Daylight Saving Bill ticks on

15.35 | 6 December 2010 | | 2 comments

The Daylight Saving Bill, which will give the UK more hours of daylight in the evenings, has passed its second reading at the House of Commons.

The private members bill championed by Rebecca Harris, Conservative MP, which is supported by Road Safety GB and a number of other road safety organisations, passed its second reading by 92 votes to 10. It will now proceed to committee stage.

Supporters of the bill say having lighter evenings would reduce road casualties, boost tourism revenues, promote sport and exercise and reduce energy use.

But critics fear a later sunrise makes the school run more dangerous and presents problems for farmers and outdoor workers, particularly in Scotland.

At the second reading, Rebecca Harris, said the bill could save up to 80 lives a year, mainly among children.

Rebecca Harris also referred to the winter-only trial of GMT plus one between 1968 and 1970 which allegedly led to an increase in road deaths, particularly among children going to school on dark winter mornings, as ‘simply not true.’

Ms Harris said: “Extensive research by the TRL found that, far from causing accidents – the view that led to the experiment being abandoned in panic – the change resulted in an astonishing 1,120 fewer people being killed or seriously injured during the affected hours.

“The principal reason behind those figures is that more accidents occur in the busy afternoon rush hour. There are currently three times as many accidents, particularly involving children, between three and six pm than between seven and 10 am.

“In the mornings, we tend to travel directly, we leave just as much time as we need to get to our destination and the roads are less busy. In the afternoons, we make much more complicated journeys and people are much less attentive -children, in particular, feel liberated after leaving school.

“That is why moving an extra hour of daylight into the dangerous, busy peak time for travel would be beneficial for road safety.”

Daniel Vockins, spokesperson for the Lighter Later campaign which is backing the bill, said: "Britain may be blanketed in snow, but the nation is one giant step closer to having more sunshine in our lives. This bill is proof that you can tackle climate change whilst making society better and happier."

Click here for more information on the Lighter Later campaign.

Or click here to view a copy of the second reading of the Daylight Saving Bill.



Comment on this story

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Report a reader comment

Order by Latest first | Oldest first | Highest rated | Lowest rated

    As a driving instructor I have witnessed carnage on our roads every winter from the moment the clocks go back and the darker evenings ensue. The accidents happen in the evening rush hour when drivers are tired. It is clear that at a time of considerable economic hardship the saving of billions of pounds by having lighter evenings is an economic must. In addition the tourist and other industries will benefit from extra expenditure, and this will result in extra revenue for the Government. We all know who opposes the change and that is the Scottish Mafia Clansmen, the same ones who ruined our economy under the last Labour administration.

    Mr N Paul Green
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

    During WWII Britain adopted BST all year round and this produced benefits in the main. But this issue, this time round, has the option of putting forward the clocks ALL year forward one hour and thereby retaining the hour change both Spring and Autumn, – or – moving to BST ALL YEAR round.

    It should be noted that the vast majority of people find difficulty in adjusting to the hours change twice a year, and that generally a stable time zone would be beneficial to all, certainly domesticated cattle have no other clock than the Sun itself, and as that changes incrementally EVERY day, their problem is made by ‘us’ who change it twice a year. I would favour BST all twelve months of the year. Don’t change at Spring and Autumn.

    It is a great shame that the campaign for this is being headed by the 10:10 group, the same that thought ‘exploding’ schoolchildren was a huge joke in their campaign to reduce CO2 emissions. The claims being made of saving CO2, one of 10:10’s major issues when CO2 is not a problem for the planet, improves food production and is not detrimental to, nor causal of global temperature change – certainly not in significantly measurable or cost effective amounts. The claims for saving X tons is nonsense, as lights switched off earlier will be left on later in the mornings. Climate has always changed, and always will. It is to their detriment that certain factions are making ‘clock changing’ a contributory/beneficial factor. This smacks of woefully deliberate ignorance of scientific facts.

    The claims that the elderly would benefit are arguable. Many retired people have the option of walking out during daylight hours – whenever they are.

    For children a lighter evening may mean after school sports activities may continue later without bad light stopped play. But there will be darker mornings – we cannot extend the Sun’s period of luminance by fiddling with clocks.

    Derek, St Albans
    Agree (0) | Disagree (0)

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.