Personally I think its to stop traders being criminalised for "insisting"
on using measures that their customers use. You must admit - it is a
rather perplexing situation. More recently they've been involved with
helping a lady pub owner because she wanted her austrian theme pub to use
austrian measures (based around metric).
I'm aware of that one isolated incident where they chose to defend a
publican against the Trading Standards Dept for whom they demonstrate so
much contempt. I submit it was nothing more that a publicity stunt to
justify all their huff and puff about traders being free to trade in a units
of their choosing. Quite easy to do as it was no threat to the exclusive
retension of the pint elsewhere in the vast majority of pubs.
In any case there have been prosectutions in the past against publicans and
other traders using units not allowed in law. Where was the long-standing
BWMA then?
They are careful to insert the word "compulsory" in that statement. This
is a deliberate deception. *All" measurements used for official and trade
purposes are "compulsory" and always have been since the existence of
weights and measures legislation going back centuries. It wasn't invented
for metrication.
I think the position is on changing the compulsion from one to another to
benefit politicians rather than people. I'd be happy if that 'compulsion'
allowed parity between the two systems.
Perhaps you could explain how it benefits politicians, especially as they
have been trying to disown it for the past 30 years.
That second statement is utter hypocrisy. Firstly there is nothing
stopping so called "Inch pound" industries from operating in the UK.
Secondly, no one can claim to represent consumer interest when they
advocate the co-existence of incompatible units of measurement on a
permanent basis in the market place.
That is your particular point of view. I can counter it.
You don't like the BWMA because of what they stand for. There is no way
they could exist in a way that would make you like them. Hopefully,
however, you respect their right to exist.
I don't respect their right to campaign on the basis of misinformation. It
isn't just a matter of "my particular point of view". I justified my remark
on the basis of self evident truths which you haven't countered.
Phil Hall
