'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
It's just another low hanging fruit fantasy of which Boris Johnson has hallmarked his career. The EU interfering with our pink sausages, straight bananas, prawn cocktail crisps and Imperial measurement system.
We need to get our priorities right. Why should we accept our food bank charitable donations if the EU tells us what we can and can't eat and worse still that they are measured in metric? We're British, we'd rather starve.
And sorry about yesterday too - I am very proud of our country, its traditions and heritage, and I get easily upset by those who don't feel the same way.
My apologies.
How nice, a PB reconciliation. I missed the altercation but - well done guys!
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
Well the so-called metric martyrs were, I believe, some market stall-holders who did only price their goods in Imperial.
They can derive some benefit from this just from the propaganda. 1. It fits into a paradigm of standing up for traditional British things against European things. 2. Anytime someone notices dual-use of imperial measurements alongside metric they will be reminded of this, and may believe that the Imperial measurement is only used as a result of this. 3. For many human-scale purposes imperial measurements are better, and young people may find pleasure in discovering them. An ounce is roughly a handful, but how much is a gram? The metric system is more logical and useful for many scientific applications, but it's a bit impersonal and alienating for everyday use.
Many government critics can overdo the criticism on this, and come across as condescending.
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I'm not convinced there is an underlying republicanism in Scotland. I think it's another symptom of the "If the English are doing it, fuck that" twitch that has taken over the country.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
Friends with benefits? Are they gonna shaft England or is England shafting them?
As I understand it both Europe and UK are feminine.
Err… don’t go googling or anything, but female-female encounters do not necessarily omit shafting.
Of course, but from an equal starting point in terms of expectations. No reason why the EU and UK can't experiment a bit and find out what works best for them.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
But, the absence of the EU in our political lives over the last few years has made us quickly forget just how overbearing and directive it was in setting the agenda. And how impotent we sometimes were in changing it when we didn't agree.
This quickly came back to me whilst dealing with Italian and German branches of my firm last week (they want to learn from the UK on how we do infrastructure advice) where they take their policy direction on sustainability, transport, energy and regional inequality almost entirely from EU directives and the Commission with their federal governments almost wholly irrelevant.
I asked about it varied by country with the added layer of policy imposed by their national governments and they just shrugged. In fact, quite often, if they want something done domestically then lobby the EU Commission instead for a new EU directive as they find it exercises more effective governance.
They always fly their national flags next to the EU flag for a reason: in many EU member states the EU Commission *is* the primary form of government.
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I'm not convinced there is an underlying republicanism in Scotland. I think it's another symptom of the "If the English are doing it, fuck that" twitch that has taken over the country.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
- “… that has taken over the country.”
Ho ho. It’s clear you are new to the country. Any visitor during the last millennium could have written that observation.
Caligula, by the way, lasted just 3 years and 4 months before being assassinated by his own guard.
He presided over a massive financial crisis and food shortages. He indulged in sex with other men's wives, which he bragged about, and turned D̶o̶w̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶S̶t̶ the palace into a drunken brothel.
And he thought he was divine
...
And he made Nadine Dorries culture secretary.
As long as he and she stick around to reform the funding of the BBC that’s fine by me.
That's the only thing which matters to this country right now? I mean, there's perspective and then there's obsessive batshit crazy.
The BBC funding will inevitably change no matter who is in charge from whatever politics. It's a commercial and contemporary trend that not even something as anachronistic as the licence fee can resist.
Talking of obsessive your posts about the govt fall into that category.
Different things matter to different people. You don’t like that. Well tough.
p.s. morning all. I was in London yesterday and had a fantastic view of the flypast: right over my head. I'm not really a monarchist but I did find it rather moving.
We got a formation of jets around lunchtime, a Hurricane (repeatedly), and some sort of small WW2 fighter with Luftwaffe markings that everyone assured me was a Bf 109, but looked more like an FW 190 to me.
I wondered, could it be a Bf.108? Civilian type plane that is often used as a poor man's 109 for air shows and even crap films. Often dressed up in Luftwaffe colours and markings, though that could be authentic as quite a few did serve under RM Goering of course. Slightly blunter cowling and wingtips than a 109 though the cockpit isn't quite like a 190.
Nice that there was a small tribute to Brenda’s German heritage, though slightly surprised that the vengeful WWII death cult didn’t require it to be shot down.
I think there’s only one airworthy Würger so that would have been a very rare bird indeed.
Anyway, perhaps someone on PB knows the answer. If one of us heard it and could confirm that the thing had a Merlin that would be easy - a Ha-1112 perhaps ex the Battle of Britain film.
German engines sounded quite different, apparently. I remember my late mother telling me of the noise of the bombers proceeding overhead to paste Clydebank, though what she remembered most was the slow beat of the deliberately unsynchronised motors - not relevant to a single-eingine job obviously.
You probably saw an RAF Texan (used for training) flying about with (or behind) the Spitfires and Hurricanes yesterday.
From the Mirror (other newspapers are available) A total of 22 aircraft took part in the rehearsal, according to Military Airshows, they included:
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I've seen no fuss round here although i don't get out much. A few kids looking increasingly gutted this isnt a Christmas style deal, general air of might as well relax for the long weekend. Bit weird.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
The potential flaw with that argument is that the UK is not a static thing; neither is the EU really. They are both continually churned as people are born and people die.
Mass-market Euroscepticism (and what is democracy if not mass market?) is really a feature of one specific British generation; roughly those born between 1945 and 1960ish. They were the leaviest group in both referendums and the only cohort who think Brexit is a good idea now (and by about a 2:1 majority). Outside that cohort, I don't get the sense of "this never worked for us".
But the "what does Britain try next?" question is for a decade in the future, anyway.
Maybe we already are. (And I will be tactically voting against this Government at the next election anyway)
On an objective level I'm loving it.
This is what political watching is all about: huge fun!
Holy crap, get a life. I would rather have my nails pulled out with pliars.
Good morning Malc. Hope all is well with you and yours and the weather is good.
That comment of yours did make me chuckle.
Morning Taz, weather a bit grey today and may see some rain I think. I am halfway through extending borders in garden so hoping it hold off. Lovely yesterday and spent most of day in the garden and managed to avoid almost all the tosh and bollox of the mafia jamboree.
PS Taz, good morning to you and hope you and family are enjoying the long weekend.
