It came as a surprise to many.
Last week, Members of the European Parliament overwhelmingly voted in favour of eliminating what we all know as the summer time.
For decades, on the last Sunday of March Europe has been moving the clock one hour ahead, establishing summer time which means later dawns and longer days. The idea was first proposed in the late 19th century in New Zealand, but in was right in the middle of the First World War in 1916 that the German Empire and its Austria-Hungary allies first used it. A year later, other countries followed suit whereas the United States took up the initiative in 1918.
Daylight saving time was abandoned in the years after the war but was re-introduced in the 1970s as a result of the energy crisis. The one-hour move ahead in the summer meant less use of electricity and a reduction in costs. Once the crisis passed, summer-time was however kept as the norm as we still know it today.
Now, however, MEPs are urging the European Union to revise the situation. In a resolution backed by 384 MEPs against 153, the European Parliament is pushing for a “thorough assessment” of EU-wide summer time arrangements and “if necessary, a revision of the rules”. It also recommended that the bloc should keep a unified time regime even if daylight saving time is scrapped.
The reason behind such a call is that the twice-yearly hourly change – the one-hour ahead move in March is “pulled back” in October – affects the human biorhythm and is therefore a cause of health issues. Despite having other benefits such as less energy consumption, there are negative effects on human health which need to be taken into consideration.
Whether the European Union will be taking up this suggestion is something that needs to be seen, and if there will be any changes they will not be starting this year.
People who love summer will argue against the move, considering that the one-hour adjustment will mean, in simple terms, longer days at the beach. But then there are people who would be all in favour of retaining a standard time all throughout the year, also because they find it hard to settle down each time there is this change on the clock. Then there are others who would prefer an extra hour of daylight in the morning, rather than the evening.
What the EP vote brought to the fore, however, goes beyond the personal likings. There have been several instances when the European Union ignored what the European Parliament decided.
But the European Union cannot ignore health issues associated with this twice-yearly change, which were highlighted in a study carried out by the European Parliament. If further studies are needed to put people’s minds at rest, then they should be executed in the coming months so that a final decision – either way – is taken.