METRICATION MADNESS
(Yardstick Aug 2001)

This was the title of a feature article by Bernard Levin in The Times on 15 August 1995 - yes, six years ago!
For he was one of only two leading journalists who were alive to the evils of the metric regulations before they came into effect. The other, of course, was Christopher Booker, who was the first to investigate and expose the Euro-Whitehall conspiracy that plotted and enforced compulsory metrication, whereas Bernard Levin was inspired simply by sheer outrage at its tyranny and cultural vandalism.
That prophetic article had passed us by, because BWMA's campaign got under way a month later, in September 1995. But every word of it is as true today as it was then. Not only that, but it reminds us that the lies characterizing the process of implementation throughout the intervening six years of our campaign were merely a continuation of the several earlier years of lies that had characterized the inception and enactment of these regulations. After two general elections, this reminder is timely. We therefore reproduce these excerpts now.

"We all knew that this government lies to us, that it has always lied to us and that it will continue to lie to us…We also knew that this government ignores our wishes, has always ignored our wishes and will continue to ignore our wishes. Nor is that all…For we all knew that this government has cheated us out of our heritage, has always cheated us out of our heritage and will continue to cheat us out of our heritage. In short, this government is based on nothing but mendacity, cowardice, arrogance, bluster and desperation. But the worst is yet to come. And it comes in the form of metrication…
When did the British people give permission to change - and overnight - from their age old imperial measures to the metric ones? When did the British people accept the criminalisation of half a pound of cheese? When did the British people allow themselves, by the total loss of any kind of guard, to be entirely open to crooks and scoundrels? When did the British people deny their Britishness?
Do you seriously believe that if this government had come out and told the truth about what was imminent we would have allowed it to happen? But the deeply rooted culture of lying by which this government lives has so sprouted that it towers over everything. If you think I am making it up, let me tell you that when the secret, the hidden agenda upon which the British people are now impaled, was revealed and our rulers were asked why they had not come out with the truth at once, they said it was not necessary be-cause the British people had already agreed - in 1965.

Please understand that I am not trying to call down lightning upon the heads of the European Union. But what would anyone deduce from the lying and cheating and hiding that the British government is so prone to? There could only be one answer: that the British government is doing something dirty, and the dirt is inevitably going to be found on the British people. For otherwise why would there be any need for secrecy? Only, of course, because if there were no secrecy the truth would be bared."
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose!

Steve Tamblin from Wellingborough sent a copy press release from Railtrack, dated 9 March, which seems to reflect the muddled state of that company. It concerned a contract between Virgin Trains and Railtrack for the upgrading of parts of the Cross Country network. It states that "The Cross Country routes cover some 5,300 track miles" but that "The project will see the replacement of over 3,400 metres of track, 24,400 metres of ballast and 7,300 sleepers…" Quite apart from the conflicting use of imperial and metric units, ballast is a measure of weight or volume - not of length - and why boast about "over 3,400 metres of track" which is only a little more than 2 miles?

James Bye was amused when, watching 'Trading Up' - one of those ubiquitous house 'make-over' style TV programmes - he saw the normally very politically correct presenter proudly displaying some amazingly inexpensive material she was about to use, declaring that at a cost of only so much per square metre, she could afford to use "yards and yards" of it.
And Christopher Pierpoint was amused, during the intensely exciting final drama of the US presidential election, to see the ghastly weather forecasters on British TV, predicting temperatures in miserable Celsius numbers, followed directly by the latest news from sunny Florida, with reporters announcing that "it has been another glorious day here - not too hot - in the mid70's all day." If our weather forecasters were still watching, it must have made them sick with envy! Of course, references to the weather during golf commentaries from the USA are equally refreshing.

Christopher Pierpoint also sent an article from The Daily Telegraph on 14 April, entitled "The perfect cup of coffee", containing this incredible paragraph: "Your cup should contain between 1.0 and 1.2 fluid ounces of coffee, which should have been delivered at a water pressure of "9 Bar" and a temperature of 90 degrees celsius. Any milk added to the drink should be warmed to a temperature of between 155 and 160 degrees fahrenheit."

Mr G F Goodwin, a Member from Brighton, received an unusual response to his complaint about metricated BBC weather forecasts, in the form of a telephone call directly from a young man in the Met Office at Bracknell, who accused him of being a 'Little Englander', insisting that they must deal in international units because this is an international business. "But", pointed out Mr Goodwin, "you don't deal in international units. You have recently changed from an international measure - knots for wind-speed - to a British customary measure - miles per hour." Spluttering at the other end!

'Private Eye' (1 June) highlighted the madness of metric pricing by reproducing a supermarket advertisement which read: "aubergines [but spelt 'aubergenes' - some superior variety of genes?] 0.395kg @ £2.31kg". How many shoppers could work out in their heads that this represents 91.245p? What would the customer actually be charged - 91.00 or 92.00p? What is the point of measuring the weight of fruit or vegetable to the thousandth of 1kg when the price has to be rounded up or down to the near-est penny? Indeed, how many shoppers would even realize that 0.395kg equals 395g? Is not this mystification calculated to harm consumers' interests? When BWMA Members notice this type of price ticket, will they please bombard their local Trading Standards Officers with these questions and let us see their replies!
A glossy brochure published by the Overseas Placing Unit (Employment Service), as a guide to EUropean citizens working in the UK, includes an imperial/metric conversion table, the top line of which reads: '1 inch = 2.45cm'. Clearly, this should have read '2.54cm'. It was especially stupid, because the next line correctly stated "1 foot = 30.48cm" and obviously 2.45 x 12 = 29.40 which is far short of 30.48! As Vivian Linacre pointed out in a letter dated 31 May: "This cannot be dismissed as a simple typographical error, for the text must have been vetted and approved by several sets of eyes through the many stages of production. It shows yet again that even those in authority are unfamiliar with the most basic conversion factors." Needless to add, no reply has been received.