Thanks, we really are. Been stopping in a lodge in the peak,district. We’ve had a great time.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
The weirdest thing about this (and there are many weird things about this) is who is it meant to be aimed at? How many non-Tory voters are going to look at this and say “you know what, I think I’ll give these imperial measures guys my vote at the next election”? https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1532633797484761091
Not going after new votes but aimed at re-enforcing the 2019 vote by maintaining turnout and discouraging a switch back to other parties.
And it is a tiny piece in their jigsaw, that they are not going to even ever implement. Pretty much guaranteed we will get similar intentions from the govt in 2023 and 2024 when they need a favourable story to the Mail and Express.
Yep. We are going to have to put up with this kind of crap until they are turfed out in 2024/5.
We actually had a brief discussion about the crown symbol on pints in pub last night. No one seemed to have ever noticed they were there or not there. There is a CE mark now which someone says is in process of being changed to CGB mark, but that may have been a joke.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
Well the so-called metric martyrs were, I believe, some market stall-holders who did only price their goods in Imperial.
They can derive some benefit from this just from the propaganda. 1. It fits into a paradigm of standing up for traditional British things against European things. 2. Anytime someone notices dual-use of imperial measurements alongside metric they will be reminded of this, and may believe that the Imperial measurement is only used as a result of this. 3. For many human-scale purposes imperial measurements are better, and young people may find pleasure in discovering them. An ounce is roughly a handful, but how much is a gram? The metric system is more logical and useful for many scientific applications, but it's a bit impersonal and alienating for everyday use.
Many government critics can overdo the criticism on this, and come across as condescending.
The last point is important.
Whereas govt critics think "Why are the govt so bothered with this?" some govt supporters equally think "Why are the left so ashamed of our past that they get bothered by this?"
And sorry about yesterday too - I am very proud of our country, its traditions and heritage, and I get easily upset by those who don't feel the same way.
My apologies.
How nice, a PB reconciliation. I missed the altercation but - well done guys!
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I'm not convinced there is an underlying republicanism in Scotland. I think it's another symptom of the "If the English are doing it, fuck that" twitch that has taken over the country.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
Wrong there big time, they have been less popular here forever and now hardly any sane person is giving a toss about the jubilee other than they have an extra day off. They are a bunch of parasites. Apart from a few old ancients no-one would give them the time of day.
Caligula, by the way, lasted just 3 years and 4 months before being assassinated by his own guard.
He presided over a massive financial crisis and food shortages. He indulged in sex with other men's wives, which he bragged about, and turned D̶o̶w̶n̶i̶n̶g̶ ̶S̶t̶ the palace into a drunken brothel.
And he thought he was divine
...
And he made Nadine Dorries culture secretary.
As long as he and she stick around to reform the funding of the BBC that’s fine by me.
That's the only thing which matters to this country right now? I mean, there's perspective and then there's obsessive batshit crazy.
The BBC funding will inevitably change no matter who is in charge from whatever politics. It's a commercial and contemporary trend that not even something as anachronistic as the licence fee can resist.
Talking of obsessive your posts about the govt fall into that category.
Different things matter to different people. You don’t like that. Well tough.
Nadine Dorries's plan to reform BBC funding, assuming she ever gets around to announcing one, is unlikely to shift many votes. As with Brexit, the government might do better to maintain the illusion that it has an oven-ready deal for television than to reveal, or even formulate, any details.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
But, the absence of the EU in our political lives over the last few years has made us quickly forget just how overbearing and directive it was in setting the agenda. And how impotent we sometimes were in changing it when we didn't agree.
This quickly came back to me whilst dealing with Italian and German branches of my firm last week (they want to learn from the UK on how we do infrastructure advice) where they take their policy direction on sustainability, transport, energy and regional inequality almost entirely from EU directives and the Commission with their federal governments almost wholly irrelevant.
I asked about it varied by country with the added layer of policy imposed by their national governments and they just shrugged. In fact, quite often, if they want something done domestically then lobby the EU Commission instead for a new EU directive as they find it exercises more effective governance.
They always fly their national flags next to the EU flag for a reason: in many EU member states the EU Commission *is* the primary form of government.
More total Little Englander bollox from you. I would take guidance from Auld Nick rather than your crooked heroes.
@Casino_Royale in case you think differently I am not anti the royals as discussed a few days ago. I have no desire to get rid of them and I quite like them. I am also keen on our traditions and heritage. Because of my political views I am in theory a republican but in practice I have no desire to get rid of them as they don't have power and provide pleasure to many.
I also like traditions from all over the world. Pride only applies where deserved. My default is to support England/UK/GB, but it is conditional on fair play and doing stuff to be proud of. Trooping the Colour yesterday fits that description (where else eh?) as did the Olympics. Millennium Dome (or rather what was in it) not so.
So I am afraid my pride is conditional. Just as I love British pubs, etc, I also love stuff from France, Italy, USA, etc
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
Well the so-called metric martyrs were, I believe, some market stall-holders who did only price their goods in Imperial.
They can derive some benefit from this just from the propaganda. 1. It fits into a paradigm of standing up for traditional British things against European things. 2. Anytime someone notices dual-use of imperial measurements alongside metric they will be reminded of this, and may believe that the Imperial measurement is only used as a result of this. 3. For many human-scale purposes imperial measurements are better, and young people may find pleasure in discovering them. An ounce is roughly a handful, but how much is a gram? The metric system is more logical and useful for many scientific applications, but it's a bit impersonal and alienating for everyday use.
Many government critics can overdo the criticism on this, and come across as condescending.
What on earth is an ounce a handful of and why is that useful to know? Not a thing I have ever heard, and I am 60
And there's, ahem, substances, m'lord, which the young are very accustomed to buying by the gram, which gives them a pretty good steer.
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I'm not convinced there is an underlying republicanism in Scotland. I think it's another symptom of the "If the English are doing it, fuck that" twitch that has taken over the country.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
- “… that has taken over the country.”
Ho ho. It’s clear you are new to the country. Any visitor during the last millennium could have written that observation.
Indeed, many have.
I dunno, I remember lots of stuff at school for the Golden (maybe that is happening for this one too?). And under Labour there wasn't such an obvious spasm away from Westminster policy.
Btw, Nats have an unfortunate habit of questioning how long unionists (55%) have lived in Scotland. Its particular silly from a poster who doesn't actually live here themselves.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
Slithering mass of tactical efficiency 58 on that poll, and the odd one showing +5 Tory leap to 36 aside, you have to go back to the 18th now to find the Tories above 33.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
Well the so-called metric martyrs were, I believe, some market stall-holders who did only price their goods in Imperial.
