Where-as UK and US articles seemed to be more negative concerning the change, Irish media is more positive.

http://www.emigrant.ie/article.asp?iCategoryID=9&iArticleID=39675

By Thursday virtually all the country's speed limit signs had been changed from miles-per-hour to kilometres-per-hour, in time for the scheduled abandonment of the last official use of an imperial measurement. Although for many years all direction signposts have given distances in kilometres, motorists continued to be informed about the speed limit in mph. On most of the country's roads the speed limit has actually been lowered. The primary reason for this is that the 60mph on regional and local roads has changed to 80 km/h, the equivalent of 50mph. At the same time the 60mph on national roads has increased marginally to 100 km/h. The 70mph limit on motorways has increased to 120 km/h (75mph) and we now have a new lower speed limit of 30km/h in some residential areas. The change, when it came, did not cause any problems; motorists who normally ignored the speed limits continued to do so.

Maybe it was always the case, but any official change to the way we live in Ireland, however innocuous, seems to result in discord led by our politicians. For the past few weeks Fine Gael and Labour spokespersons have been berating the Government for what they claimed was a late start in launching an awareness campaign aimed at helping motorists understand the change. I suspect if the campaign had started three months ago we would have been told that it was too early. A spokesman for the National Safety Council said that advice had been sought from psychologists, who recommended that a short sharp publicity campaign immediately before the changeover would be most effective.

In my first writing of this story I asked questions about the competence of local authority staff, based on media reports about the location of some of the new signs. Fortunately I had a chance meeting with a senior council official and was reminded that there are two sides to every story. The Irish Examiner carried a front-page photograph of an 80 km/h sign erected on a Co. Mayo bóthairín with grass growing along the middle. In other counties 100 km/h signs have appeared beside schools. In all cases the speed limit had been 60mph and the extra 2mph wasn't going to make a great deal of difference, but it was argued that the placing of new signs adjacent to schools only encouraged drivers to increase their speed on that stretch of road. In my chat with the official it was pointed out to me that these signs were at the junctions with National Primary Roads which have a 120 km/h limit and failing to erect a sign would have left the motorist believing that he or she was still in a 120 km/h area, or at least that is what the lawyers would argue when the council was being sued.

Actually we continued to use one other imperial measure until Thursday. Met Éireann had been giving wind speeds in miles-per-hour but this is now reported in kilometres-per-hour.

" in time for the scheduled abandonment of the last official use of an imperial measurement. "

No more pints in Irish pubs then?

Newspapers eh?

A riddle: Did you know that all the newspapers in Sweden told their readers to vote 'yes' to the euro?

<<<Did you know that all the newspapers in Sweden told their readers to vote 'yes' to the euro?>>>

Did you know that newspapers in Britain tell people to vote against the euro?

Sweden:-
All businesses said vote yes
Government said vote yes
Opposition said vote yes
Newspapers said vote yes
Posters said vote yes

The public voted: "NO"

UK:-
Some businesses are saying vote yes
Some businesses are saying vote no
Government says vote yes
Opposition says vote no
Most Newspapers say vote yes
A few Newspapers say vote no
Arguably the BBC has slanted in favour of "yes"
There are no Posters (there is no campaign)

The public will vote: "?"

Look at the huge difference, Andy!

Anyway - the riddle was not to do with what's happening in the UK, rather how perception does not always echo the public's real sentiment.

Erin, where do you live (country)?

According to the initial post you posted this in at past 4 a.m. UK (and Ireland) time.

Point taken Steve, although I disagree that most newspapers are pro-euro. Sun, Mail and Times alone must make up well over 50% of readership

I just hate the tabloid press in Britain (as you may have noticed) for the way they manipulate peoples views particularly anything "european".

It runs both ways, Andy. In my view it is better things are manipulated against the EU than for it. I don't care who remains 'ignorant' in this issue so long as the UK remains sovereign.

Sorry Andy - got my yes's and no's mixed up -please transplant the following into my post:

Most Newspapers say vote no
A few Newspapers say vote yes
Arguably the BBC has slanted in favour of "yes".

Barry- On the contrary - if people actually *knew* the behind the scenes activities of the EU (****NOT*** "Europe") then I think more will be hostile to it.
I actually visited the european parliament once - including sitting in the listeners bay above the parliament house itself.

It's more scary than you can ever imagine.

<<<In my view it is better things are manipulated against the EU than for it.>>>

In my view it is better the people are well informed on the issue, so they can make their own decision. The anti-EU propoganda causes anti-european feeling and also turns people against things like metrication, which is a seperate issue (that has unfortunately been linked to the EU due to UK govt incompetence)

<<<I don't care who remains 'ignorant' in this issue so long as the UK remains sovereign.>>>

I want the UK to remain sovereign as well, but as Steve says - people don't need to be left ignorant, they can make up their own minds.

<<<It's more scary than you can ever imagine.>>>

I don't doubt that!

