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.......

<<
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
>>

I have said this many times - most of the countries 2 million road do not have measurements on them. If you think about it, 2 million road signs means one sign for every 30 people. Think about the road where you live. Where is the roadsign that accounts for the 30 people who live closest to you. It is probably the name of the road where you live.

Tony, for the umpteenth time, when will you understand that the majority of the 2,000,000 road signs that you repeatedly mention on this boards are road names whioch do not carry measurements of any kind??????

As long as you peddle that kind of trash, we must view everything else that you say with the same sceptisism.

This reply to a pro-metric letter in a regional newspaper has been submitted by ARM today:

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

Dear Editor

Our figure for converting road signs to metric is correct

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

Your correspondent Philip Hall believes the conversion of our 2 million or so Imperial road and footpath signs to metric would cost nearer £100 million than our estimate of £1 billion - ten times smaller than our figure.

Our assessment is based on a careful analysis of the likely cost of changing every footpath, speed restriction, distance and dimension sign into metric. It includes costs of preparation, making the necessary legal changes, the public education programme that would be required, and the intensive labour costs needed for what would, in effect, have to be a virtually overnight conversion.

Conversion of 2 million signs into metric could not be done by the absurd ‘gradual replacement strategy’ suggested by Mr Hall. Indeed, the Department for Transport has consistently stated publicly that there would be manifest dangers of confusion if it were done piecemeal. We could hardly have a situation where a sign: ‘Road Works 600 metres’ is followed by another: ‘Give Way 200 yards’ - or a 30mph sign was followed by one saying, e.g., 60km/h.

Public opinion on this was last tested by respected pollsters ICM, who interviewed over 1,000 people from 26- 28 April 2002. A whopping 86% of people wanted to keep our road and footpath signs in miles and yards, with just 8% preferring kilometres and meters. There is no evidence that these figures have changed since then.

Mr Hall says children these days are ‘metric educated’. True. But when they leave the school gates, they enter the real world where Imperial measurements are the rule. They describe their height and weight in feet and stones. They watch football, golf and cricket matches where feet and yards are used exclusively. They eat 12” pizzas and quarterpounders, buy 27” bikes and watch TV on 22” televisions. They cycle on roads with Imperial measurements on them. Their favourite reading material is the Harry Potter series, which uses Imperial measurements throughout.

Surely Mr Hall would agree that even if converting 2 million signs only cost £100 million, we have many far better things to do with taxpaayers’money?

Yours sincerely

Tony Bennett

Secretary, Active Resistance to Metrication

[345 words]

re (Beranger): "Tony - I would disagree re your point regarding the planners. I suspect that every sign I saw had no planning permission whatsoever!"


REPLY: You are right, but this is how a typical conversation will go:

Joe Public: "Do I need planning permission to erect a B & B sign?"

Mr Bureaucrat: "Not if each letter is no taller than 25 cm, the overall area of the sign is smaller than 4.5 sq. metres, and it's sited at least 1 metre away from the road/highway"

Joe Public: "Oh good. Should I put the distance up in yards or metres?"

Mr Bureaucrat: "Metres - that's what most people are doing these days - it won't be long before all the road signs go metric"

Martin. I refer you to the answer I gave on this board on the subject of the cost of erecting vast numbers of metric roads signs - on 25 June 2003. It's reproduced below. Maybe you have forgotten it. I have frequently given cost estimates on these boards, as a flick through the archives will reveal.

Thus I trust that your (unusually for you, I concede) cheap and throwaway allegation that my comments on the massive costs of metrication are 'trash' will not be able to be repeated after you have carefully read and considered all my previous evidence on this subject.

And you *still* don't say why we need to convert the signs, except to say 'everybody else has metric road signs'.

So what? 'Everybody else' might have dysentery

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

836 distance and dimension signs in 116 miles
June 25 2003 at 8:02 PM Tony Bennett

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

One subject of discussion on this board has been whether or not the estimate by ARM that metric conversion of road and pedestrian signs would cost £1 billion plus is an exaggeration or not. ARM has also consistently estimated that there may be well be over a million road signs in the country that would need converting.