They can derive some benefit from this just from the propaganda. 1. It fits into a paradigm of standing up for traditional British things against European things. 2. Anytime someone notices dual-use of imperial measurements alongside metric they will be reminded of this, and may believe that the Imperial measurement is only used as a result of this. 3. For many human-scale purposes imperial measurements are better, and young people may find pleasure in discovering them. An ounce is roughly a handful, but how much is a gram? The metric system is more logical and useful for many scientific applications, but it's a bit impersonal and alienating for everyday use.
Many government critics can overdo the criticism on this, and come across as condescending.
They are appealing to their accolytes such as Casino and Barty boy, trying to hold onto as many cult members as they can.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
The weirdest thing about this (and there are many weird things about this) is who is it meant to be aimed at? How many non-Tory voters are going to look at this and say “you know what, I think I’ll give these imperial measures guys my vote at the next election”? https://twitter.com/KevinASchofield/status/1532633797484761091
Not going after new votes but aimed at re-enforcing the 2019 vote by maintaining turnout and discouraging a switch back to other parties.
And it is a tiny piece in their jigsaw, that they are not going to even ever implement. Pretty much guaranteed we will get similar intentions from the govt in 2023 and 2024 when they need a favourable story to the Mail and Express.
Yep. We are going to have to put up with this kind of crap until they are turfed out in 2024/5.
We actually had a brief discussion about the crown symbol on pints in pub last night. No one seemed to have ever noticed they were there or not there. There is a CE mark now which someone says is in process of being changed to CGB mark, but that may have been a joke.
Slithering mass of tactical efficiency 58 on that poll, and the odd one showing +5 Tory leap to 36 aside, you have to go back to the 18th now to find the Tories above 33.
In fact the accompanying graph clearly has a Tory share downtick on it now.
Maybe we already are. (And I will be tactically voting against this Government at the next election anyway)
On an objective level I'm loving it.
This is what political watching is all about: huge fun!
Holy crap, get a life. I would rather have my nails pulled out with pliars.
Good morning Malc. Hope all is well with you and yours and the weather is good.
That comment of yours did make me chuckle.
Morning Taz, weather a bit grey today and may see some rain I think. I am halfway through extending borders in garden so hoping it hold off. Lovely yesterday and spent most of day in the garden and managed to avoid almost all the tosh and bollox of the mafia jamboree.
PS Taz, good morning to you and hope you and family are enjoying the long weekend.
Thanks, we really are. Been stopping in a lodge in the peak,district. We’ve had a great time.
Excellent, I am off to Spain next week , get some sun and laze by the pool for a week.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
But, the absence of the EU in our political lives over the last few years has made us quickly forget just how overbearing and directive it was in setting the agenda. And how impotent we sometimes were in changing it when we didn't agree.
This quickly came back to me whilst dealing with Italian and German branches of my firm last week (they want to learn from the UK on how we do infrastructure advice) where they take their policy direction on sustainability, transport, energy and regional inequality almost entirely from EU directives and the Commission with their federal governments almost wholly irrelevant.
I asked about it varied by country with the added layer of policy imposed by their national governments and they just shrugged. In fact, quite often, if they want something done domestically then lobby the EU Commission instead for a new EU directive as they find it exercises more effective governance.
They always fly their national flags next to the EU flag for a reason: in many EU member states the EU Commission *is* the primary form of government.
The UK politicians, and especially the UK Civil Service, are going to have to learn to live without the hand of the EU in everything.
For them it was great, the lack of accountability for the decisions taken and the direction of travel being seen as positives rather than negatives.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
But, the absence of the EU in our political lives over the last few years has made us quickly forget just how overbearing and directive it was in setting the agenda. And how impotent we sometimes were in changing it when we didn't agree.
This quickly came back to me whilst dealing with Italian and German branches of my firm last week (they want to learn from the UK on how we do infrastructure advice) where they take their policy direction on sustainability, transport, energy and regional inequality almost entirely from EU directives and the Commission with their federal governments almost wholly irrelevant.
I asked about it varied by country with the added layer of policy imposed by their national governments and they just shrugged. In fact, quite often, if they want something done domestically then lobby the EU Commission instead for a new EU directive as they find it exercises more effective governance.
They always fly their national flags next to the EU flag for a reason: in many EU member states the EU Commission *is* the primary form of government.
Good morning to everyone. Malcolm I see you're not very happy this morning!
Was sorry to read about Mr Jessops blue tits yesterday but, as he posted, that's what happens in nature!
Can you fill me in OKC? I was up in town all day.
Late reply I'm afraid, Ms H, but apparently all Mr Jessps blue tit chicks died. The mother got sick and died apparently, and father did his best but after a very cold and wet day that was that.
Slithering mass of tactical efficiency 58 on that poll, and the odd one showing +5 Tory leap to 36 aside, you have to go back to the 18th now to find the Tories above 33.
I mean we are circling the airport and people have started to nervously joke about having enough fuel. Nothing changes till tub o' lard is sent packing
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I'm not convinced there is an underlying republicanism in Scotland. I think it's another symptom of the "If the English are doing it, fuck that" twitch that has taken over the country.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
- “… that has taken over the country.”
Ho ho. It’s clear you are new to the country. Any visitor during the last millennium could have written that observation.
Indeed, many have.
I dunno, I remember lots of stuff at school for the Golden (maybe that is happening for this one too?). And under Labour there wasn't such an obvious spasm away from Westminster policy.
Btw, Nats have an unfortunate habit of questioning how long unionists (55%) have lived in Scotland. Its particular silly from a poster who doesn't actually live here themselves.
We have a budding Scottish HYFUD in the making. Loves imaginary numbers as well, will we get more subsamples I ask.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
@Casino_Royale in case you think differently I am not anti the royals as discussed a few days ago. I have no desire to get rid of them and I quite like them. I am also keen on our traditions and heritage. Because of my political views I am in theory a republican but in practice I have no desire to get rid of them as they don't have power and provide pleasure to many.
I also like traditions from all over the world. Pride only applies where deserved. My default is to support England/UK/GB, but it is conditional on fair play and doing stuff to be proud of. Trooping the Colour yesterday fits that description (where else eh?) as did the Olympics. Millennium Dome (or rather what was in it) not so.
So I am afraid my pride is conditional. Just as I love British pubs, etc, I also love stuff from France, Italy, USA, etc
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I'm not convinced there is an underlying republicanism in Scotland. I think it's another symptom of the "If the English are doing it, fuck that" twitch that has taken over the country.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
- “… that has taken over the country.”
Ho ho. It’s clear you are new to the country. Any visitor during the last millennium could have written that observation.
