After a year full of conflict of the most horrific kind, it was good to begin 2002 with a momentous piece of news concerning countries growing closer together. As the bells chimed midnight on December 31, most of western Europe moved into a new economic era.

The 'Post' Editor and around 300 million other residents of Europe are now getting to grips with a new currency, the euro: a unit currently worth about 61 UK pence, or 90 US cents. The French franc, the German mark, the Dutch guilder, the Spanish peseta and several other long-established currencies have been consigned to history. Some nationalists and traditionalists may be upset by the change, but travelling and trading across most of Europe will now be much easier.

Just before Christmas, I played my own tiny part in this enormous event, giving a few guilders I had left over from an h2g2 Dutch meet to charity, while they still had some value. I was very happy to do so, but at the same time a bit frustrated that I was otherwise excluded from the continent-wide party. Britain remains outside the eurozone, doggedly hanging on to the pound. It's one of only three European Union countries to opt out of adopting the euro, for now at least, the others being Sweden and Denmark.

The official line is that a referendum on switching to the euro will take place as soon as a series of economic tests relating to the compatibility of the British economy with other European economies are met. Unofficially, it's widely assumed that the UK government wants to sign up, but fears that it couldn't yet win the referendum on the issue that it has promised will ultimately decide whether or not Britain joins. Opinion polls tend to support that theory, showing 60 to 70 per cent in favour of keeping the pound.

Interestingly, however, when the opinion pollsters change the question and ask whether UK voters think that Britain will sign up for the euro (as opposed to whether it should) the results reveal an interesting paradox. A recent ICM poll revealed that 62 per cent of respondents believe that Britain will be using the euro in 10 years' time.

In short, a lot of people in the UK don't want the euro, but think they're going to get it anyway.

However, now that the euro is a physical reality, in wallets and purses in 12 nations, I think that British hostility to the project will soften. Most people, to some extent or another, fear the unknown. There's a good chance that a lot of those Britons who currently feel threatened by the euro will feel less so when they've been on holiday and actually used the currency.

What's more, the result of the last General Election suggests that British voters' opposition to the euro really doesn't run all that deep. The Conservative Party made it the main focus of their campaign, endlessly emphasising their line that the election was the last chance to save the pound. The tactic was a spectacular failure, as it deserved to be, since it was based on a lie. The last chance to save the pound was always going to come in a referendum, whatever the election result. But had the electorate really felt passionately about the currency question, then Tony Blair and the Labour Party surely would not have won their second landslide victory.

Personally, I hope that Britain will sign up for the euro sooner rather than later. After the events of last year, I think it should be obvious that the age of nationalism is over. Even the mighty USA can't ignore the rest of the world, and to believe that a small country like Britain can do so looks increasingly ridiculous. Britain's economy depends to a huge extent on trade with countries now in the euro-zone. It surely makes sense to make that trade as easy as possible.

In any case, the euro has already come to Britain to some extent. Many UK shops are now accepting the euro, for the simple reason that they can't afford not to. If one shop accepts tourists' money while another refuses it, it's pretty obvious which one is more likely to prosper.

The only people who really stand to benefit from Britain refusing to join the euro are those who operate bureaux de change. I hope that one day, I'll be able to attend another h2g2 Dutch meet without the cost of exchanging money contributing to the expense.

Since 1976, the Lake Superior State University in Michigan, USA has provided a great service to the English-speaking world. It has produced an annual 'List of Words Banished from the Queen's English for Mis-Use, Over-Use and General Uselessness'.

Compiled from nominations sent from all over the world, the list does exactly what its title suggests. It brings together words and expressions that are nonsensical, over-exposed or both, and urges that they should be avoided.

This year's list has a certain poignancy, since it includes some expressions that been overworked because of the September 11 tragedy and the subsequent military campaign. Indeed, the lazy abbreviation for that fateful date, '9-11', is among the expressions the list's compilers have recommended for oblivion. I'd certainly go along with that nomination, partly because it makes an appalling event sound like a convenience store, and partly because if you're British, 9-11-01 was November 9.