On a recent journey by road from the outskirts of Salisbury to Stourbridge, a journey of 116 miles, it was decided to count how many distance and dimension signs could be seen along the roads. The roads covered were, respectively, the A 338, A 345, A 417, M 5 and A 491. The journey involved rural, urban and motorway driving.

Signs visible in either direction, or just off the main road and easily visible, were counted. Each distance on signs with more than one distance on them, e.g. a route confirmatory sign giving distances to 2, 3, 4 or 5 places, was counted.

The total number of dimension and distance signs counted was 836. That works out at about one every 244 yards.

The following types of signs were seen along the way (list not complete):

30 mph
40 mph
50 mph
60 mph
Speed limit 50 mph, 3/4 mile ahead
P 1/2 mile, 1/4 mile
Slippery road for 150 yards
Beware deer for 2 miles
Lane closed ahead, 800 yds, 600 yds, 400 yds, 200yds
Road works ahead, various distances
Give way ahead, various distances
Signs to villages off route
Route confirmatory signs
Motorway route confirmatory signs
Distances to motorway junctions, intersections etc., 1m, 1/2m, and 1/3 mile
Traffic lights, 200 yds, 100yds

Out of all the signs seen, 835 were Imperial and one metric (on the A 417: 'Prohibited length 8 metres at Lechlade').

Private signs were not counted. But several dozen were seen e.g. distances to pubs, garages and bed-and-breakfasts, acreages or sq. ft. of agricultural and industrial land respectively. Of several dozen seem, just two were metric.

*Every single one* of the 835 Imperial dimensions and distances seen on the Salisbury to Stourbridge journey would have to be changed if our roads and highways ever went metric - if not by a new sign, then at least by a sticker giving the distance/dimension/speed in metric.

It's an awesome thought.

Do we *really* need it?

<<<and are told that they should really be putting the distances up in metric>>>

I very much doubt it.

Just face it, you don't like it when someone "chooses" to put up a metric sign.

<<<And you *still* don't say why we need to convert the signs, except to say 'everybody else has metric road signs'.>>>

Tony, we have given reasons time and time again why we think we need to convert the signs. You obviously don't agree with our reasons, but to us on the metric side, you have never given a good reason why having begun the transition to the metric system, we should leave road signs in imperial.

Andy - they don't "choose" metric. I've seen one of these advice notes showing how to put a sign up and how to use "m" for metres. Despite their own preference for yards most people don't give a monkeys and will do what the rule books say.

<<Your correspondent Philip Hall>>

Where have I heard that name before?

T Bennett:
<<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>>

Stan:
ARM have cost local taxpayers untold sums of money in the unnecessary replacement or modification of harmless metric signs with imperial ones - just to satisfy the ARM lust for imperial measures. That and any expense incurred by ARM out of thier own funds could just as easily have gone to a more worthy cause.

Not to mention the gratuitous vandalism of other signs obliterating supplementary metric indications just because of their hatred of metric.

Don't talk to me about shame. It's you that should examine your conscience.

rer (Stan): "ARM have cost local taxpayers untold sums of money in the unnecessary replacement or modification of harmless metric signs with imperial ones - just to satisfy the ARM lust for imperial measures"


REPLY: What a strange, indeed perverse, way of regarding British officials who go around negligently or deliberately breaking the laws of this country with regard to signage on British roads.

I've made a note of your generous view of official law-breaking for future reference, Stan. I just hope you're not an official, that's all

I'm shaking in my boots.

re (Stan): "I'm shaking in my boots..."

REPLY:

Would those be size 10 boots (11 inches)?

Or maybe size 11 boots (11 + 1/3 inches)?

Or perhaps size 12 boots (11 + 2/3 inches)?