Indeed, many have.
I dunno, I remember lots of stuff at school for the Golden (maybe that is happening for this one too?). And under Labour there wasn't such an obvious spasm away from Westminster policy.
Btw, Nats have an unfortunate habit of questioning how long unionists (55%) have lived in Scotland. Its particular silly from a poster who doesn't actually live here themselves.
We have a budding Scottish HYFUD in the making. Loves imaginary numbers as well, will we get more subsamples I ask.
Ouch We might get some new data next year with Indyref2. Or not.
Just saw my first bunting in Scotland - old people's home.
They had some on my girlfriend's ward (psychiatry) but they had to take it down as a ligature risk... rather a dark image.
I remember the silver jubilee in Scotland. Nada. And the monarchy is *much* less popular in the country now than it was then.
My mum, who is a classic soppy royal family fan, took us down to wave wee saltires and lion rampant flags at her maj outside Holyroodhouse once. I cannot remember the queen or her carriage, but I think those wee flags might have been the start of my journey to supporting sovereignty. The other thing I remember is that there weren’t many people there.
I'm not convinced there is an underlying republicanism in Scotland. I think it's another symptom of the "If the English are doing it, fuck that" twitch that has taken over the country.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
- “… that has taken over the country.”
Ho ho. It’s clear you are new to the country. Any visitor during the last millennium could have written that observation.
Indeed, many have.
I dunno, I remember lots of stuff at school for the Golden (maybe that is happening for this one too?). And under Labour there wasn't such an obvious spasm away from Westminster policy.
Btw, Nats have an unfortunate habit of questioning how long unionists (55%) have lived in Scotland. Its particular silly from a poster who doesn't actually live here themselves.
We have a budding Scottish HYFUD in the making. Loves imaginary numbers as well, will we get more subsamples I ask.
FUDHY’s love of subsamples is fascinating. As is OGH’s.
One is forced to draw the conclusion: Scottish subsamples = bad All other subsamples = good
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
That's quite a technocratic argument. The key issue is trust.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
The revolution always eats it own, and Brexit has certainly moved in that way. The purity tests have pushed it ever more extreme in a predictable way, simultaneously weakening the calibre of politician willing to go ride the Brexit wave.
We will probably get somewhere sensible in the end, but I fail to see how that starts to happen before this version of the Tories suffer a big electoral defeat, which is more likely 2028 than 2024.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
The revolution always eats it own, and Brexit has certainly moved in that way. The purity tests have pushed it ever more extreme in a predictable way, simultaneously weakening the calibre of politician willing to go ride the Brexit wave.
We will probably get somewhere sensible in the end, but I fail to see how that starts to happen before this version of the Tories suffer a big electoral defeat, which is more likely 2028 than 2024.
Pro_Rata and DJL point below to something that it's so easy to forget. This isn't about who will make the best Prime Minister. It's not about will be best to lead this country out of the mire. This isn't about who can be most trusted. Nor even about who can most effectively draw a line under this Caligula-era.
It's about:
1. Who Cons MPs prefer to shortlist and THEN
2. Who the Membership most like
Whilst I'm prepared to accept that the former are a bit more in touch with ordinary voters and I have very little faith that the latter are.
This makes betting very difficult. It's not like most other markets. We're betting on a niche point of view which is not necessarily in sync with the rest of the nation.
The thought of a few thousand HYUFDs choosing a next PM is a very scary thought. 😳
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
That's quite a technocratic argument. The key issue is trust.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
I don't see why it would erode trust, so long as its set to a standardised conversion rate.
Anyone who wants to Google what the conversion is, if they're confused, can easily do so on their phone. We carry calculators in our pockets nowadays anyway. I use metric but if I'm cooking and have got a recipe off Google that is in imperial, or worse US imperial, then I can easily just ask Alexa and she'll tell me what the metric amount is. Other people who prefer imperial can and do the opposite already too.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
That's quite a technocratic argument. The key issue is trust.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
I don't see why it would erode trust, so long as its set to a standardised conversion rate.
Anyone who wants to Google what the conversion is, if they're confused, can easily do so on their phone. We carry calculators in our pockets nowadays anyway. I use metric but if I'm cooking and have got a recipe off Google that is in imperial, or worse US imperial, then I can easily just ask Alexa and she'll tell me what the metric amount is. Other people who prefer imperial can and do the opposite already too.
Yes, every single adult in the country has access to all those things and the mental capacity to make use of them
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
I'm not sure what's that got to do with what I said, but either way I don't want to die on this hill, I really couldn't care less. Its other people who seem extremely bothered by the concept.
Whether you want to buy or sell in metric or imperial, I couldn't care, let people choose. So long as businesses aren't committing fraud in doing so, then let people choose whichever they prefer. If a business wants for some reason to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying how many grams are in the burger, then so long as the measurement is correct - why should anyone care about that?
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
Scotland did, until the English parliament abolished them in 1824.
As Conservative leadership questions hang in the Platinum Jubilee air, and no challenger seems to be close to declaring their intentions, @BrunoBrussels brings us this from one diplomat he spoke to this week:
"To what question will Liz Truss ever be the answer?"
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
I'm not sure what's that got to do with what I said, but either way I don't want to die on this hill, I really couldn't care less. Its other people who seem extremely bothered by the concept.
Whether you want to buy or sell in metric or imperial, I couldn't care, let people choose. So long as businesses aren't committing fraud in doing so, then let people choose whichever they prefer. If a business wants for some reason to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying how many grams are in the burger, then so long as the measurement is correct - why should anyone care about that?
Standardised product information aids price discovery and reduces costs to consumers. Marginally, but it does. Why take it away and add yet more costs, even if they are tiny.
Even more bunting up here. The flowers have little flags beside them. The trees have big union jacks upon them. Some houses have flags out. The Ukraine flag which had been flying in a couple of places has been (temporarily, I assume) replaced.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
That's quite a technocratic argument. The key issue is trust.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
Why on earth would it erode trust to let people choose for themselves?
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
I'm not sure what's that got to do with what I said, but either way I don't want to die on this hill, I really couldn't care less. Its other people who seem extremely bothered by the concept.
Whether you want to buy or sell in metric or imperial, I couldn't care, let people choose. So long as businesses aren't committing fraud in doing so, then let people choose whichever they prefer. If a business wants for some reason to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying how many grams are in the burger, then so long as the measurement is correct - why should anyone care about that?
Standardised product information aids price discovery and reduces costs to consumers. Marginally, but it does. Why take it away and add yet more costs, even if they are tiny.
