SHARE
COPY LINK

EUROPEAN UNION

Whatever happened to the EU’s plan to stop changing the clocks?

This weekend sees the changing of the clocks to summer time - but the EU had actually come up with a plan to end this practice back in 2019. So what happened?

Whatever happened to the EU's plan to stop changing the clocks?
The clocks will change this weekend, moving into summer time. Photo by Sergei GAPON / AFP

On the morning of Sunday, March 31st (which is also Easter Sunday), people across Europe will turn the clock forward by one hour, moving into summertime.

This means that people will lose an hour of sleep on Sunday – although in good news Monday is a public holiday so it gives you a little more time to get used to it – and marks the start of daylight savings time.

But wasn’t this supposed to change? What happened to the idea circulated in the European Union some years ago of no longer having seasonal time changes? 

The most successful public consultation

In 2018, the European Commission launched a public consultation asking people what they thought of scrapping the time changes.

It was the most successful EU consultation ever: 4.6 million people participated, in some cases representing a signification portion of the national population (3.79 per cent for Germany and 2.94 per cent for Austria).

People overwhelmingly said they wanted to stop moving the clock back and forward every six months – in fact 84 per cent of respondents agreed with the proposal. 

Negative health impacts, including sleep disruption, the lack of energy savings and an increase in road accidents were the most common reasons to justify the idea.

On that basis, in 2018 the Commission proposed legislation to end seasonal clock changes. This had to be approved by the European Parliament and by national governments represented at the EU Council.

The European Parliament in 2019 supported the proposal by a large majority suggesting time changes should be scrapped in 2021.

But EU governments could not find an agreement. Should summertime or wintertime become the norm? How to coordinate the change among neighbouring countries to avoid a patchwork of different time zones? And who would benefit the most? 

Brexit and the pandemic also got in the way. With the UK leaving the bloc and unlikely to follow new EU rules, abolishing time changes would have left the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland in different time zones for half of the year. 

In some countries, support for the idea was also flimsy – in Cyprus, Greece and Malta less than half of participants in the consultation agreed.

The last time the matter was discussed at the EU Council was in December 2019. Countries then called on the European Commission to produce an “impact assessment” of the proposal before being able to decide. Then Covid-19 hit and the pandemic overshadowed the discussion.

Why changing time?

Time changes, adopted by some 70 countries, have a long history.

Daylight saving time (DST) was introduced in several countries, including Germany, France and the UK, during World War I to save energy by delaying switching the lights on in the evening.

The arrangements were abandoned after the wars but were revived in the 1970s to deal with the oil crisis. Italy introduced daylight saving time in 1966, Greece in 1971, the UK and Ireland in 1972, Spain in 1974 and France in 1976.

Since 2001, an EU directive obliges EU member states to move the clock forward by one hour on the last Sunday of March and backward on the last Sunday of October. Earlier in the 1990s countries were changing time on different dates, with complications for transport, communications and cross-border trade. 

But today does the system really ensure energy savings?

Several assessments have found that the benefits are ‘marginal’. One study estimates energy savings at between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent, also depending on the geography, climate, economic and cultural factors of the country.

Generally, it seems that southern countries benefit the most, although gains are potentially diminished by technological advances, such as energy efficient devices. In other words, there is not just one factor to consider and results achieved in some countries do not necessarily apply to others. 

What happens next? 

The debate on seasonal time changes was somewhat revived due to the energy crisis. In March 2022, the US Senate passed a bill to make daylight saving time permanent from November 2023, although it still hasn’t been passed by the House of Representatives.

In summer 2022, reports in Italian media suggested the discussion could resume in the EU too. 

However, a spokesperson for the EU Council recently told The Local there is nothing new on the agenda.

“The Council has not yet formed its position on the Commission’s proposal,” he said in an email. 

However in March 2024 the chair of the European Parliament internal market committee – German Green MEP Anna Cavazzini – urged EU member states to come to a common position on the matter, at last.

“At the end of this legislative period, it is unfortunately clear that the abolition of the time change has become a non-starter in the Council,” she said.

“In order to avoid further frustration, the Council must finally untie the Gordian knot of the member states’ divergent opinions and take a position.

“This means we can finally make progress with ordinary legislation. The time between the European elections and the Commission’s new work program would leave enough room for this this summer. In this way, the EU can keep the long-overdue promise to abolish the time change.”

It seems therefore likely that Europeans will keep changing the time for a while. 