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

Quote:

"The English system is thirds of an inch, starting roughly at four or eight inches for children or adults. Four and eight inches used to be called one hand or two hands, with four inches being width of a hand and an inch the length between the end of your thumb and the middle crease. A hand or hand-width was the common measure for horses, so it was convenient to use it for shoes as well.

Thirds of an inch used to be called barleycorns, after the corns you can make porridge out of.

At this point the system becomes more hi-tec, because cobblers would use a bit of stick, more or less designed for the purpose of measuring shoes rather than feet. A shoe should be about one size larger then the foot it surrounds, so the measuring stick would be marked with a child's size one one hand and a third of an inch, rather than the round number of one hand or four inches exactly.

This "starting roughly" was altered at some point by colonists in the USA - of which more below..."

Endquote

<<
Tony, we have given reasons time and time again why we think we need to convert the signs. You obviously don't agree with our reasons, but to us on the metric side, you have never given a good reason why having begun the transition to the metric system, we should leave road signs in imperial.
>>

Andy, it all depends on what you consider a "good" reason. We have given plenty of reasons, so if you don't accept them, there is not much we can do. But obviously Parliament agrees with us, not you.

I happened to drive right across Scotland at the weekend and kept an eye out for distance signs advertising B&B's, hotels, guest houses, shops, tourist attractions etc.

I only counted the signs put up by the businesses themselves - ie the signs that do not have to comply with the TSAGDR.

I did not count any of the official brown tourist signs, as they must be in imperial & might not therefore reflect the preference of the individual businesses.

I only counted each business once - regardless of the number of signs displayed.

In a 150 mile journey, 17 businesses displayed metric signage only. 10 businesses displayed imperial signage only. 2 businesses had both imperial & metric signs.

I make that 58.6% metric, 34.5% imperial & 6.9% dual

There was a bit of a tendency to use metres for distances up to around 500m, and fractions of miles or miles for distances over 1/4 mile.

Interestingly, the west of the country seems to be more metric than the east - it was closer to 50/50 on the east whilst overwhelmingly metric on the west.

Anyway, the results seem to replicate (to within a few percentage points) the results of the survey I carried out the other day.

Tony's 30% metric figure from 2003 may have become outdated, but even that figure does not support his contention "that 86% of the country do not want our system of miles, yards, feet and inches on our road signs disturbed"

<<
There was a bit of a tendency to use metres for distances up to around 500m, and fractions of miles or miles for distances over 1/4 mile.
>>

Did you see any kilometres, Beranger, or were metric signs only used for small distances?

Berenger,

I went to Chester on the weekend and had to use "back roads" due to a crash on the M6.

I then drove to Cardiff on Sunday, again avoided motorways. The number of times I came across "Welcome to ENGLAND, Croeso y LOEGWR" and "Welcome to WALES, Croeso y GYMRU" was very slightly amusing.

Sadly though I did make a note of the metric/yard b&b sign thing (and any other "non official" sign).

I saw one '300 Metres' sign behind a factory gate (nothing to do with B&B's) however I would say that over 95% of B&B, pub etc signs were yards. I did see just a few "mts" (not "m").

What was a tad more annoying in my case is that hardly any of the B&B's showed the Welsh "llath" (yards) (though all "official" signs did). Being close to the border is not a good excuse.

So if you're not busy these days, ARM? ;-)

Bud

"Did you see any kilometres, Beranger, or were metric signs only used for small distances"

Largest metric distance was 500m. Most were in range 50 to 200m.

Vast majority of imperial signs were in fractions of miles - only 2 or 3 made reference to yards.

Stimpy

"I did see just a few "mts" (not "m")."

Yeah, lots of the signs I saw were "mts" or "mtrs" too.

Are you suggesting that these signs don't count as metric because they don't follow the strict SI system?

And did you consider any sign reading "B&B 200m" to be advertising premises 200 miles away like you usually do......