Because consumers and businesses ought to be able to choose.
If consumers choose to purchase quarter pounders, then a metric conversion on that shouldn't be required, they've made their choice.
I prefer metric, but if people are choosing metric because they prefer metric, then great. It shouldn't strip away other people's choices either, I'm pro-choice.
As Conservative leadership questions hang in the Platinum Jubilee air, and no challenger seems to be close to declaring their intentions, @BrunoBrussels brings us this from one diplomat he spoke to this week:
"To what question will Liz Truss ever be the answer?"
As Conservative leadership questions hang in the Platinum Jubilee air, and no challenger seems to be close to declaring their intentions, @BrunoBrussels brings us this from one diplomat he spoke to this week:
"To what question will Liz Truss ever be the answer?"
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
But, the absence of the EU in our political lives over the last few years has made us quickly forget just how overbearing and directive it was in setting the agenda. And how impotent we sometimes were in changing it when we didn't agree.
This quickly came back to me whilst dealing with Italian and German branches of my firm last week (they want to learn from the UK on how we do infrastructure advice) where they take their policy direction on sustainability, transport, energy and regional inequality almost entirely from EU directives and the Commission with their federal governments almost wholly irrelevant.
I asked about it varied by country with the added layer of policy imposed by their national governments and they just shrugged. In fact, quite often, if they want something done domestically then lobby the EU Commission instead for a new EU directive as they find it exercises more effective governance.
They always fly their national flags next to the EU flag for a reason: in many EU member states the EU Commission *is* the primary form of government.
The UK politicians, and especially the UK Civil Service, are going to have to learn to live without the hand of the EU in everything.
For them it was great, the lack of accountability for the decisions taken and the direction of travel being seen as positives rather than negatives.
A friend was fairly high up in DEFRA. He has since left, but said his younger colleagues were all looking forward to being able to make policy again, rather than just work out how to implement someone else's directives.
And sorry about yesterday too - I am very proud of our country, its traditions and heritage, and I get easily upset by those who don't feel the same way.
My apologies.
I really do get your enthusiasm for the monarchy etc but you are far from stupid so I don't understand why you can't just accept that lots of us feel differently.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
The vast majority of Europe converted to metric in the 19th century. Ireland and the UK were the only European countries to start the process later than WWII.
- ”There is only one UK political betting story at the moment and that is whether Johnson is going to face a vote of no confidence amongst Conservative MPs.”
There is another, and that is whether or not Johnson wins the VONC. As witnessed by the previous thread.
Fascinatingly, another state in the news is facing an imminent and significant VONC. Yesterday, a motion was tabled in parliament against Morgan Johansson, Sweden’s justice minister. It immediately gained support from all 4 parties on the centre-right-far right bloc, making the result dependent on how an Independent MP and/or the Centre Party votes. So what? one might ask. Well, the fact is that the prime minister Magdalena Andersson will resign if the VONC in Johansson wins.
What worries the Establishment is that the Independent MP is a leftist Kurd, profoundly unhappy with the Swedish Government desperately sooking up to Turkey in a probably forlorn attempt to obtain NATO membership. She has indicated she will support the VONC based not upon Johansson’s track record (which is dire), but purely on the Swedish government’s Turkey/Kurdistan moves.
Very, very finely balanced, but we may well be facing yet another political crisis at a worrying time. The GE is in September anyway, but the minority government might not make it that long.
Oddly, the Social Democrats also hit a modern polling high yesterday: 33%. Way ahead of the Moderates and Sweden Democrats. The Liberals and Greens are way below the 4% threshold.
Interesting, thanks! That may have been an oulier, if
is up to date. You mentioned a while back that the Moderates no longer see a deal with the Sweden Democrats as anathema. Does thast apply to the Christian Democrats too? If so, a centre-right coalition looks plausible.
Good morning Nick! You’re welcome.
Yes, might be an outlier poll, but I think our new PM Magdalena Andersson is doing bloody well, in difficult circumstances. I have never voted for her party, and probably won’t in September, but I like the cut of her gibb. IMHO it is not an “outlier” but a genuine step up in Social Democrat support.
The leader of my former party The Moderates - Ulf Kristersson - is unimpressive, and has had one of his biggest election issues, NATO membership, dragged out from under his feet. I might vote M anyway, but extremely reluctantly.
The Sweden Democrats, Moderates and Christian Democrats act as a well-coordinated team these days. The Alliance is long dead. Absolutely guaranteed that they will build a coalition if they can. And *that* is what puts me off voting M! (There are other factors too).
As Conservative leadership questions hang in the Platinum Jubilee air, and no challenger seems to be close to declaring their intentions, @BrunoBrussels brings us this from one diplomat he spoke to this week:
"To what question will Liz Truss ever be the answer?"
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
I think that's a bit naïve, CR. Anything that puts the UK back in the EU's orbit is, IMO, unacceptable. I have no issue with co-operation with the EU as long as it's a very tightly defined set of rules with the basis of co-operation set out in separate agreements or treaties rather than one overall and undefined relationship based on "trust" or relying on the other partner to act favourably. No more freebies, no more favours.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
That's quite a technocratic argument. The key issue is trust.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
Why on earth would it erode trust to let people choose for themselves?
It's the businesses that would choose and the consumers whose trust would be eroded.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
I think that's a bit naïve, CR. Anything that puts the UK back in the EU's orbit is, IMO, unacceptable. I have no issue with co-operation with the EU as long as it's a very tightly defined set of rules with the basis of co-operation set out in separate agreements or treaties rather than one overall and undefined relationship based on "trust" or relying on the other partner to act favourably. No more freebies, no more favours.
I suspect that's the EU's view of GB, too. Especially if there's any chance of any of the present Government still being in charge!
Even by the standards of the MOD this seems to be egregiously bad.
A review of the Ajax project by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) concluded a "litany of failures" had led to the years-long delays.
So far no operational vehicles have been delivered, despite the 12-year-old project already costing over £3bn.
The new reconnaissance vehicle was supposed to enter service in 2017...
Since the contract was signed in 2014, the project has delivered 26 reconnaissance vehicles out of a promised 589 vehicles - which can only be used for training...
However, the army has said it is "cautiously optimistic" that Ajax can enter service by 2030.
Even after all the delays it is only 'cautiously optimistic' they will enter service by 2030, and we all know that means it definitely won't.