<< The anti-EU propoganda causes anti-european feeling >>

Whenever I talk about this subject, whether it be here, with friends, with adversaries, with work colleagues, with the pixies that live at the bottom of my garden I ***ALWAYS*** state that I am truly fond of europe* and cite that as my main reason for hating the EU.

It usually shuts-up the pro-EU brigade who start of with "you just hate europe you little Englander(!)"






[* except France] *

[* only JOKING!!]

Thats all fair enough for someone like yourself who knows whats what and can seperate "EU" from "Europe", but for the average Sun-reader (and I know I am generalising, and stereotyping here) it all gets blurred together to a them (continental europe) and us situation.

"but for the average Sun-reader (and I know I am generalising, and stereotyping here) it all gets blurred together to a them (continental europe) and us situation"

I thought the avg Sun read read it whilst in Spain ;-)

Steve: Barry? The number of people who have merged my two names into one- Barry- has actually gone beyond a joke and now insults me greatly. But you are special case, innit.

And Steve: I agree!! The more people know of the EU the more likely they are to reject it.. but at the end of the day, what I am saying is all that is important is that folk reject the EU. Whether they are slightly influenced by the press or not in that regard is not relevant- much rather they are influenced that way than the other :)

Erin, where do you live (country)?

Western New York state

<<<And Steve: I agree!! The more people know of the EU the more likely they are to reject it.. but at the end of the day, what I am saying is all that is important is that folk reject the EU. Whether they are slightly influenced by the press or not in that regard is not relevant- much rather they are influenced that way than the other :)>>>

So it doesn't matter what lies are fed to the people, as long as the end result is that they agree with Bryan Parry (Barry) it is OK?

My name isn't Barry. I just said that offends me. The number of people who have called me Barry because they are too thick to seperate a surname from a forename is really quite shocking.Thank you.

And to answer you question: yes-no. It's better that people make their own decisions, but let's be realistic here: we are not for a long time going to have a situation where people can be uninfluenced by the press etc. Thus, I would rather, if the press is going to influence anyone, influence them against the EU. If you consider this "People must agree with Bryan", then so be it, but I am saying something quite different: what is happening with the EU is the manifestation of the belief of many that the nation state should note exist. The nation state, in my world view, is fundamental to mankind. This is a self-evident fact. End of. The important thign is that Britain survives, that is all that matters. I am only being practical here.

<<<Thus, I would rather, if the press is going to influence anyone, influence them against the EU. If you consider this "People must agree with Bryan", then so be it, but I am saying something quite different: what is happening with the EU is the manifestation of the belief of many that the nation state should note exist.>>>

What I object to is the influencing by people who have their own interests at heart, not whats good for our country. I am assuming you know why Murdocks papers are anti-EU?

<<<The nation state, in my world view, is fundamental to mankind. This is a self-evident fact. End of. The important thign is that Britain survives, that is all that matters. I am only being practical here.>>>

Bryan, your arrogance is quite shocking at times. I am in favour of Britain remaining totally independant as well, but Europe is changing all the time and Britain needs to consider what its future is within Europe, not just stick our heads in the sand.

I think you are grossly misreading my posts.

"Byron: The number of people who have merged my two names into one- Barry- has actually gone beyond a joke"

I am genuinely sorry for that!
I don't know what it is but a lot of people have done that mistake.

I remember once when "euric" was posting on metricsucks. And we all know that he steals names sometimes to help him lose his argument. Well I remember him posting some bullsh*t pretending to be you. The only problem was - he posted as "Barry" - bit of a giveaway really.

I'll try not to do it again!

Back OT - don't forget we can be "with europe" but not "in europe"

<<<Back OT - don't forget we can be "with europe" but not "in europe">>>

Shouldn't that be the other way round?! I fail to see how Britain can be physically removed from the continent of Europe.

Churchill had some observations on Britain's relations with Europe.

In this, the week which is the 40th anniversary of his death in 1965, it might be prove useful pause for thought by all of us to recall his words, written against a background of a terrible World War started by an undemocratic regime on the continent of Europe, a frequent source of major world conflicts:

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

"Every step that tends to make Europe more prosperous and more peaceful is conducive to British interests...But we have our own dream and our own task.

"We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed.

"And should European statesmen address us in the words which were used of old - 'Shall I speak for thee to the King or the Lord of the Host?' - we should reply with the words of the Shunamite woman [Bible reference]: 'Nay sir, for we dwell among our own people ...'

"We must build a kind of United States of Europe...Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, amd mighty America must be friends and sponsors of the new Europe".

-----

ENDS. I hope no-one dares suggest, by the way, that Churchill was 'a little Englander'

Steve is quoting Conservative party policy/mantra (I think).

As Welshman Steve Humphreys (on the bwmaonline bulletin board), and Englishman Winston Churchill (in a major speech to a post-war European audience) have observed:

"...don't forget we can be 'with europe' but not 'in europe'..."

Actually I was referring to Churchill's thoughts, from memory.

He made a whole heap of mistakes in his time, but when it came to defending Britain and his views on Europe he was spot on.