:-):-):-)

Beranger, that means that there is no problem with mixed units on Britain's roads, because a metre and a yard are basically the same. For large distances, only miles are used, and for small distances, it doesn't matter which one is intended because most drivers couldn't distinguish between them anyway.

....except one faulty sign near Newbury.

It said "Low bridge, if you turn left, after 12m" (Basically a picture of a low bridge with ft/in on it with (underneath) a seperate black arrow on white pointing left with 12m on it)

Now this was an odd one, because even the metric minded (or "pretend minded") people here would read 12m as 12 miles there.

This was particulary dodgy as when you turned the leafy corner there was the bridge quite literally about 15 yds after. Even at 30mph it could have caused an issue.

To Berenger - I wonder, do you just "notice" the mts and mtrs signs more than the yd ones? ie because they "stick out" a bit.

<<
Now this was an odd one, because even the metric minded (or "pretend minded") people here would read 12m as 12 miles there.
>>

... which is a very good reason for the DoT to use the CORRECT symbols for miles and metres and not to do their own bodges.

CORRECT - they should use symbols that the UK driver is most familiar with and keep our safety record impeccable.

There is something here that metrication objectors might like to consider.

We are constantly hearing from you that metric and imperial should be allowed to co-exist in a free society. Some maintain that both imperial and metric should be allowed on signs others that only imperial should be allowed.

What is also clear from the ARM reports is that a lot of metric signs are being put up that don't comply with the TSRGD rules forbiding metric only where it is allowed at all or imperial only otherwise.

We now have an example where the m for mile and m for metre are actually in danger of being misread.

So, irrespective of what local authorities ought to be doing legally and discounting that they deliberately flout the regulations, one can reasonably assume that in reality it is not clear to them what they are allowed to do or what they are expected to do.

It is also unsurprising that some seem to think they are meant to put up signs in metric given that metric is required for most other purposes, including submissions for planning applications and road construction plans.

What does all this tell you about the persistence of imperial alongside metric?

Surprise us.....

<<<What does all this tell you about the persistence of imperial alongside metric?>>>

It persists because it is enforced by bureacracy.

In exactly the same way that were it metric being enforced the pro-imperial brigade would be up in arms.

Did you have a nice holiday, Andy?

;-)

<<<Did you have a nice holiday, Andy?>>>

Yes, thanks

Saw lots of lovely metric signs and drank lots of half-litres of beer.

"Yes, thanks

Saw lots of lovely metric signs and drank lots of half-litres of beer."


What paradise were you visiting? It sounds almost like heaven.

Excuse him, Andy!

So where did you go?

Was it Hungary?

It was indeed, and Slovakia and Czech Republic.

Unfortunately didn't make it to Statue Park, which you recommeded in Budapest due to a tight schedule and the aforementioned beer.. got plenty of other insights into the communist era though, which was fascinating. (The museum of Communism in Prague shows a very moving film)

Something I noticed re. the EU numberplates we were discussing recently - many new cars in all the above countries now have them, but unfortunately in their case the EU flag is in place of the old national one which used to be on the plates, which I find a shame. (in the UK we didn't have anything before so the addition of the EU bit is OK)

<<(The museum of Communism in Prague shows a very moving film)>>

Did you have issues with "gypsies" and pick-pockets in Prague? It was one reason I was put off there in favour of Hungary.

Would love to visit that museum though.

re (Andy): "...in the U.K. we didn't have anything before, so the addition of the EU bit is OK..."

REPLY: Speak for yourself

<<<Did you have issues with "gypsies" and pick-pockets in Prague? It was one reason I was put off there in favour of Hungary.>>>

No, but it is ridiculously over-touristy. I would certainly avoid Prague in mid-summer.

<<<"...in the U.K. we didn't have anything before, so the addition of the EU bit is OK..."
REPLY: Speak for yourself>>>

just clarifying my position - i.e I don't like the EU flag replacing national ones, but see nothing wrong with it appearing in addition.

Hmmm

Thanks for that info (not the numberplate bit!)

