THE UK Government has been roundly mocked after announcing the launch of a review into the economic benefits of a reintroduction of imperial measures.
The report is to be overseen by the UK Government’s business department, despite Jacob Rees-Mogg having recently taken on the newly created role of “Minister for Brexit Opportunities”.
The former leader of the House of Commons started out by asking the public to recommend any opportunities they knew, which also led to widespread mockery.
In a list of “Brexit opportunities” released by the UK Government in September 2021, the return of the “crown stamp” to pint glasses was listed alongside a return to imperial measures.
READ MORE: Tory government hails return of pounds and ounces as 'key success' of Brexit
Neither was prohibited under EU law, although metric units and European Conformity marks had to appear as well.
Now, the Tories have set out to launch a review into whether such a return to pounds and ounces would actually have any economic benefit.
Under the metric system, 1000 grams equal one kilogram. Under the imperial, there are 16 ounces to a pound and 14 pounds to a stone. One ounce is roughly equivalent to 28 grams.
Conservative business minister Paul Scully said reintroducing imperial measurements would be “an important step in taking back control” and that an “assessment of the economic impact on business will be carried out in due course”.
However, the review has been widely condemned as a waste of public money, with the SNP’s Philippa Whitford (above) asking if the story wasn’t a “spoof”.
The University of Strathclyde's Professor Tanja Bueltmann said: “It may seem a weird comment from a historian, but let me say this again: if your approach for future policy is essentially a recreation of the past, it usually means you have no actual ideas of any substance.”
“Brexit in a nutshell,” she added.
Broadcaster Gavin Esler wrote: “I don’t object to Rees-Mogg wasting his own time (damage limitation) but wasting that of our excellent civil servants in this nonsense is ludicrous.”
Businesswoman and Dragon’s Den star Deborah Meaden added: “So now we waste money on a study on economic benefits of reintroducing imperial units.There are none. There you go… now stop wasting our money.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel