To illustrate both the extent to which amendments by supporters of ARM are increasing nationwide, and the technical quality of the amendments, here is a short list of some recent actions to render illegal metric signs lawful, which you may come across:

1. Scotch Corner, 200 yds north of Scotch Corner Hotel on A1: 'Weighbridge 200m ahead' changed to 'Weighbridge 200 yds ahead'

2. Lock on the River Nene, Denford, Northamptonshire: large sign '11.2 kilometres per hour' changed to '7 mph'

3. Entrance to country park in east Bedford changed from '2.0m' to ' 6' 6" '

4. Oak Street, Accrington: four large blue-and-white signs 'Weak bridge ahead 30m' changed to 'Weak bridge ahead 30 yds'

5. Sowerby, near Thirsk, north Yorkshire, road over low bridge just under A 19: 'Width restriction 400m ahead: 3m' changed to ' Width restriction 1/4 mile ahead: 10' 6" ' [this was to comply with another sign on the same road, nearer the actual old stone bridge, which said that the width restriction was actually 10' 6"]

6. Sign at the southern end of the village of Geddington, Northamptonshire: 'Width limit 2.1m in 400m' changed to ' Width limit 6' 6" in 1/4 mile ' [6' 6" was chosen (rather than 6' 9") to co-ordinate with a sign at the northern end of the bridge which said that the width limit was 6' 6"]

7. Wooden footpath signs along the River Lee Navigation in the Picketts Lock area, north London, amended from metric to Imperial

8. Cast iron black-and-white fingerpost signs outside Christchurch Priory, Dorset, amended from metric to Imperial.

THE ARM Gazetter of demetricated signs now includes over 2,300 known demetrications. It is available by e-mail or hard copy from our Information Officer

Tony, answer this question honestly.

How many lives do you think the ARM have saved by converting so many signs from metric to imperial? I give £3 a month to Oxfam and I feel a sense of satisfaction that I am helping people in the third world helping save lives. Do you get this same satisfaction converting metric signs that you are saving lives or improving people's quality of life?

If so, why doesn't the ARM apply to be an officially recognised charity?

<<
Lock on the River Nene, Denford, Northamptonshire: large sign '11.2 kilometres per hour' changed to '7 mph'
>>

That sign was not illegal.

ARM and its "supporters" are vandals giving free expression to their obsessive hatred of metric.

So stop pretending to uphold the law. Your campaign is purely political. It has no practical value whatsoever.

re (Richard): "Tony, answer this question honestly.
How many lives do you think the ARM have saved by converting so many signs from metric to imperial? I give £3 a month to Oxfam and I feel a sense of satisfaction that I am helping people in the third world helping save lives. Do you get this same satisfaction converting metric signs that you are saving lives or improving people's quality of life?
If so, why doesn't the ARM apply to be an officially recognised charity?"

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

REPLY: I'll be glad to answer your (two) question(s) honestly, but in exchange, please answer honestly just *one* from me (see below).

The answer to your question is that ARM has saved no lives by converting signs from metric to Imperial. Further comment follows:

1. You wrote>>> "How many lives do you think the ARM have saved by converting so many signs from metric to imperial? I give £3 a month to Oxfam and I feel a sense of..."

With all due respect, Richard, this is a complete and utter non-sequitur. You see, changing road signs is something I and dozens of other similarly-minded people like to do in our spare time. I would not query how you choose to spend your spare time; it may be very different from the way I choose to spend mine, but that's life's rich diversity for you.

Now, as it happens, I also have for many years given money to Oxfam by direct debit, and as it happens, at a rate considerably in excess of the rate you quote, but I would prefer not to specify the amount. I fully agree with you that the 'haves' in this life should help the 'have nots' and there is a solemn lesson to this effect at Luke 16 vv 19-31.

How I choose to spend my leisure time has relatively little connection with what I choose to do with any excess income I may have. I would venture to suggest that the same is true of you.

2. ARM is activley considerimg registering as a charity. It has an educational purpose which is clearly defined in law as charitable.

