>>> Joseph B. Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2001-03-28 17:34:38 >>> You wrote <<snip>> >If you would >like to see the copy of the of the letter I received from Mr. Alan >Johnson, President of Measurement Canada, they I would be more than >willing to send you a copy (either paper or electronic). I would be glad to receive an e-mail copy of Alan Johnson's letter. Joe Joseph B. Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 Tel. 416 486-6071 ====================================================== Hi Joe, Jim, et al., I have included six letters that my wife, Tammy, or myself, have received from various government and business parties outlining the official Canadian perspective on completing metrication. You will note that the letters are extremely consistent (if not identical) in their wording, most likely originating with the official policy from Mr. Alan Johnston's office at Measurement Canada. greg Saskatoon SK Canada ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Measurement Canada (An agency of Industry Canada) "Fair Measure for All" Main Building Tunney’s Pasture Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C9 September 11, 1998 Mrs. Tammy Booth Peterson, B.A./B.Ed. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Dear Mrs. Booth Peterson Thank you for your September 1, 1998, letter concerning the use of the metric system in Saskatchewan. In the early 1970's the Government of Canada created the Metric Commission, whose mandate was to play the lead role for metric conversion in Canada. Over 100 committees were formed and assigned the responsibility of planning and implementing themetric system. There committees comprised representatives from sectors as diversified as retail and wholesale trade, industry, consumers, government and education. Certain committees, such as those for the retail sale of gasoline and diesel fuel, the retail sale of individually measured foods and the retail sale of home furnishings, felt that regulations to support the pace of metric conversion in their sectors were necessary. Consequently, the Weights and Measures Act and Regulations were amended to incorporate mandatory schedules for implementing the metric system in these trade sectors. The mandatory implementation of the metric system in these three sectors raised the possibility that freedom of choice for Canadians would be unduly restricted. For this reason, a moratorium on the enforcement of these regulations was declared in 1983 by the then Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. Since then, the policy has been to let the marketplace set the pace of conversion rather than force it’s use by regulation. Please note that this policy not only applies to Saskatchewan, but to all of Canada. Although I can understand your concerns, there is no evidence that the use of both metric and imperial units of measure results in any deliberate inaccurate measurement or pricing. I also understand that there has been relatively little public reaction, one way or another, with a few people wanting only metric units to be used and others wanting only imperial units to be used. However, as a consumer you play an important role in the marketplace when you communicate your views directly to retailers. For instance, if a significant number of consumers want only metric units to be used in advertising and sales, they should make their views know to retailers who would likely comply with their demands. This is a far more effective method for changing trade practices than forcing retailers to comply with something which is not requested by their consumers. The implementation of the metric system has taught us that conversion was most effective in industry sectors where it was marketplace driven. The use of metric units is, in essence, a marketplace issue where the pace and scope of conversion can best be set in the marketplace. I therefore do not feel that further government intervention is appropriate at this time. I trust my comments have responded to your concerns. Yours sincerely, Alan E. Johnston President Measurement Canada ++++++++++ Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs (Saskatchewan) Legislative Building Regina, Saskatchewan S4S 0B3 October 6, 1998 Ms. Tammy Booth Peterson, B.A., B.Ed. Saskatoon SK Dear Ms. Peterson: Thank you for your letter of September 1, 1998 to Premier Roy Romanow, in which you express your dissatisfaction with metric standards and enforcement in Canada. The Government of Saskatchewan supports Canada’s conversion to the metric system as it is provided for through the federal Weights and Measures Act and Regulations. The Constitution Act, 1867, section 91(17) specifies that weights and measures are the exclusive legislative authority of the Parliament of Canada. Therefore, in accordance with federal legislation, responsibility for implementation and enforcement of the metric system in Canada is entirely with the Government of Canada through the Department of Industry Canada. In considering your concerns, I note the following information that might be of interest to you. In the early 1970s, the Government of Canada created the Metric Commission, whose mandate was to play the lead role for metric conversion in Canada. Over 100 committees were formed and assigned the responsibility of planning and implementing the metric system. Certain committees, such as those for the retail sale of gasoline and diesel fuel, the retail sale of individually measured foods and the retail sale of home furnishings, felt that regulations to support the pace of metric conversion in their sectors were necessary. For that reason, the Weights and Measures Act and Regulations were amended to incorporate mandatory schedules for implementing the metric system. However, the mandatory implementation of the metric conversion in these three sectors raised the concern that freedom of choice for Canadians may be unduly restricted. For this reason, the federal government imposed a moratorium on the enforcement of these regulations in 1983. Since then, the federal policy has been to allow the marketplace to set the pace of conversion rather than force its use by regulation. Thank you for taking the time to write to Premier Romanow. I hope the above information addresses your concerns. Sincerely yours, Bernhard H. Wiens Minister Intergovernmental and Aboriginal Affairs cc: Premier Roy Romanow +++++++++++++++++++++ Return-path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> From: "Johnston, Alan: LMT" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To "‘Ms. T. Booth Peterson’" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: FW: 1983 moratorum on metric conversion Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 10:17:00 -0500 Dear Mr. And Mrs. Peterson, Thank you for your e-mails of November 6 and 9, 1998, addressed to Sonia Roussy and myself respectively, concerning the use of the metric system in Canada. As you stated in the e-mail to Sonia Roussy, the Weights and Measures Act and Regulations were amended some 20 years ago to incorporate mandatory schedules for conversion to the metric system. However, as mentioned in my previous