Here's the University's full list for 2002:

1. Disenfranchise
2. Surgical strike
3. Friendly fire
4. 'Bring them to justice' or 'bring the evil-doers to justice'
5. Faith-based
6. Bi-partisanship
7. Doppler
8. Frig and frigging
9. Nine-eleven (9-11)
10. If...then the terrorists win' or 'the terrorists will have won'
11. Brainstorm/brainstorming
12. Synergy
13. Ramp up
14. Edgy
15. Infomercial
16. Making money
17. Bots
18. Functionality
19. Killer app
20. Solutions
21. 'Reality TV' and 'reality-based TV'
22. Car-jacking
23. In the wake of
24. No-brainer
25. Athleticism
26. Run the table
27. Totally unique
28. Very unique
29. Sworn affidavit
30. Possible choices
31. Forewarn
32. Unprecedented new
33. Rename it something else
34. Delay due to an earlier accident
35. Foreseeable future

Some real horrors in there, I think you'll agree. I'm particularly fond of 'very unique' - as opposed to 'slightly unique', I suppose. 'Disenfranchise' presumably made it to the top, with 'bi-partisanship' close behind, largely because of the 2000 US Presidential Election. ('Chad', as in 'hanging chads' , was in last year's list.)

I heartily agree with the inclusion of 'friendly fire' and 'surgical strike', both of which are offensive euphemisms. 'Friendly fire' sounds like something it'd be nice to sit next to in an armchair, but actually refers to shooting innocent people. 'Surgical strike' is an attempt to make something messy and deadly sound clean and neat.

Personally, I have a deep loathing for corporate euphemisms, such as 'downsizing' or 'right-sizing' for throwing people out of work. I'm also sick of hearing about the need for a 'flexible workforce'. Why not just say:
'We need to make it easy to sack people'?

I also agree with the contributor who suggested 'faith-based', as over-used in the expression 'faith-based schools'. As the contributor pointed out:
'All it means is religious entities, but I presume "Faith-based organisations" will elicit less recoil'.

Quite so. Why not call a church a church, especially if you're proposing to allow that church to indoctrinate children?

I'm sure that we could all think of many more possible additions to the list. I'm planning to nominate 'political correctness gone mad', an expression I've seethed about in this column before, used by right-wing commentators to describe anything they disagree with.

In Britain, with the debate over the euro likely to last for years, we're bound to get very weary of hearing about 'euro-creep', the expression used by anti-euro campaigners to describe the supposed introduction of the euro in Britain by stealth. I'm already sick of hearing about things being 'extreme', as in 'extreme sports' (most of which are extremely silly) or the UK TV show 'Robot Wars Extreme'. It really is getting extremely irritating.

Above all, though, I must applaud the words of Mary Li of Toronto, who nominated the phrases 'reality TV' and 'reality-based TV' , with this eloquent plea:
'Banish the words, banish the shows, banish the people who came up with the idea for the shows, because there is nothing real about this form of television'.

I couldn't agree more.

Incidentally, I was delighted to note that one of the contributors to this year's list hailed from Climax, Michigan. I wonder if there's a tourist board there urging people to come to Climax?

Finally, an encouraging story for any students out there who may be finding their courses a little harder than expected. Jean Vernon-Jackson of Lymington, Hampshire, has just completed her Open University course in religion, art history and social sciences, at the age of 71.

She's naturally delighted... especially as she began the course in 1971.

In fairness to Ms Vernon-Jackson, I should add that she has a pretty good excuse for being somewhat slow with her studies. She is currently the Mayor of the town of Lymington in Hampshire, and for much of her time as a student she has also been a town councillor and a magistrate. Combine those duties with bringing up a family, and you've got a lot of distractions from course work.

The successful student has commented:
'I am really looking forward to my graduation ceremony, because I've been to my children's degree ceremonies and it will be nice to have them coming to mine instead.'

I hope they're suitably proud, and I hope we all have something to celebrate during 2002.

Ormondroyd

03.01.02. Front Page

Back Issue Page