Energy Saving (Daylight) Bill

If the broadcasting system were indeed to adapt, we might review the situation, but we are dealing with the world as it is. I am not suggesting for a moment that I am completely in favour of everything in the current system. It contains many difficulties; there is a strange asymmetry, for example, in the fact that we change our clocks 50 days before midwinter and change them back again about 90 days afterwards. I never welcome changing the clocks. Of course, it marks the change of season, but my gut instinct is a preference for a shorter period of change—perhaps 40 days. However, that is not on offer at present. Indeed, I gather that it would not be possible, because of European directive 2000/84/EC of 19 January 2001 on summer time arrangements. Article 2 states:"““From 2002 onwards, the summer-time period shall begin in every Member State at 1.00 a.m. Greenwich Mean Time on the last Sunday in March.””" Article 3 states that the period should end"““in every Member State…on the last Sunday in October.””" The asymmetry seems enshrined in European directive. One of the reasons for the directive is that, as it points out,"““it is important for the functioning of the internal market that a common date and time for the beginning and end of the summer-time period be fixed throughout the Community””." The argument is not that each area should have the same time, but that the changes should occur at the same time. That, unfortunately, is the situation, which is why we are stuck with asymmetric winter time and why the House is not completely free to reach a more optimal period of winter change. The situation is not perfect, but it is far better than what the Bill suggests, which would leave areas north of Manchester with darkness beyond 9 am for two months every winter. The experiments suggested would appear to be cyclical: they come along every few years in various areas—in Portugal, they come along every 20 years—and then they go back again. There could be many cultural reasons for that happening. Being further north, the UK seems to have a longer memory than Portugal of how bad the situation was—it may have been more extreme here—and it is coming round again after a 40-year period. I confidently predict here and now that if this change were to occur, we would see ourselves changing back again after three years. It would be the fourth unsuccessful experiment on the changing of time zones in western Europe. Do we really have to go through it one more time? Cannot we look at the experience of Portugal twice and of the UK once rather than mess about in a way that is not practical or sensible? Let us look into the times of sunrise and sunset on this very day in various parts of the UK. I look at the extreme fringes of the UK, starting in London. This morning, London’s sunrise was at about 7.49 am. In Shetland, it was 8.35 am. In the north and west part of my constituency in Stornoway it was 8.44 am and in the south end of the constituency it was 8.46 am. Already, the latitude lottery winning is evident and it is heartening for the south-east of England, which has an earlier morning. It is also instructive to reflect on the times of sunset. It is 15.58 in Shetland, 16.30 in Stornoway and 16.36 in London. Again, it is already clear that the day is longer in the south-east of England. When one different area has already won on the latitude lottery, it seems particularly small minded further to impose on the Scots—though not just the Scots, as it applies north of Manchester—a day that does not start at 25 minutes to 9 or quarter to 9 in the morning, but at 25 minutes to 10. I really think that those who have won the latitude lottery are and should be thankful for their luck. Latitudinal problems have an effect on my constituency, but so do longitudinal problems. The fence on my croft happens to be about 7.5° west of Greenwich, which means a full half hour. We lose out not only on latitude, but on longitude as well. I would wager that major unhappiness would be caused if this experiment were to go too far. The cultural habits, which I alluded to earlier, have not been fully looked into or explained. I notice that trade union groups are against this. My father’s old trade union, the Communication Workers Union, is against the change—and for many good reasons. There are risks of injury and accidents, particularly to postmen in the mornings. We look back to Portugal and see that the safety side of the experiment there was inconclusive. The insurers in that country reported an increase in the number of accidents.