How do contractors get away with this shit? There's no way that's just incompetence. You expect goverment to be in bed with defence contractors, but to allow this kind of thing must mean outright corruption, surely? Given the problems are never fixed and always reoccur.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
But, the absence of the EU in our political lives over the last few years has made us quickly forget just how overbearing and directive it was in setting the agenda. And how impotent we sometimes were in changing it when we didn't agree.
This quickly came back to me whilst dealing with Italian and German branches of my firm last week (they want to learn from the UK on how we do infrastructure advice) where they take their policy direction on sustainability, transport, energy and regional inequality almost entirely from EU directives and the Commission with their federal governments almost wholly irrelevant.
I asked about it varied by country with the added layer of policy imposed by their national governments and they just shrugged. In fact, quite often, if they want something done domestically then lobby the EU Commission instead for a new EU directive as they find it exercises more effective governance.
They always fly their national flags next to the EU flag for a reason: in many EU member states the EU Commission *is* the primary form of government.
The UK politicians, and especially the UK Civil Service, are going to have to learn to live without the hand of the EU in everything.
For them it was great, the lack of accountability for the decisions taken and the direction of travel being seen as positives rather than negatives.
It's not the civil service's job to provide a vision for Brexit. Perhaps this will happen if Johnson is deposed and we get a range of candidates, some of them offering closer alignment with the singe market/customs union and others who want to diverge more dramatically.
On the topic of trust, it would surely aid trust to have imperial standardised not harm it.
If I go to a restaurant and order an 8oz steak then I want to know that steak is 8oz (within margin of error) and not a steak they're simply calling 8oz but is actually six ounces.
Even after years of metrification there is still plenty of things that people choose to buy in imperial. We shouldn't try to override their choice, but we should be sure that the standards are there that it is what people say it is.
The snooty attitude of "people under 40 don't understand imperial" is a bit backwards anyway, you don't need to for some things. I don't understand imperial one bit, I couldn't care less about it, but I know what an 8oz steak is. I don't know off the top of my head what the unit smaller than an ounce is, if there is one, or how to convert it but I don't need to either. I know what a pint is, I couldn't tell you how many pints there are in a gallon, but I don't need to know that either.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
That's quite a technocratic argument. The key issue is trust.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
Why on earth would it erode trust to let people choose for themselves?
It's the businesses that would choose and the consumers whose trust would be eroded.
No it wouldn't. Consumers choose which businesses they frequent, if the consumers aren't happy that burgers aren't listed in how many grams are in a quarter pounder, of how many grams are in an 8oz steak then they can take their business elsewhere.
Businesses do what they do to serve their customers, they don't have customers as a captive audience.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
I think that's a bit naïve, CR. Anything that puts the UK back in the EU's orbit is, IMO, unacceptable. I have no issue with co-operation with the EU as long as it's a very tightly defined set of rules with the basis of co-operation set out in separate agreements or treaties rather than one overall and undefined relationship based on "trust" or relying on the other partner to act favourably. No more freebies, no more favours.
That's what I'm arguing for: bilateral, and maybe multilateral, treaties in security and trade in certain defined areas between sovereign states that don't want to be part of the EU - fine - and even some other cooperation agreements with the EU itself too.
I'm not arguing for going back into the EU's orbit, and would be very wise to anything that smelt like that.
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
I think that, in time, the UK and the EU will adopt a closer and more cooperative relationship with each other but we'll never go back to full EU membership. You can't ever put the genie wholly back in the box.
We had decades of friction over our membership for very good reasons and I think both sides recognise it was the wrong model for both the EU and the UK.
Agree with that although would replace wrong with imperfect. The Ukraine war may actually open up possibilities for different levels of involvement with the EU and a strong UK government would be exploring what possibilities an outside EU satellite group could develop.
Of course, if you look at the original Vote Leave manifesto (and I'm not trying to trigger anyone here) but 'create a new European institutional architecture' was in there.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
I think that's a bit naïve, CR. Anything that puts the UK back in the EU's orbit is, IMO, unacceptable. I have no issue with co-operation with the EU as long as it's a very tightly defined set of rules with the basis of co-operation set out in separate agreements or treaties rather than one overall and undefined relationship based on "trust" or relying on the other partner to act favourably. No more freebies, no more favours.
I agree with that post. I am a remainer, but we have left and so what you describe is the way forward. I wish both sides would get on with it. In my opinion there are hundreds of trivial to complex agreements that have to be made to make all our lives better. Red tape on trade, and a particular bug bear of mine, is red tape on temporary exports, and then we trivial things, but which have significant real effects on people, like the pet passport fiasco and the 90 day in 180 day travel issue.
Does anybody check whether Mr Brady actually gets 54 letters? I mean he could just get the one or none but decide to call a VoNC anyway.
Or is this another "We Assume He's a Good Chap" convention?
One of those 'who watches the Watchmen?' scenarios. After all, whoever checked he'd got 54 would presumably also need to be checked. Or you'd open them in front of everyone, which would counter the purpose of it being anonymous to encourage people to be bold enough to put in letters.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
I'm not sure what's that got to do with what I said, but either way I don't want to die on this hill, I really couldn't care less. Its other people who seem extremely bothered by the concept.
Whether you want to buy or sell in metric or imperial, I couldn't care, let people choose. So long as businesses aren't committing fraud in doing so, then let people choose whichever they prefer. If a business wants for some reason to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying how many grams are in the burger, then so long as the measurement is correct - why should anyone care about that?
Standardised product information aids price discovery and reduces costs to consumers. Marginally, but it does. Why take it away and add yet more costs, even if they are tiny.
Because consumers and businesses ought to be able to choose.
If consumers choose to purchase quarter pounders, then a metric conversion on that shouldn't be required, they've made their choice.
I prefer metric, but if people are choosing metric because they prefer metric, then great. It shouldn't strip away other people's choices either, I'm pro-choice.
I also support choice and diversity in units of measurement - but that can still happen at the same time as having a legal minimum to use metric so that there is a standard for comparison.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
States have controlled the use of weights and measures for millennia, because it's a necessary condition for building trust in a market.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
That's a different matter, to prevent fraud. You don't want to have people buying a litre of fuel but only getting 950ml with the company fraudulently pocketing the difference.
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
That's quite a technocratic argument. The key issue is trust.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
Why on earth would it erode trust to let people choose for themselves?
Has government ever let people do such a thing? There are surely reasons these things are standardised, and I really don't get the 'This is for FREEDOM' histrionics as if the idea of standardised measurements is unacceptable tyranny. Try a real tyranny.
'The Tory peer and Asda boss Lord Rose said returning to imperial weights and measures was “complete and utter nonsense” and would “add cost” for businesses.
