Dear Ken,
Many thanks for your thoughtful comments. You have given me a great
deal to think about. I will mull some more!
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
Geelong, Australia
On 2009/03/30, at 3:51 AM, Ken Cooper wrote:
Pat
I'd like to comment on some of the points you make in your
interesting article below.
"Hearing that a single German bureaucrat, Guenter Verheugen, had
condemned the UK to at least another hundred years of dual
measurements with their associated confusion and cost"
Nothing that Verheugen said has changed the current position -
packers are free to mark a supplementary imperial indication to the
primary metric quantity marked on a package.
One thing that you do not seem to appreciate, however, is that very
few manufacturers actually choose to dual mark. The overwhelming
majority of packages available in UK supermarkets are marked in
metric only.
You will note that anti-metric extremists are always reluctant to
post examples of dual-marked UK packaging, preferring to hide behind
excuses like "I don't want to bore you with lists"
The real reason would be that such a list would be really short.
There are probably nearly as many products marked in both g & ml as
there are in g & oz.
"Anti-metric campaigners in the UK, who call themselves 'metric
martyrs', have decided to run a campaign to take measures in the UK
back to old, unchecked, scales and bowls to sell fruit and
vegetables."
As well as being unchecked, these scales should have had their
verification stamps removed. It is illegal to use an unstamped scale
for trade. It has always been an offence to use an unstamped scale -
regardless of whether that scale is imperial or metric. The so-
called "metric martyrs" are encouraging their supporters like Devers
to commit criminal offences that existed long before UK metrication.
Selling certain fruits & vegetables by the bowl is not necessarily
illegal, however. For example, why should a shopkeeper be forced to
sell apples by weight? He is perfectly at liberty to display a bowl
of apples with a price ticket reading "Golden Delicious 20p each" or
even "6 apples £1.00"
As long as the fruit appears on the list of countable produce in
Schedule 1 of the Weights and Measures Act 1963 (Cheese, Fish, Fresh
Fruits and Vegetables, Meat and Poultry) Order 1984, this is
perfectly legal.
Unfortunately for Devers, the veg she was selling by the bowl
(chillis) are not on that list. They must be sold by metric weight.
"Mr Neame's remarks were illustrated with a photo of 500 millilitres
of beer and 70 millilitres of froth in a 570 millilitre glass"
Can you provide some proof of these measurements, Pat? How can you
tell the exact amount of beer and froth just by looking?
With regard to the glass, it is stamped as a pint - not as 570ml. In
reality, the glass must conform to the Measuring Instruments
(Capacity Serving Measures) Regulations 2006 (CE marked glasses) or
the Capacity Serving Measures (Intoxicating Liquor) Regulations 1988
(Crown stamped glasses)
A legal pint brim measure, therefore, must contain an amount between
568.3ml & 606.7ml.
In practice, however, most "pint" brim measures fall into the range
576ml to 593ml with an average of around 585ml (source - British
Beer & Pub Association Draught Beer Guidance Notes)
"illustrating that whenever anyone asks for: 'A pint of beer,
please?' in the UK, they normally receive almost exactly 500
millilitres of beer."
Not true. My local authority would consider prosecution if a test
purchase revealed a 12% short measure.
In every survey carried out by Trading Standards & by organisations
such as CAMRA (real ale lovers), the average pint served is around
540ml.
In 1980, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) released a
report comparing the industrial use of metric units (only) to the
use of multiple measures. They found that the metric only companies
could expect to reduce their costs by about 9 % of their overall
turnover, and to increase their net profits by about 14 % when
compared to the users of multiple measures..............Industrial
costs to the people of the UK have been increased relative to all
other European nations by about 9 %.
This may be correct, but the overwhelming majority of UK goods that
are sold by measure are packed & marked in metric only. The point
above would only be relevant if it was compulsory to dual mark
metric & imperial on all goods sold by measure. One poster to this
board (Stephen Humphreys) supports this view - he has signed a
petition started by another pro-imperial activist asking for dual-
marking to be made compulsory.
Perhaps Stephen will be willing to comment on the additional costs
he wishes to impose upon UK industry through his dual marking
proposals? In addition, he might wish to comment upon the barrier to
trade he would be placing on UK importers who wish to import foreign
products that are only marked in metric.
--- On Sat, 21/3/09, Pat Naughtin
<pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com> wrote:
From: Pat Naughtin <pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com>
Subject: [USMA:44033] Re: Diversity
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <usma@colostate.edu>
Date: Saturday, 21 March, 2009, 5:31 AM
On 2009/03/16, at 2:35 PM, <mech...@illinois.edu> wrote:
Diversity of units of measurement (e.g. many choices by vendors for
units of volume or capacity) clearly facilitates confusion in trade
and commerce, and deceit of consumers in the market place.
…
Gene.
Dear Gene,
The battle against diversity of units is a long one. It goes back at
least the earliest books of the Bible.
When I heard that a single bureaucrat, Guenter Verheugen, had
successfully condemned the UK to at least another hundred years of
dual measurements with their associated confusion and cost, I wrote
this (unpublished) article:
Devers weights and Devers measures
Pat Naughtin
'Game, set, and match' trumpeted the Conservative MEPs as soon as
the first ball, of the first set, was served. Hearing that a single
German bureaucrat, Guenter Verheugen, had condemned the UK to at
least another hundred years of dual measurements with their
associated confusion and cost, the UK Conservative MEPs strangely
expressed delight. How odd!
