It's fewer, Asda, not less

According to our friends at Asda, their campaign against the mountain of waste going to landfill means that "together we're using less bags". Actually, no we're not: we're using fewer.

Now, they say people in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, and God knows I'm aware that any English teacher could probably drive a coach and horses through some of my jottings, but I felt duty bound to point out the error after I saw it in the chain's Donnington Wood branch.

To be fair to Asda, their spokeswoman did apologise (although she did say they were pleased that at least someone had noticed the sign). It was a mistake, she said. The wording should never have been approved and Asda would look into getting it changed - a big job considering the sign is part of a nationwide promotion.

For those who are not sure why "less" is wrong in this context, I'll refer you to the late author Kingsley Amis. Fewer, he said, "can properly be used of countable entities like cabbages and kings. The word for a smaller quantity of something uncountable, like sugar and spice, is less. We speak or write of less sugar but fewer cabbages."

According to the Government our education system has never been in better health. GCSE passes are going through the roof. We're all right brainboxes and no mistake. And yet (by the way, Amis says there is no rule against starting a sentence with 'and' or 'but') a mistake like that gets through.

Is it important? I think so. If you cannot use your own language properly how are you going to get anywhere in the world?

I certainly wish we'd spent more time on the basics when I was at school in the late 1980s. I feel like I've been trying to catch up in my own time ever since.

Still, the more I learn, the less errors I hope I make.*

*Yes, I know. It's deliberate.