He told Times Radio: “I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life. I mean, we have got serious problems in the world and we’re now saying ‘let’s go backwards’.
“Does anybody in this country below the age of about 40 know how many ounces there are in a pound?”
BEIS insisted the move would not inflict further costs on businesses as there was no intention to require them to make a change.'
But the Graun journalist notes something I hadn't quite realised - this proposal is completely futile anyway even on the Tories' (admittedly implicit) premisses about nasty EU banning Imperial stuff:
'it is still legal to price goods in pounds and ounces if displayed alongside prices in grams and kilograms.'
Yes. The whole argument is about whether someone can price and sell goods using Imperial measures alone, or if they have to give the metric values too. I welcome use of both systems.
Most consumers are too young to be imperial savvy. So it would take an absolute tool to *only* price in imperial. And before anyone says "what about pubs" take a look at their price list - 568ml is also displayed.
So this is a confected argument for seniles and idiots to propose something that no business will do.
I don't think I've ever seen 568ml displayed on a price list. The grams for a quarter-pounder burger is normally displayed, but not normally ml's for pints, I always thought that was an exemption to requiring metric alongside.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
It is a lot easier for people to choose when there are standard rules of measures in place than it is left up to each business to make up their own.
If you go to a bar the bar can sell "Singles" or "Doubles" of spirits and those aren't standardised, depending upon the bar the law allows them to be either 25ml or 35ml which will be listed somewhere, typically on a wall, in their weights and measures disclaimer.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
Because you want standardisation *across the market* not *across the UK market.* I bet you some other member of the 27 had pre existing weights and measures which weren't decimal and weren't lb and oz either, the whole thing fragments and gets bonkers. This is an irrational hill to die on.
I'm not sure what's that got to do with what I said, but either way I don't want to die on this hill, I really couldn't care less. Its other people who seem extremely bothered by the concept.
Whether you want to buy or sell in metric or imperial, I couldn't care, let people choose. So long as businesses aren't committing fraud in doing so, then let people choose whichever they prefer. If a business wants for some reason to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying how many grams are in the burger, then so long as the measurement is correct - why should anyone care about that?
Standardised product information aids price discovery and reduces costs to consumers. Marginally, but it does. Why take it away and add yet more costs, even if they are tiny.
Because consumers and businesses ought to be able to choose.
If consumers choose to purchase quarter pounders, then a metric conversion on that shouldn't be required, they've made their choice.
I prefer metric, but if people are choosing metric because they prefer metric, then great. It shouldn't strip away other people's choices either, I'm pro-choice.
I also support choice and diversity in units of measurement - but that can still happen at the same time as having a legal minimum to use metric so that there is a standard for comparison.
I don't see any harm in dropping that legal minimum.
If I go to McDonalds and look at their menu it doesn't say how many grams of beef are in a Big Mac, but it does for a Quarter Pounder. That's just petty.
If a restaurant lists on their menu they're selling 8 ounce steaks but don't list how many grams that is, do you think that should be against the law?
“Brexit was a mistake which is causing harm but we shouldn’t do anything to reverse it” is a bizarre way of thinking. It’s like mishandling a knife and then resolving to let yourself bleed to death. https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/1532630897173962752
Not really. Some divorces are mistakes and people find out the grass is not greener. For that group it would still be the exception rather than the rule to get back together with the ex.
Perhaps we should try and tempt the EU with friends with benefits instead of a second marriage or bitter enemies bitching about each other?
Friends with benefits? Are they gonna shaft England or is England shafting them?
As I understand it both Europe and UK are feminine.
Comments
We need to get our priorities right. Why should we accept our food bank charitable donations if the EU tells us what we can and can't eat and worse still that they are measured in metric? We're British, we'd rather starve.
They can derive some benefit from this just from the propaganda.
1. It fits into a paradigm of standing up for traditional British things against European things.
2. Anytime someone notices dual-use of imperial measurements alongside metric they will be reminded of this, and may believe that the Imperial measurement is only used as a result of this.
3. For many human-scale purposes imperial measurements are better, and young people may find pleasure in discovering them. An ounce is roughly a handful, but how much is a gram? The metric system is more logical and useful for many scientific applications, but it's a bit impersonal and alienating for everyday use.
Many government critics can overdo the criticism on this, and come across as condescending.
It certainly informs the decision making of the government (census, lockdown, nationalising ScotRail and so on).
The words Tory and good chap do not chime.
Quite frankly I don't see what's wrong with letting businesses decide. If they want to sell by metric, let them do so. If they want to sell by imperial, let them do so. If they want to do both, let them do so. Why should anyone else care, let the consumers and businesses choose.
If a company wishes to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying that a quarter pounder is 113.4g then I don't see what the issue is to be frank. Let people choose.
This quickly came back to me whilst dealing with Italian and German branches of my firm last week (they want to learn from the UK on how we do infrastructure advice) where they take their policy direction on sustainability, transport, energy and regional inequality almost entirely from EU directives and the Commission with their federal governments almost wholly irrelevant.
I asked about it varied by country with the added layer of policy imposed by their national governments and they just shrugged. In fact, quite often, if they want something done domestically then lobby the EU Commission instead for a new EU directive as they find it exercises more effective governance.
They always fly their national flags next to the EU flag for a reason: in many EU member states the EU Commission *is* the primary form of government.
Ho ho. It’s clear you are new to the country. Any visitor during the last millennium could have written that observation.
Indeed, many have.
Different things matter to different people. You don’t like that. Well tough.
A total of 22 aircraft took part in the rehearsal, according to Military Airshows, they included:
Wildcat HMA2
Two Wildcat AH1s
Puma HC2
Chinook HC6
Prefect T1
Phenom T1
Two Texan T1s
Three C-130J Hercules’
A400M Atlas
C-17A Globemaster III
P-8A Poseidon MRA1
RC-135W Airseeker R1
Two Voyager KC3s
Two Hawk T2s
Typhoon T3
Typhoon FGR4
Juno HT1
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/trooping-colour-flypast-route-timings-27120735
Wikipedia has not caught up but it will.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Trooping_the_Colour#Platinum_Jubilee_Flypast
ETA no mention of the Luftwaffe; shame you did not take a photo or video.
That's why there has to be a legal standard, but people are free to use conversions to other measures too.
Mass-market Euroscepticism (and what is democracy if not mass market?) is really a feature of one specific British generation; roughly those born between 1945 and 1960ish. They were the leaviest group in both referendums and the only cohort who think Brexit is a good idea now (and by about a 2:1 majority). Outside that cohort, I don't get the sense of "this never worked for us".
