<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Metric Views &#187; Department for Transport</title>
	<atom:link href="http://metricviews.org.uk/tag/department-for-transport/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://metricviews.org.uk</link>
	<description>Commentary on the measurement muddle in the UK</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 20:54:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Howe calls for metrication progress</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/05/howe-calls-for-metrication-progress/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/05/howe-calls-for-metrication-progress/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 20:54:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erithacus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Consumer affairs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bridge strikes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dual-unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metrication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weights and measures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=3091</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lord Howe of Aberavon, the former Conservative Chancellor and Deputy Prime Minister, intervened in the Queen’s Speech debate on Tuesday to reiterate his call for the Government to complete the conversion of the UK’s weights and measures to metric units. &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/05/howe-calls-for-metrication-progress/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/05/howe-calls-for-metrication-progress/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DfT admits: no basis for blocking metric signs</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/03/dft-admits-no-basis-for-blocking-metric-signs/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/03/dft-admits-no-basis-for-blocking-metric-signs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 09:58:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erithacus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bridge strikes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DfT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dual-unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imperial road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metrication]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=2898</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After finally admitting they were wrong to try to withhold this information, the DfT have now published their analysis of the responses to their earlier consultation on the proposed phasing out of imperial-only height and width restriction traffic signs.  What &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/03/dft-admits-no-basis-for-blocking-metric-signs/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/03/dft-admits-no-basis-for-blocking-metric-signs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>31</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>DfT rejects industry view on metric signs</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/01/dft-rejects-industry-view-on-metric-signs/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/01/dft-rejects-industry-view-on-metric-signs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jan 2012 13:18:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erithacus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bridge strikes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DfT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dual-unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imperial road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[measurement units]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric speed limits]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=2566</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Department for Transport (DfT) has given in to anti-metric lobbying and backtracked on its earlier proposal that imperial-only height and width restriction signs should be replaced with dual metric/imperial signs within four years.  This climbdown is despite the responses &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/01/dft-rejects-industry-view-on-metric-signs/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2012/01/dft-rejects-industry-view-on-metric-signs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Who should pay for metrication of road signs?</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/12/who-should-pay-for-metrication-of-road-signs/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/12/who-should-pay-for-metrication-of-road-signs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 23:29:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erithacus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DfT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imperial road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[measurement units]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric speed limits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metrication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weights and measures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=2463</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Department for Transport have claimed that converting road signs to show metric units would be an unjustifiable diversion of resources from other priority areas.  So is there an argument that the costs should be met from some other budget?  &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/12/who-should-pay-for-metrication-of-road-signs/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/12/who-should-pay-for-metrication-of-road-signs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>22</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Review fails to address major traffic sign issues</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/review-fails-to-address-major-traffic-sign-issues/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/review-fails-to-address-major-traffic-sign-issues/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Oct 2011 19:36:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Isaac</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bridge strikes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DfT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dual-unit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imperial road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric road signs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=2370</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A three-year review of traffic signs has failed to address major problems with the UK&#8217;s signs. On 13 October the Department for Transport published the final report of its Traffic Signs Policy Review. The report, &#8220;Signing the Way&#8221;, marks the &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/review-fails-to-address-major-traffic-sign-issues/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/review-fails-to-address-major-traffic-sign-issues/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spotlight falls (again) on the high cost of construction in the UK</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/spotlight-falls-again-on-the-uks-high-construction-costs/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/spotlight-falls-again-on-the-uks-high-construction-costs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:01:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>derekp</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[construction-costs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[high-speed-rail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric road signs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=2356</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The magazine New Civil Engineer (NCE) reports this week on a recent conference in Barcelona which highlighted the wide difference between the cost of infrastructure in the UK and on the continent. So it seems that the inflated 2006 estimate &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/spotlight-falls-again-on-the-uks-high-construction-costs/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/10/spotlight-falls-again-on-the-uks-high-construction-costs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Spain discredits DfT&#8217;s case against metric signs</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/03/spain-discredits-dfts-case-against-metric-signs/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/03/spain-discredits-dfts-case-against-metric-signs/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 10:52:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>tonyw</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DfT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric speed limits]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=1992</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Spanish government this week exposed the Department for Transport’s case against adopting metric road signs in the UK as flawed. While the DfT maintains that it must allow an average of around £1400 to change our road signs, Spain this week changed all its motorway speed limit signs for an average cost of just €41, or £35.
 <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/03/spain-discredits-dfts-case-against-metric-signs/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/03/spain-discredits-dfts-case-against-metric-signs/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How decimalisation succeeded while metrication stalled</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/02/how-decimalisation-succeeded-while-metrication-stalled/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/02/how-decimalisation-succeeded-while-metrication-stalled/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 22:13:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erithacus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[History]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[decimalisation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metrication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weights and measures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=1870</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The media like nothing better than an anniversary, so it was predictable that the 40th anniversary of &#8220;decimal day&#8221; &#8211; 15 February, 1971, when the UK finally gave up its archaic and inconvenient coinage and currency &#8211; would get a &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/02/how-decimalisation-succeeded-while-metrication-stalled/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2011/02/how-decimalisation-succeeded-while-metrication-stalled/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“Half of that mince, please”</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/%e2%80%9chalf-of-that-mince-please%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/%e2%80%9chalf-of-that-mince-please%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:37:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Erithacus</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Consumer affairs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[consumer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metrication]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[weights and measures]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=1631</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Two little anecdotes illustrate the difficulties still being experienced by customers because neither the Government nor “consumer advocates” will try to help them adapt to metric units in the supermarket. Anecdote 1 A woman in her 60s approaches the fresh &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/%e2%80%9chalf-of-that-mince-please%e2%80%9d/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/%e2%80%9chalf-of-that-mince-please%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Optimism bias&#8217; falls from favour</title>
		<link>http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/optimism-bias-falls-from-favour/</link>
		<comments>http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/optimism-bias-falls-from-favour/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Nov 2010 15:24:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>derekp</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department for Transport]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[imperial road signs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[metric road signs]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://metricviews.org.uk/?p=1609</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In November 2005, the UK Department for Transport (DfT) produced an estimate of the cost of converting road traffic signs for speed and distance measurements to metric units. Optimism bias accounted for between 26% and 33% of the total overall &#8230; <a href="http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/optimism-bias-falls-from-favour/">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://metricviews.org.uk/2010/11/optimism-bias-falls-from-favour/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