3. ARM does not profess to try to save lives. But we do profess to save two things: (a) money and (b) our heritage, and a familiar and tried-and-tetsed system of measurement. The entire road system in the U.K. is marked with up to 2 million road signs in Imperial, with metric an option in a couple of situations only (heights and widths). It is a system understood by all road users in the U.K. including continental lorry drivers and visitors. It is a system *preferred* by over 90% of those who expressed a preference (independent ICM Survey of over 1,000 peope aged 18+, April 2002).

One of ARM's objectives is to save this system of road signs and so prevent the government from spending a vast amount of *the people's money* on a wholly unnecessary conversion exercise.

Now follows my question:

Woud you rather spend £1 billion (or whatever the actual sum may be) converting the U.K.'s road signs to metric, or give it to Oxfam to assist in their relief work?

re (Stan): " 'Lock on the River Nene, Denford, Northamptonshire: large sign '11.2 kilometres per hour' changed to '7 mph''. That sign was not illegal".

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

REPLY: Are you quite sure that the sign was not illegal?

Can you quote the actual legislation that says this sign is actually 'legal' or 'illegal'?

What do you then say about all those canals (the majority) which still sign their speed limits in miles per hour. Legal or illegal?

Your answers may well help to expose the utter absurdity of converting canal speed limits to metric. Many canal users do not like to see '11.2 kilometres per hour' or '6.436 km/h' (another even more absurd version) on our canals.

The conversion to metric is done misguidedly by canal authorities, who mistakenly think there is some European Union Directive legally requiring them to do things like convert '7mph' to '11.2 kilometres per hour'.

What could or would the European Commission do about a canal that still signs in Imperial?

I'll answer my own question. Absolutely nothing

Well, there is no specific reference by EC/80/181 to converting canal signs - however, it refers to "public administration, health and safety" (or words to that effect). The UK authorities have interpreted that to mean canal signs.

re (BWMA Forum Owner): "EC/80/181...refers to "public administration, health and safety" (or words to that effect). The UK authorities have interpreted that to mean canal signs".

REPLY: Well, the 'U.K. authorities' appear to be wrong, then. In which case, it may be worth asking the Audit Commission to investigate the waste of thousands of pounds on signs that are 100% unnecessary

European law does not express what is illegal - but what is legal. Anything not made legal is automatically assumed to be unlawful.
The DETR sought an exemption for miles, etc on roads, but not for canals. So, although there is no law to compel metric canals, there is no law saying that metric need not be compelled.
This really raises a wider question as to whether European law can be legitimate.

Someone please look up "road" in Oxford dictionary and tell me what the definition is. I looked it up in Webster's: "an open way for vehicles, persons, and animals". Assuming that a boat is a vehicle, a canal should be considered a road.

Bud,

The TSRGD 2002 in the United Kingdom rely on the definition of "roads" which is found in one of the British laws (The Highways Act I think). In this way the TSRGD 2002 only applies as specified in the Act. Anything else is either covered by other laws or is not covered in the law.

How does the TSRGD 2002 define "road," please?

Bud,

You can find the full text ot TSRGD 2002 at
http://www.hmso.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm

<<
Woud you rather spend £1 billion (or whatever the actual sum may be) converting the U.K.'s road signs to metric, or give it to Oxfam to assist in their relief work?
>>

Sorry it has taken me so long to reply Tony, I have been on holiday. Of course the answer to your question is £1 billion to Oxfam. I am not a strong supporter of changing our road signs to metric if it was to cost this much money. What I do object to is when a sign is erected in metric, particularly if it is a private firm that has done, e.g. the Tower of London sign you changed, or one that is not on the road, is that you target these. This is surely unlawful action.

I fully respect you for giving money to Oxfam as I do to anyone who gives to most charities. However I do believe money spent by the ARM could be better spent elsewhere.

Thanks for answering my question straight about regestering the ARM as a charity BTW. Please keep us informed.