Those who waited

Why yes, of course we did. It's all coming back now. The great Millennium countdown, the Pope declaring 2000 as a jubilee year, the Queen belting out Auld Lang Syne in her cockney accent at the Dome, London's invisible river of fire, cheap bubbly and extortionate babysitters. What a night that was.

Except it was the wrong night. The mathematicians warned us that January 1, 2000 did not mark dawn of the Third Millennium but the dawn of the last year of the Second Millennium. But did we listen? Did we heck. We couldn't hear anything except Prince belting out 1999.

Among those who told us so was David Marsh, proprietor of Millfield Home Brew in York. In a letter to the Evening Press, he claimed we had created the first 99-year century.

A year on, and he's unrepentant. They called 2000 the new Millennium "out of ignorance," Mr Marsh says. "And because it was given such media hype which is a lot to blame."

That's told us.

He thought it was cynical of the Church to jump on the bandwagon. "It was the 1,999th birthday of Jesus Christ, not the 2,000th."

The response 100 years ago supports his point of view.

"The 20th century began in 1901, so the 21st century begins in 2001, hence the title of Arthur C Clarke's book.

"It was even passed in an Act of Parliament that 1901 was the start of the 20th century. That must have been passed in 1899 or 1900."

Mr Marsh is now warming to his theme.

"Also you have got to remember that there was no year zero, because nought was an Arabic invention that didn't come in until around the seventh century.

"The Romans never had a nought. Twenty, for example, was just XX.

"If you think back it went from 1BC to 1AD. A year had passed at New Year 2AD."

This sort of talk is wholly endorsed by Des Reed, long time Malton Town councillor. He used his column in our sister paper the Gazette & Herald to chide the rest of us for our premature millennial enthusiasm a year ago.

"So, what is all the celebration about then?" he wrote at the time. "It seems obvious that it must be the attraction of the number "2000", the LAST year of the 20th century, and that this nice round number has fired the world's imagination. Someone set the ball rolling and, like lemmings, the world followed."

He has not changed his mind.

"The old century ends when 2000 is finished," he said. "People who said the century started this year insisted the old century ended in 1999, but it doesn't. It ends in 2000 to complete 100 years."

Mr Reed claims official confirmation for this stance from today's ministers.

"The other point was that the Government made an announcement that this year would be the finish of the old century and the old Millennium."

And what do you know, he's right. In an announcement that passed many of us by, the Government made next year the official start of the 21st century and the Third Millennium.

In December last year, Lord McIntosh of Haringey, the Government's deputy Chief Whip, said: "The Government have always recognised that the new Millennium starts on 1 January 2001. But many people wish to celebrate during the year 2000."

Consequently, it was decided in 1994 that the Millennium Commission would fund projects throughout 2000 and "into the new Millennium", said Lord McIntosh.

For some of the high profile Millennium schemes, recognition of 2001 as the real start of the century might be the perfect excuse.

After all, York's biggest single project, the Millennium Bridge over the River Ouse, was due to open this summer. Then it was hit by engineering delays. And just after it had been inched into place across the river, the floods came and put the project even further back.

Down south they have suffered similar problems. London's new bridge, known as the Blade Of Light, was opened in 2000 - and then promptly shut again after suffering a serious case of the collywobbles.

And although the London Eye, that giant ferris wheel by the Thames, has been spinning away for some time now, it spectacularly failed to be ready for New Year 2000 as promised.

If the creators of all these delayed projects have necks of brass and nerves of steel, they should claim that it was their intention all along to open in the "real Millennium" - ie next year.

Certainly the forthcoming New Year's Eve should be a big one for David Marsh, Des Reed, and the many others who pointed out our millennial mix-up. As you might expect neither of them had a lavish knees-up out last year. After all it was just another New Year's Eve.

But what of this year? They must be readying themselves for the bash of the century, preparing for a party glamorous and exciting enough to see out the old Millennium and see in the new.

"I have reached the age when, once it gets dark I am shut up for the night," said Mr Reed, who is 78.

"It's just another day as far as I am concerned. But I am pleased to have reached it."

Mr Marsh has a similarly downbeat attitude. "I don't really like all that noise and false hilarity," he confesses.

He will toast the new era in home brew, a drop of malt whisky and maybe even a glass of vintage port.

But I cannot help thinking that someone, somewhere is organising a huge party for all those who refused to join in last year's hype. Can anyone get me an invite?