When Bishop John Wilkins invented the 'universal measure' that
became the modern metric system — in London — in 1668, he was trying
to protect English shoppers from unscrupulous and dishonest traders.
Then, as now, some people were prepared to use the measuring
confusion caused by multiple measures to gain commercial advantages
by cheating.
Bishop Wilkins was an extremely practical man who knew about the
problems of dual measures by directly observing the dishonesty of
commercial traders. He probably based some of his sermons on
Biblical texts that railed against the dangers of dual measures that
the English High Street traders knew how to exploit by using quotes
such as:
Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and a small.
Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a
small. Diverse weights and diverse measures, both of them alike are
an abomination to the Lord. (Deuteronomy 25:13-14)
Shall I count them pure with the wicked balances, and with the bag
of deceitful weights.' (Micah 6:11)
Awareness of the possibilities for cheating was not new, even in
1668. Early books of the Christian Bible treat measurement almost as
a running theme. See: Leviticus 19:35-36, Isaiah 5:10, Ezekiel 45,
and Amos 8:5.
Anti-metric campaigners in the UK, who call themselves 'metric
martyrs', have decided to run a campaign to take measures in the UK
back to old, unchecked, scales and bowls to sell fruit and
vegetables. To my knowledge there has never been a standard bowl and
I have no doubt that the traders intend to choose the size of their
own bowl. I also doubt that they would simply fill any bowl that a
customer brought to their market stall. I don't think that Richard
Ashworth, Conservative Member of the European Parliament (MEP),
really means it when he says: 'Consumers should be able to buy in
the measurement of their choice'.
The use of old unapproved scales and a bowl effectively shifts
control of measurement definitions from the government to individual
traders with the legal effect of taking measurement law to some time
before Magna Carta when anyone could decide the size(s) of the
containers they use to buy and sell.
The anti-metric campaigners have chosen a trader named Janet Devers
to be their latest metric martyr. Presumably she will choose her own
size of bowl and with an illegal set of scales, her own standard for
weight; we could think of these as Devers weights and Devers
measures. In fact, I can't get this line out of my head whenever I
think of her name:
Devers weights and Devers measures, both of them alike are an
abomination to the Lord. (Paraphrased from Proverbs: 20)
Mr Giles Chichester, UK Conservative MEP proudly proclaimed the
continuation of multiple measures in the UK when he said: 'It was
ultimately the European Commission that listened to Conservative
pressure to keep pounds and ounces indefinitely … The Government may
be eager to scrap the pound as our currency, but at least we can say
we have saved it indefinitely – as a measurement at any rate.'
The oddly progressively named, Secretary of State for Innovation,
Universities and Skills, John Denham, whose department is
responsible for national weights and measures, is reported to have
said: 'People in Britain like their pint and their mile. They should
be able to use the measures they are most familiar with and now they
can be sure that they will continue to do so. We made strong
arguments for the UK’s right to carry on using pints and miles and
maintaining dual metric and imperial labelling'.
Bishop John Wilkins would roll over in his grave, in the St Lawrence
Jewry church in central London, if he knew of this opinion from
someone who is supposed to be a leader in Innovation, Universities
and Skills as John Wilkins was indeed a leader in developing
Innovation, Universities and Skills when he was the only person ever
to be a Master of a College at both Oxford and Cambridge, a writer
of science fiction, an internationally recognised 'scientist' in the
17th century, and the principle founder of the Royal Society.
The chief executive of Britain’s oldest brewer, Jonathan Neame, said
he was delighted the British pint had been saved. 'It was crazy that
Europe should think it could interfere with such a British icon', he
said. Mr Neame's remarks were illustrated with a photo of 500
millilitres of beer and 70 millilitres of froth in a 570 millilitre
glass illustrating that whenever anyone asks for: 'A pint of beer,
please?' in the UK, they normally receive almost exactly 500
millilitres of beer. A pint of British beer has been an illusion
maintained by the brewers — who work inside their breweries
exclusively in metric measures — for a long time.
In 1980, the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) released a
report comparing the industrial use of metric units (only) to the
use of multiple measures. They found that the metric only companies
could expect to reduce their costs by about 9 % of their overall
turnover, and to increase their net profits by about 14 % when
compared to the users of multiple measures. European Union Industry
Commissioner, Guenter Verheugen, with a single stroke from a German
bureaucratic pen, did what two world wars were not able to do, beat
the British into the sort of submission where industrial costs to
the people of the UK have been increased relative to all other
European nations by about 9 %. Guenter Verheugen is quoted as
saying: 'this is good news for the people in the UK and Ireland who
prefer to use pints and miles as current practices will remain in
place', and then he probably went home that night well satisfied
with his day's work.
Reference: http://www.metricmartyrs.co.uk
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin
PO Box 305 Belmont 3216,
Geelong, Australia
Phone: 61 3 5241 2008
Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has
helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the
modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that
they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or
selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources
for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial,
industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and
in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google,
NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the
USA. See http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication
information, contact Pat at pat.naugh...@metricationmatters.com or
to get the free 'Metrication matters' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter
to subscribe.
