When I go shopping I might buy a couple of litres of juice, a kilo of rice and a 500 grams of frozen peas. Many packet sizes have been converted to convenient metric sizes, and so you can get a 10 kilo sack of potatoes or onions, a couple of kilos of rice, a litre of milk and 300g of fancy cheese. We have no problems with the metric system in everyday life.

I feel we truly are living in a post-democratic age. The wishes of the electorate count for far less than the wishes of corporate capitalism; one of the greatest dangers we have in this country is how totally unrepresentative of the people our political parties are. There is a massive disconnect between the two.

Thank you for having the grace to concede that there is a world of difference in adapting to a situation you never wanted (metrication in Canada) and there being any popular enthusiasm for that situation in the first place.

(That isn’t a sarcastic remark, btw, it’s genuine).

While ‘big business’ may have been a driving force behind Australia’s and Canada’s conversion (I can speak for Canada, as I lived there at the time and sat on a sector conversion committee), it was far from being the only driving force. In Canada’s case, there were just as many big business reasons for NOT converting, due to its close proximity to, and huge trade with, the USA.

Notwithstanding what the driving forces were, democratic countries elect their governing representatives by popular vote, and then rely on those representatives to do what is best for both the individual and the country as a whole. Obviously, there will be conflicts arising, and what’s seen as best for one may not be best for the other. When such a conflict arises, the duty of the politician is to do what is best for the country.

In Canada’s case, politicians of all stripes truly felt that converting to the metric system was best for the country, even if it was unpopular with much of the electorate. Any support from big business was merely a bonus, but was not the prime motivation.

I see nothing undemocratic in how Canada did it – far from it, and although not fully converted, few Canadians today would support a reversion to Imperial.

Guys, could it be that instead of espousing (as you see it) a logical and superior system of measurements, what you are actually espousing is the triumph of corporate capitalism over democracy?

Which is a horse of a different and far less appealling colour.

Fair?

Kimmys, for Kms,

and

Kaygees, for KG.

Its kinda cute, and I think its standard colloquialism in her region.

My Canadian friends did indeed say clicks, and I did too when working with them.

Sooner the better for Metric conversion I say.

Dave.

The issue is very simple. At least in my personal experience of returning to the UK for four years after many metric years abroad, Britain has a half-baked “system” that allows people to be bloody-minded. I would ask for things in metric (having never previously shopped in anything other than that) and get replied to in imperial. Completing the metric changeover is the only answer, and the only way forward.

This is exactly what the situation was in Continental Europe. The Netherlands (including modern-day Belgium) ditched their system of measure which varied from city to city in 1820.

The German Customs Union (Zollverein) introduced a level of standardisation (1 zollpfund = 500 g) in 1853 and the German Empire which was founded in 1871 introduced the full metric system in 1871.

The Kingdom of Italy, which was formally constituted in 1871, uniting the northern Italian states, the Vatican states and the southern Italian states likewise adopted the metric system as their system of measure as part of their unification process.