I welcome the opportunity that Deputy Broughan’s Bill gives us to focus on the issue of our time zone arrangements. As can be seen from the Bill itself and the contributions already made to today’s debate there are many aspects to be considered.
Deputy Broughan’s Bill has two general focus points:
·the preparation and publication of a report on the costs and benefits of advancing clocks by one hour; and
·the conducting of a three year trial during which clocks will be advanced by one hour.
The Bill is interesting, not least because of its specific requirement that in preparing the report the interests of the people of Northern Ireland must be considered. I will return to this specific aspect of the Bill at a later stage.
Current Time Arrangements
At present, Irish clocks are aligned with those in the United Kingdom and Portugal.
This means that our winter time begins at 1:00 a.m. Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) on the last Sunday in October every year when clocks are put back one hour.
Winter time ends at 1:00 a.m. GMT on the last Sunday in March of the following year when clocks are put forward one hour, signalling the start of summer time.
These arrangements are set out in the Winter Time Order, 2001 which gives effect to European Directive 2000/84/EC of 19 January, 2001. As a result, all EU member states start summer time simultaneously which in turn means that time differences between member states remain constant throughout the year.
Bringing Ireland into the Central European Time zone would mean that the Single/Double Summer Time (SDST) model would be adopted wherein the first year clocks would not go back in October. They would stay one hour ahead until March when they would then be put forward by an hour. After this first adjustment clocks would continue to go back and forwards as usual but they would be an hour ahead of our current Greenwich Meant Time (GMT) and GMT+1 system (i.e. to GMT+1 in winter and GMT+2 in summer) and bring Ireland into line with Central European Time.
By way of example, were Ireland's time zone in line with Central European Time in 2013 this would mean that in areas in the North West e.g. Sligo sunrise would not occur on Christmas Day 2013 until 9:54 a.m. while on 21 June, 2013 sunset would not have occurred until 11:12 p.m.
Report
The Brighter Evenings Bill requires the Minister for Justice and Equality to prepare a report on all the potential costs and benefits of advancing clocks by one hour to bring our time arrangements in line with Central European Time.
In addition, the Minister for Justice and Equality must establish an independent group to oversee the preparation of the report. Reflecting the many aspects of this matter, membership of the group must be comprised of stakeholders from various Government Departments and agencies as well as non-governmental organisations including:
·Economic and Social Research Institute
·Department of Job, Enterprise and Innovation
·Department of Health
·Department of Education and Skills
·Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food
·Road Safety Authority
The Bill further requires the Minister for Justice and Equality to publish the report within 12 months of the Bill being passed and that copies of the report be sent to the Houses of the Oireachtas and the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Daylight Saving Bill 2010-12 [UK]
Deputy Broughan’s Bill is similar to the recent U.K. Private Member’s Daylight Saving Bill which failed to complete its passage through Parliament in early 2012.
That Bill would require the U.K. Government to conduct a cross-departmental analysis of the potential costs and benefits of advancing time by one hour for all, or part of, the year.
If this analysis found that a clock change would benefit the U.K., the Bill requires that the Government initiate a trial clock change to determine the full implications.
Deputies will be interested to note that in recognition of the key consideration of the close links between our respective states the U.K. authorities sought our views on the Bill at an early stage in its life. In this regard officials from my Department met with the Bill’s sponsor, Rebecca Harris, M.P. in February 2011. I will return to this key consideration at a later stage.
U.K. Consultants Report
On 13 August, 2012, some months after this U.K. Bill fell, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (the U.K. equivalent of our Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation) published a report entitled
Review of the scope, quality and robustness of available evidence regarding putting clocks forward by one hour, the year round, in the U.K.
which was prepared on the Department's behalf by David Simmonds Consultancy.
The consultants were requested to carry out a review of the scope, quality and robustness of available evidence that could be used to assess or monitor the potential effects of a policy to move the clock forward the year round in the United Kingdom. Such a change would effectively move the United Kingdom to "single/double summer time" or SDST, and would set clocks in the U.K. to the same time as those in the majority of Western European countries, i.e. matching Central European Time.
The work conducted was not a full cost-benefit analysis of the matter but simply a review of the available evidence. That said, the consultants reported that following the search of a range of sources, 118 references had been examined. These were studies based on the whole or parts of the U.K. as well as studies which looked at the impact or potential impact in other countries.
In spite of the many sources examined the consultants reported
Our overall conclusions are that we believe a formal ex ante cost-benefit analysis of the single/double summer time proposal would be possible, but that more research is needed to inform it, particularly in relation to how people would respond to the change in terms of carrying out different activities at different times.
Three Year Trial Period
Section 3(1) of the Brighter Evenings Bill states that the Minister for Justice and Equality may make provision for advancing the clocks in Ireland by one hour for a three year trial period under a daylight saving order.
I note that the Explanatory Memorandum accompanying the Bill is more definitive in this regard when it states
In addition under this Bill, the Minister must then advance the clocks by one hour for a three year period (and then permanently if required).
Perhaps Deputy Broughan would clarify this apparent contradiction?
Deputy Broughan’s Bill also provides that the Minister for Justice and Equality must
·monitor the effect of the daylight saving order throughout the three year trial period; and
·at the end of the trial period, then decide whether to abandon the experiment or to permanently advance our clocks by one hour.
Previous Trial Periods
Trial periods during which a country’s time arrangements are altered are nothing new.
