Options
Single/Double Summer Time (SDST)...again!!
![[Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/7e59b7aaf92d0ff7771d5c4f6e5c969e.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 914 Forum Member
✭✭
So when are we gunna get a consensus on this? Surely this suits everyone (in England)?
An extra hour in Winter (as in Summer now!) and 2HRS extra in the summer under the new system.
Will there be a Private Members Bill put through Parliament this yeat, as with 2006?
I personally think we should go for it, extra jobs for the economy and more people spending money. Not forgetting the "feel-good" factor.
We're just misreable during the winter dark days...
An extra hour in Winter (as in Summer now!) and 2HRS extra in the summer under the new system.
Will there be a Private Members Bill put through Parliament this yeat, as with 2006?
I personally think we should go for it, extra jobs for the economy and more people spending money. Not forgetting the "feel-good" factor.
We're just misreable during the winter dark days...
0
Comments
Darkness at 8 a.m. for four months of the year even in the south (much later in mid-winter) and even longer further north would not be welcomed by many. Particularly unpopular and difficult for outdoor workers.
Children would all go to school in the dark - with the move towards earlier school hours, many are now able to go to and from school in daylight under the present arrangements.
In summer, incredibly late sunsets making it difficult for the large number of people who have to get up for work in the early hours to get to sleep - plus noisy children running around causing annoyance in many neighbourhoods - the Portugese abandoned a similar experiment as children were falling asleep in class due to staying up later.
If it's such a great idea for us to be an hour ahead, why have those in the middle of the Central European time zone - whose local sunrise and sunset times are about the same as ours now - not moved an hour ahead themselves? If CET is right for us, then surely CET+1 is right for them, yet for some reason they have not adopted it.
Incidentally there would not be two hours extra daylight in summer - it would just be one hour under the proposal that has been made, and we would still change the clocks twice a year just as we do now. This is something which those advocating a change do not go to too much trouble to make clear, as they know many people would be in favour of it it thinking they would no longer have to change their clocks.
So the extra creation of 60-80,000 jobs in the economy would not be welcomed by you?
Given the current state of the economy too...
Extra £m's of pounds pumped into the economy as people stay out longer.
Here's what ROSPA have to say:
Changing Britain’s timekeeping to Single/Double British Summertime (SDST) so that during Winter, time would be GMT+1 and during summer, time would be GMT+2 would create lighter evenings all year round and result in fewer people being killed and injured in road accidents. It would also bring significant environmental, economic and health benefits, the latter being particularly relevant to the concerns about obesity and public health. This change would also put Britain into the Central European Time Zone.
If you believe that that many jobs will be created by moving this country away from its natural timezone (GMT) then you must believe that aliens are about to land over all world cities tonight. There is no need whatsoever to move us away from the time we are on now.
Some of us like it.
I suspect that you might well be saying exactly the same about the darkness in the mornings if we were to change.
I wouldn't - its dark in the mornings anyway.
Yes, but that's better than 15.30 ... and a month or so later.
I disagree. Most people still won't see anything. And there is no benefit to schools as most are finishing earlier and some are starting earlier than 10 years ago. The sun will rise at 09.00 in the far North.
I would go for March and Sept. I wouldn't see sunlight until 08:45 in Oct otherwise.
In 2006 I think there was a Private Members Bill trying for a change, this should be brought back!!
Actually the comments in here are around 50/50 for the status quo. We did try this in the 1960s and it failed drastically due to the excessively late sunrises. This bill should be put to sleep.
I'd rather MP's put their minds into sorting the mess the country is in out rather than needless private members bills.
Well I don't. We've managed this long with the present system. I quite like the longer nights
How do you reach that conclusion? I'd say the arguments are fairly evenly split.
This is one of those issues where you will never please everyone, whatever you do. The one thing which strikes me though, having taken part in these twice yearly discussions here for some while, is that people who want to change the present arrangements simply don't like winter, and are really arguing on that basis. For my part, I don't like summer, but every March I accept the putting forward of the clocks with as much good humour as I can, much as I would prefer not to do it. I don't quite see the same spirit in those who hold the opposite view.
Even if the change saved lives on the roads, was better for the environment (i.e. less energy usage) and boosted tourism!
It isn't pointless at all.
I agree 100%. I also think that somehow, people who think we should go onto CET seem to think doing this will get rid of winter.
There would still be accidents in the morning during winter if we were on CET. Please provide evidence that staying on CET will increase tourism, and be better for the envioronment. Changing time does not mean you'd get anymore daylight.
Kevin Clinton, the head of road safety at the RoSPA, said: "Studies show that vulnerable road users such as children and the elderly are more at risk during dark evenings than in the morning."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4387592.stm
Another story here from a couple of years ago:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4834108.stm
BBC Breakfast ran a piece this morning and it was stated that 60-80,000 jobs would be created in the tourist industry, and why wouldn't they?
Who can argue against this?
People in jobs already whose lives would be made much more difficult - the construction industry springs to mind, but there are many others.
The argument about children and the elderly is interesting. I have already dealt with the issue of children, for whom earlier school hours than was the case twenty or thirty years ago mean that the very best arrangement is now the present one - whatever might have been the case in times gone by. As for the elderly, this is the group most likely of all to be up and about early, and you can be quite certain that they would be the ones complaining longest and loudest about dark mornings.