correspondence, the mandatory implementation of the metric system raised the possibility that freedom of choice for Canadians would be unduly restricted. For this reason, a moratorium on the enforcement of these regulations was declared in 1983 by then Minister of Consumer and Corporate Affairs. A copy of the news release announcing the moratorium is being forwarded to you by regular mail. Since the moratorium was declared, the government’s policy has been to let the marketplace set the pace of conversion to metric units rather than force its use by regulation. This is the reason for the discrepancy you mentioned between the Weights and Measures Regulations and the practices of certain retailers. While I agree that one of the driving factors for retailers maintaining the advertising of prices in imperial units of measure is the fact that prices may appear less costly, it is not the only factor. In fact, under the metric system retailers could advertise prices per 100 grams, which would appear even less costly than the price per pound. In many instances, retailers are maintaining the advertising of prices per pound for fear of alienating those customers which are unfamiliar with the metric system. This is why, as a consumer, you play such an important role in the marketplace when you communicate your views directly to retailers. If a significant number of consumers voice their concerns directly to retailers, the retailers would likely comply with your demands in order to satisfy their customers. This is a far more effective method for changing trade practices than forcing retailers to comply with a policy they don’t perceive as being important to their customers. I trust my comments have responded to your concerns. Yours sincerely, Alan E. Johnston President Measurement Canada +++++++++++++++++++++ Safeway Canada Limited 1020-64th Avenue N.E. Calgary, Alberta T2E 7V8 P.O. Box 864, Stn. ‘M’, Calgary, Alberta T2P 2J6 December 3, 1998 Mr. Gregory Peterson & Ms. Tammy Booth Peterson Saskatoon, Saskatchewan Re: Metric Units of Measure Thank you for your letter of 1998-11-12. I appreciate your keen interest in weights and measures issues related to Safeway’s in-store signage and advertising. We respect your obvious desire to see a complete conversion to metric measurement in Canada. No doubt, a good case can be made that one uniform system of measurement would make life simpler for everyone. However, Safeway does not see itself as having a role to champion this issue. By continuing to display so called *Canadian* or *Imperial* units of measurement, we are simply recognizing what we believe to be a continued desire by our traditional customers to measure their food purchases this way. This is not unique to Safeway, but is in fact the norm among grocery retailers in Western Canada. In any event, I have forwarded your letter to our Marketing and Legal Departments and asked that they review this issue to ensure that our practices continue to respond to our customer’s wishes and stay in strict compliance with the law. Again, thank you for your interest. Yours truly, Canada Safeway Limited Grant M. Hansen President and Chief Operating Officer. ++++++++++++++++++++ Maurice Vellacott, M.P. [Reform Party, now Canadian Alliance, federal offical opposition] Wanuskewin Constituency 3,844-51st. E. Saskatoon, Sask. S7K 5C7 April 28, 1999 Mr. Gregory Peterson Saskatoon, SK Dear Mr. Gregory: Thank you for writing into our office regarding the issue of Metric usage. The Reform party does indeed support any initiative that strengthens competitiveness in Canada. I quote from the 1999 Reform Blue Book of Principles and Policies under Industrial Development and Diversification: D. The Reform Party supports orienting Federal government activities toward the nurturing of human and physical infrastructure. E. The Reform Party supports giving greater priority to the development of skills, particularly those that provide future job flexibility (such as literacy and computer education). As well, such training should be made flexible in terms of the type of institution providing the training. We would encourage cooperative training in industry. I have enclosed a copy of the Blue Sheet for your benefit. The need for Canada to stay competitive is both obvious and yet, under the current Liberal government, forgotten or merely paid lip service to. Recently, a Liberal cabinet minister actually claimed that high taxes were actually incentives for the economy to do well! Finally, in talking with many of our local manufactures, especially those who export outside of Canada, the Metric system is the reality, and not myth. They have to compete using the worldwide standards, as you so aptly point out. They support the need for a well-educated workforce, willing and able to learn, adapt, and thrive in the competitive world environment. Reform supports any private party initiatives that would see greater competitive advantages be brought to bear for Canada and Canadian businesses, and that enhances the lives of everyday Canadians. On this issue, fell free to write to our office. Sincerely, Alan Chant Assistant ++++++++++++++++ The Senate of Canada John (Jack) E.N. Wiebe Saskatchewan Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A4 Telephone: (613) 995-1800 Fax: (613) 995-1861 November 29, 2000 Mrs. Tammy Peterson Saskatoon, Sk. Dear Mrs. Peterson: This is in response to your inquiry regarding the teaching and enforcement of the metric system. Your concern is appreciated and important to ensuring focus and attention to Canadian differences. It is important that students are taught the metric system, and are functional in it. Education is a provincial responsibility, the federal government is limited in acting in this domain. The local school boards are there to give input to educators and school divisions as elected members of their community. When we contacted Robert Josza, of the Minister of Education’s office, he was not aware of other measurement systems being taught. He stated that metric was the measurement system used in Saskatchewan schools. Measurement Canada is a monitoring branch of Industry Canada. It is responsible for inspecting and calibrating scales used in commerce and trade for measurement accuracy. The Government of Canada has no immediate plans for taking a more aggressive stance on the use of the metric system. Since 1985 the Government of Canada has chosen to follow a moratorium on the enforcement in service and retail sectors. The legal units that are allowed are metric only, or both metric or imperial measurements. To ease the change of conversion to metric, Measurement Canada has decided to let the market set the pace for change. There have been changes to industry standards and voluntary conversion. Canada is a member of the global economy, we import and export goods from around the world. The enforcement of accuracy in measurements is more important than ensuring metric use. Once again I would like to thank you for bringing it to our attention, and we will let you know if there are any changes to the Government’s position with this matter. Sincerely, John E.N. Wiebe Senator +++++++++++++++++++++++ end.