For example, in the 1960's the U.K. Government decided to test the support for continuous summer time. A three year experiment was introduced from 1968-1971 when summer time (GMT+1) applied throughout the year. The experiment was debated in the Commons on 2 December, 1970 and, by a vote of 366 to 81, the experiment was discontinued.
Ireland followed suit. The Standard Time Act 1968 was introduced. This Act set time at GMT+1 hour throughout the year and in 1971 the Standard Time (Amendment) Act became law.
It is notable also that Portugal, which is in the same time zone as Ireland and the United Kingdom, converted to Central European Time in 1966-1976 and 1992-1996.
Topical Issue Debate – Daylight Saving Time
While it may be over 40 years since our 1968-1971 trial period ended the issue of our time arrangements has been the subject of Parliamentary Questions, some of which were asked by Deputy Broughan, and recent debate.
Against the background of the eventually unsuccessful passage of the Daylight Saving Bill through the U.K. Parliament Deputy David Stanton raised the issue in a Topical Interest Debate on Daylight Saving Time on 26 October, 2011.
Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality – Central European Time
Subsequently, the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality discussed moving Ireland to Central European Time when it held a meeting on the socio-economic and other implications of autumn and spring time adjustment arrangements on 30 November, 2011.
During the meeting the Joint Committee heard statements from and asked questions of representatives of the Irish Farming Association, the Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.
It is interesting to note, although not surprising, that many of the contributors to this discussion referenced the Daylight Saving Bill and various U.K. research papers.
No "correct" time zone
Since becoming Minister for Justice and Equality it is has repeatedly been brought to my notice that there is no "correct" time zone for our country or indeed, any other state. Whether when dealing with Parliamentary Questions, Topical Issue Debates or Joint Committee discussions. Today’s debate has re-enforced this point.
There is no scientific or mathematical formula which determines the correct time zone for a state to adopt.
Ireland, along with other countries, has made decisions to change its time zone arrangements at different times during the last century. Such decisions, which are made taking many issues into account, are policy decisions and not formulaic in nature.
Great Britain and Northern Ireland
When considering which time zone we should select it is evident that we should take into consideration the implications of Ireland being, for example, one hour ahead of Northern Ireland. Deputy Broughan’s Bill acknowledges this.
However, we must also consider what is happening in the UK as a whole, not least because we have the same time arrangements, they are our biggest trading partner and we share a border with Northern Ireland.
In addition, we should also bear in mind that Ireland is one of the U.K.’s biggest trading partner. During the 42nd plenary of the British Irish Parliamentary Assembly in Cork in June 2011 it was stated that Britain does more business with Ireland than it does with Brazil, Russia, India and China combined.
Not accepting the Bill in principle
While I am all for making informed decisions regardless of the subject matter I am cannot accept the Brighter Evenings Bill in principle.
I do not believe that legislation is necessary to consider this matter. This issue is already kept under regular consideration as recent Parliamentary Questions and the Topical Issue Debate demonstrate. If the aim of the Brighter Evenings Bill is to have an extra hour of daylight in the evening, rather than the mornings, this could be achieved without legislation by getting up, going to work and finishing work an hour earlier – which I understand is common practice in Norway and Sweden.
While Deputy Broughan’s Bill is an interesting one, which acknowledges the wide diversity of views that the issue generates, for me, the key issue lies in the many interlinked connections between us and the U.K. as a whole. Deputy Broughan’s Bill, while acknowledging the Northern Ireland connection, is silent on the rest of the U.K. By this silence is he suggesting that we should consider conducting a three year trial in which Ireland would set clocks one hour ahead of those in Northern Ireland or Great Britain or the U.K. as a whole in order to establish the implications of doing so?
Realistically, Ireland is not going to put itself in a different time zone to Northern Ireland or the U.K.
I would agree with the thrust of Deputy Broughan’s Bill which proposes that full consideration be given to the broad range of areas that our time zone arrangements impact upon including the agricultural community, industry, schools, individual people with work commitments.
I note that Deputy Broughan’s Bill proposes the establishing of an independent group to oversee the preparation of a report on all the potential costs and benefits of advancing clocks in Ireland by one hour.
However, I also note from the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality’s meeting of 30 November, 2011 on the socio-economic and other implications of autumn and spring time adjustment arrangements that Jim Curran, Head of Research of the Irish Small and Medium Enterprises Association stated
The main body of evidence on these arguments is centred in the U.K., with little, if any, evidence on the impact a change would have on Ireland.
While I acknowledge that the Deputy has not proposed that research be commissioned in relation to this matter there would appear to be an absence of Irish based research dealing with the issue. For the record, I am of the view that the commissioning of research into this matter would be expensive, is unlikely to be persuasive either way, and cannot be justified in the current economic circumstances.
Proposed Approach
While recognising his interest in the issue I would ask Deputy Broughan if he would adjourn the matter for further consideration.
If he will do so I am willing to write to the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality to ask it to further examine this matter, seek submissions and invite interested parties to make presentations. I would also suggest the Committee engage with members of the Westminster Parliament and also with members of the Northern Ireland, Scottish and Welsh Assemblies and having completed the process ultimately publish a report detailing both the advantages and difficulties relating to any change in time and its conclusion on the matter. Due to their work load the Committee might consider establishing a sub-committee to invite submissions, conduct hearings etc. which in turn will report to the main Committee and thereafter back to Houses of Oireachtas and to me as the Minister responsible for time.
I hope that Deputy Broughan will accept this proposal which I believe would be welcomed by the Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality, not least because its Chairperson, Deputy David Stanton has, I understand, a personal interest in this subject.