I might consider going there.

Did you fly direct to or from Prague to a London airport?

How long is it in hours and minutes (rather than "Danny style" Ms (mega-seconds))?

Got an anniversary coming up (yep, its been that long) and need to go somewhere!

Easyjet to Gatwick
about 2 and a half hrs

seriously beautiful city, but go when its quiet

didn't know it was that far...

re (Andy): "...just clarifying my position - i.e I don't like the EU flag replacing national ones, but see nothing wrong with it appearing in addition..."

REPLY: If all the E.U. symbol (actually, not a flag) were ever going to do is appear *alongside* national flags, maybe I could live with it.

But an analysis of the intentions of the founding fathers of the E.U., and of those who still run it behind the scenes, is that the E.U. symbol will one day *replace* national flags, just as the drive to 'ever-closer union' will gradually strip nations of their powers step by step until they are about as potent as County Councils.

The proposed introduction of 'E.U. Citizenship' alongside national citizenship is another such example. The intention is to remove national citizenship eventually.

It's all there for those who want to see what's coming up - Booker and North's recent book: "The Great Deception: The Secret History of the European Union" is a good starter...

"It was indeed, and Slovakia and Czech Republic."


Did you use euros? Some businesses prefer them over the local currency. A former co-worker and his wife went to visit her family in Slovakia in April and were shocked when the shops either didn't take US dollars or gave a very bad exchange rate. They were under the impression from the cold war days that everybody preferred dollars, but it seems those days are past. The shops however all took euros. Even though Slovakia has not officially adopted the euro, it is possible for people and businesses to open bank accounts in euros. Many businesses, especially those that do business outside of the country do have euro accounts.

http://www.licenseplates.tv/product_info.php/cPath/2_720/products_id/5069


Here is what the new plate looks like. The site is not Slovak.


SLOVAKIA EURO (EEC) LICENSE PLATE ISSUED FROM MAY 1, 2004 TO PRESENT -- EMBOSSED WITH YOUR CUSTOM NUMBER

I guess that makes it about the same distance between Hungary (Budapest) and London then.

When you were in Budapest did you go to both Buda AND pest?

Also - if you came across a restaurant called "fatale" then you will have noted that it was great nosh!

E.U. Symbol September 6 2005, 12:19 PM

TB
But an analysis of the intentions of the founding fathers of the E.U., and of those who still run it behind the scenes, is that the E.U. symbol will one day *replace* national flags, just as the drive to 'ever-closer union' will gradually strip nations of their powers step by step until they are about as potent as County Councils.

metre
Dear oh dear having nightmares again, do we?

<<<But an analysis of the intentions of the founding fathers of the E.U., and of those who still run it behind the scenes, is that the E.U. symbol will one day *replace* national flags, just as the drive to 'ever-closer union' will gradually strip nations of their powers step by step until they are about as potent as County Councils. >>>

We have seen recently with the rejections of the constitutions that the powers of the EU are essentially limited by the people.

<<<Did you use euros? >>>

No. In some of the touristy areas they gave prices in euros as well. Didn't bring any with me so have no idea whether they can be used.

<<<When you were in Budapest did you go to both Buda AND pest?>>>

Yep

<<<if you came across a restaurant called "fatale" then you will have noted that it was great nosh! >>>

I remember seeing it - but didn't go in :-(
(the name put us off!)

I think it (fatale) means "wooden bowl" rather than "you will die"!

Having said that, Danny might be able to enlighten us more because - unlike us - he's never been there.

"No. In some of the touristy areas they gave prices in euros as well. Didn't bring any with me so have no idea whether they can be used."

If you did pay in euros though you would not get any back as change. They keep the good money and give you back as change the junk they don't want. They know what has value and what doesn't.


As for the EU license plates, they have both the EU circle of stars and the letters representing the country. Thus for Slovakia, the SK is prominent under the stars so people know what country the car is from.

Whispers: He's on your side Andy!

;-)