In 2024, the switch to summer time happens at 2am on Sunday, March 31st, when the clocks move forward by one hour. They will then change again on Sunday, October 27th, this time moving back by one hour. 

This article was produced in collaboration with Europe Street news. 

Member comments

  1. Well it was a different world back then in 2019 when the EU had the leisure to debate unimportant things

  2. Firstly, the end of March to end of September is seven months, not six. I sometimes wonder why don’t we go on to Summer time in February as there’s just as much daylight then as there is in October. Secondly, my parents spoke of something called Double Summer Time during the peak summers of World War 2 in UK. I’m too young to know but I certainly remember DST in the Sixties. I believe we tried to stay on DST in 1972 (maybe 1973 as well) and didn’t like it.

  3. Changing our clocks twice per year is one of the more ridiculous undertakings we engage in. We should all just stop, and remain on Standard Time. And “Permanent DST” is really just changing the time zone – in my case California would be changing from the Pacific to the Mountain time zone – and that is just as ridiculous. The time zones were determined so that Noon (Mid-day) would be approximately the middle of the day, and Midnight the middle of the night, wherever one may be.

  4. It is only half-true to say that the UK and Ireland introduced DST in 1972. They retained it after the war. But in 1968 began an experiment to keep the clocks permanently on GMT+1. The clocks went forward in spring 1968 and stayed there. This was abandoned in 1971, and so the clocks went back in autumn of that year. In spring 1972 the clocks went forward again, as they had done for decades. Seemingly politicians can’t resist the Canute-like temptation to pass laws telling the sun when to rise.

  5. What happened to permanent DST in UK is that the papers mendaciously described each child road death in the morning as a wilful act of the Wilson (Labour) government, and omitted to mention that child road deaths in the evening had fallen by substantially more than they had risen in the morning, ie they were reduced. An early lesson in politics

  6. Yes, I remember we used to have 6 months of Summer Time, but the UK had 7 months. So for one month each year the UK had the same time as on the Conteninent. This was confusing for international time tables, and so on. Eventually, the rest of the EU (of which the UK was a member then) decided to adopt the British practice.

    Personally, I’m very much in favour of changing the clocks, as it’s so much nicer to have longer day light during Summer TIme.

  7. I thought it was introduced to help farmers tend to their livestock in more daylight, but even that would be irrelevant now as the WEF and globalist elite want us to stop eating animal produce and eat plants and bugs ‘to save the planet’ (everyone except them of course) 🙂

  8. another good example that the current democracy does not work.
    peoples will – clearly and democratic demonstrated – is ignored when any other politically stronger position does not agree.
    why ask then?

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

TRAVEL NEWS

Why a Swiss-EU deal could be bad news for train users in Switzerland

Switzerland’s rail system is connected with that of neighbouring countries, but that may prove to be a problem in the future depending on the outcome of talks between Switzerland and the EU.

Why a Swiss-EU deal could be bad news for train users in Switzerland

Bern and Brussels are negotiating various bilateral treaties during the current round of bilateral talks

One of the topics under discussion is the inter-connected rail network — which sounds like an overall positive development for seamless cross-border travel.

However, Vincent Ducrot, head of national rail company SBB fears that such a deal would be detrimental to Swiss commuters, because it would mean international trains would have priority over Switzerland’s system.

What is it about?

Currently, priority is given to national traffic on Swiss territory.

But a new deal with the EU would mean that European law — and international train traffic — would take precedence.

The problem is that all the train paths in Switzerland are currently occupied, Ducrot said in an interview with Swiss media on Wednesday.

He cited the example of the Geneva-Paris route, on which several European companies would like to bid. But that would mean that SBB would lose out by having to remove an existing train to accommodate a new foreign one.

And there is more: the question of punctuality

The SBB has long had a problem with trains from Germany, as half of them arrive in Switzerland late, disrupting the carefully coordinated Swiss railway timetable.  

“Another huge concern we have is that the level of punctuality of the international system is totally different from ours,” Ducrot said. “Delays therefore risk being imported into Switzerland.”

To ease the chaos, the SBB has to keep special trains on standby to replace delayed ICE trains on the Basel-Zurich route, and passengers travelling from Germany to Zurich often have to transfer onto Swiss trains in Basel.

“Today, if a German train arrives late in Basel, we stop it and send a [Swiss] reserve train instead,” Ducret said.

“But if we can no longer do this in the future, it would mean that the train in question is accumulating delays, but above all that it is putting the SBB system behind schedule.”

SHOW COMMENTS