I’m waiting to vote on the second reading of the Daylight Saving Bill, a private member’s bill introduced by Rebecca Harris MP and promoted by Lighter Later. With considerable scepticism, I will be supporting the bill.
It seems to me that good arguments can be made either way on this Bill because the offset we use from solar time is fundamentally arbitrary. Solar noon is when the sun is highest in the sky. Some people prefer lighter mornings and some lighter evenings. Those who have a preference either way can find the arguments either way. I note that we live in a world where solar midday comes early in most people’s waking day and that this is the choice which has emerged over time. It tends to suggest people prefer lighter mornings…
Many of the more appealing benefits – someone lobbied me on the basis that I would be able to enjoy an extra hour’s sailing in the autumn, should I ever have another boat and escape Parliament – are ones which could be achieved through more flexible working. Flexible working, widely adopted, would for example, reduce congestion and therefore save CO2 (discuss). The point is that when we do the things we want to do is a matter of choice against a subjective scale of preferences.
Right – I think I shall go and listen to the minister in person.
Update: Having heard the minister, I would willingly vote it down but let’s have it in committee for public discussion. I may vote against at third reading.