But the "what does Britain try next?" question is for a decade in the future, anyway.
We actually had a brief discussion about the crown symbol on pints in pub last night. No one seemed to have ever noticed they were there or not there. There is a CE mark now which someone says is in process of being changed to CGB mark, but that may have been a joke.
The article makes one offhand reference to Brexit.
The comments are wall to wall Brexit
Whereas govt critics think "Why are the govt so bothered with this?" some govt supporters equally think "Why are the left so ashamed of our past that they get bothered by this?"
I don't see what the harm is in having a legal standard for imperial, alongside a legal standard for metric, and allowing companies to choose to use whichever standard they prefer. Instead of companies having to display that a quarter pounder is so many grams, the legal standard is that it is instead.
If the conversion between metric and imperial were set standards then any weights and measures would still be standardised whichever route companies or consumers chose to use.
On a personal level I far, far prefer metric and would choose to use that 99.99% of the time. But I see absolutely no harm if others choose to use something different and see no advantage in requiring eg pints or quarter pounders etc being compelled to have a metric conversion alongside, if the conversion is standardised anyway.
Cardiff City Stadium
5 June
Wales 2.82
Ukraine 2.95
I know its crazy......
I also like traditions from all over the world. Pride only applies where deserved. My default is to support England/UK/GB, but it is conditional on fair play and doing stuff to be proud of. Trooping the Colour yesterday fits that description (where else eh?) as did the Olympics. Millennium Dome (or rather what was in it) not so.
So I am afraid my pride is conditional. Just as I love British pubs, etc, I also love stuff from France, Italy, USA, etc
And there's, ahem, substances, m'lord, which the young are very accustomed to buying by the gram, which gives them a pretty good steer.
Btw, Nats have an unfortunate habit of questioning how long unionists (55%) have lived in Scotland. Its particular silly from a poster who doesn't actually live here themselves.
The BBC has a strange sight disease which makes it incapable of seeing large, clumpy, grey, herbivorous mammals.
For them it was great, the lack of accountability for the decisions taken and the direction of travel being seen as positives rather than negatives.
Nothing changes till tub o' lard is sent packing
Cost me £30 this. Grrrrr.
It's certainly what I voted for, and would consider supporting today too.
So long as its disclaimed whether you're talking either of 2 measurements, what's the issue? If people want to buy and sell in metric, they can, if they want to buy and sell in imperial, what's the harm in that? So long as the conversion is standardised, then its much ado about nothing, just trust people to decide what's best for them.
One is forced to draw the conclusion:
Scottish subsamples = bad
All other subsamples = good
The Union in a nutshell.
Allowing businesses to pick and choose which measurement system they want to use would erode trust. I don't see it as a particular burden to require businesses to use a single set of measurements, while allowing them to use additional ones if they wish.
We will probably get somewhere sensible in the end, but I fail to see how that starts to happen before this version of the Tories suffer a big electoral defeat, which is more likely 2028 than 2024.
Her Maj is best. End of. Please do not point out contraindications.
Anyone who wants to Google what the conversion is, if they're confused, can easily do so on their phone. We carry calculators in our pockets nowadays anyway. I use metric but if I'm cooking and have got a recipe off Google that is in imperial, or worse US imperial, then I can easily just ask Alexa and she'll tell me what the metric amount is. Other people who prefer imperial can and do the opposite already too.
I really wouldn't use Alexa if I were you
Whether you want to buy or sell in metric or imperial, I couldn't care, let people choose. So long as businesses aren't committing fraud in doing so, then let people choose whichever they prefer. If a business wants for some reason to sell quarter pounder burgers without specifying how many grams are in the burger, then so long as the measurement is correct - why should anyone care about that?
https://www.scan.org.uk/measures/weight.asp
If England gets her measures back, we’ll have ours back too.
"To what question will Liz Truss ever be the answer?"
https://twitter.com/CalumAM/status/1532638875637653506
Even more bunting up here. The flowers have little flags beside them. The trees have big union jacks upon them. Some houses have flags out. The Ukraine flag which had been flying in a couple of places has been (temporarily, I assume) replaced.
If consumers choose to purchase quarter pounders, then a metric conversion on that shouldn't be required, they've made their choice.
I prefer metric, but if people are choosing metric because they prefer metric, then great. It shouldn't strip away other people's choices either, I'm pro-choice.
Wonder what happened to him?
A review of the Ajax project by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) concluded a "litany of failures" had led to the years-long delays.
So far no operational vehicles have been delivered, despite the 12-year-old project already costing over £3bn.
The new reconnaissance vehicle was supposed to enter service in 2017...
Since the contract was signed in 2014, the project has delivered 26 reconnaissance vehicles out of a promised 589 vehicles - which can only be used for training...
However, the army has said it is "cautiously optimistic" that Ajax can enter service by 2030.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61679080
Even after all the delays it is only 'cautiously optimistic' they will enter service by 2030, and we all know that means it definitely won't.
How do contractors get away with this shit? There's no way that's just incompetence. You expect goverment to be in bed with defence contractors, but to allow this kind of thing must mean outright corruption, surely? Given the problems are never fixed and always reoccur.
If I go to a restaurant and order an 8oz steak then I want to know that steak is 8oz (within margin of error) and not a steak they're simply calling 8oz but is actually six ounces.
Even after years of metrification there is still plenty of things that people choose to buy in imperial. We shouldn't try to override their choice, but we should be sure that the standards are there that it is what people say it is.
The snooty attitude of "people under 40 don't understand imperial" is a bit backwards anyway, you don't need to for some things. I don't understand imperial one bit, I couldn't care less about it, but I know what an 8oz steak is. I don't know off the top of my head what the unit smaller than an ounce is, if there is one, or how to convert it but I don't need to either. I know what a pint is, I couldn't tell you how many pints there are in a gallon, but I don't need to know that either.
https://www.mwis.org.uk/forecasts/scottish/cairngorms-np-and-monadhliath
Businesses do what they do to serve their customers, they don't have customers as a captive audience.
I'm not arguing for going back into the EU's orbit, and would be very wise to anything that smelt like that.
Lets get on with it.
However what we do re NI I have no idea.
If I go to McDonalds and look at their menu it doesn't say how many grams of beef are in a Big Mac, but it does for a Quarter Pounder. That's just petty.
If a restaurant lists on their menu they're selling 8 ounce steaks but don't list how many grams that is, do you think that should be against the law?