politicians can sell dud wars how much easier would it be to sell an up to date measuring system. No lies needed, metric beauty explained, speaks for itself.

<<
1.A political party can go into an election advocating metrication. Given that mandate it can use compulsion to achieve it. Had Bill Clinton decided to do that in his second term people would have voted for it.
>>
Political parties here have more important things to advocate than units of measurement. Our campaigns focus on the economy, war on terror, health care, etc. By the way, who would vote for a party that proposes place further regulations on business? In the US, neither party would be willing to admit to that. (Although the Democrats would do it without making a show of it.)


<<
2. Governments can actively propose metrication based on compulsion. To do so it has to be prepared to hard sell that proposition with the emphasis on school children's plight of having to waste precious time on learning an outdated system next to a modern and almost universally used one. If politicians can sell dud wars how much easier would it be to sell an up to date measuring system. No lies needed, metric beauty explained, speaks for itself.
>>
For the government to ask the entire country's industry to switch systems in order to help school children save some time would be extremely suspicious. No one would believe such an argument.

Bud wrote

<<
For the government to ask the entire country's industry to switch systems in order to help school children save some time would be extremely suspicious. No one would believe such an argument.
>>

I don't know too much about the US (where Bud lives), but in the UK industry is already metric.

A large amount of the private industry ( the majority) still uses US customary, though most government work is done in metric however due legislation passed during Bush senior's presidency.

<<
Thankfully, they have collectively and completely ignored that advice! - which is why UKMA is so furious, stating in its recent report that 'they have no excuse' left for failing to prosecute
>>

Not really. If you look carefully at the LGA announcement (one of a great many in a long list) all it really says is this (my paraphrase):

<If you have been holding back on prosecutions pending the outcome of the ECHR ruling, there is no longer any need because the outcome is now known, i.e. the human rights case has been rejected.>

It is still a matter of discretion as to what they pursue based on their case load and sense of priority. It will always be like this. The Metric Martyrs campaign has not invented any new procedures or precedents, except that if any trader tries to challenge the 1994 legislaion in court again, the 2002 ruling will kick in as an established precedent.

In response to Roth's statement, it is not exactly true that most of the US government uses metric. Legislation back in the early 1990s simply required government agencies to make a metrication plan and report regularly on their progress. It allowed for so many exemptions to metric usage (such as when it would cause confusion to the public) that it has been rather ineffective.

Re: Dozens of New Crimes - The Heart's Desire of the UKMA Fanatics August 6 2004, 9:08 AM


metre:
1.A political party can go into an election advocating metrication. Given that mandate it can use compulsion to achieve it. Had Bill Clinton decided to do that in his second term people would have voted for it.
>>
Bud:
Political parties here have more important things to advocate than units of measurement. Our campaigns focus on the economy, war on terror, health care, etc. By the way, who would vote for a party that proposes place further regulations on business? In the US, neither party would be willing to admit to that. (Although the Democrats would do it without making a show of it.)
Bud:
Of course your campaigns focus on the really import things like wars and terror that you brought predominantly onto yourselves. What health care may I ask? To keep the excellent one for the rich and neglect the poor even further? You can focus on the economy as much as you like, governments, and especially America's usually indecisive one, will not be able to get its act together to do anything. You can true to form look forward to a long stretch in the economic wilderness. Maybe it needs this bitter pill to revisit metrication.

metre:
2. Governments can actively propose metrication based on compulsion. To do so it has to be prepared to hard sell that proposition with the emphasis on school children's plight of having to waste precious time on learning an outdated system next to a modern and almost universally used one. If politicians can sell dud wars how much easier would it be to sell an up to date measuring system. No lies needed, metric beauty explained, speaks for itself. >>
Bud:
For the government to ask the entire country's industry to switch systems in order to help school children save some time would be extremely suspicious. No one would believe such an argument.

metre:
This shows a callous disregard for future generations, who will need every advantage to fend off metric China's super power ambitions. Then again, all mighty nations dug their own graves.

<<BWMA, or Tony Bennett have not so far taken responsibility for misleading an MP into thinking that the penalty for selling in lb oz is a prison sentence.>>

Why don't you email her?
Assuming she's stupid and ignorant and hasn't looked up all the facts you might be able to teach her something(!)

<<I don't know too much about the US (where Bud lives), but in the UK industry is already metric>>

With respect that is a common mis-perception - its not true.
The official line is that industry does not fall under the W&M acts but they should go metric to capitalise on cheaper production - something I totally disagree with (ie the 'cheaper production' bit).

So that's great innit? The state interferes with our lives but leaves big business alone with mere advice.

<<The official line is that industry does not fall under the W&M acts but they should go metric to capitalise on cheaper production - something I totally disagree with (ie the 'cheaper production' bit).>>

That looks like my opinion!
It isn't!
It's paraphrase of something I've read.