GMT & BST

I feel the move from BST, to GMT, in late October is well timed but I feel the move from GMT, back to BST, could come in early March, rather than at the end of it. The worst of the cold weather (If not wet weather!!!) is usually over by March and so an extra hour of daylight, at the end of the day, is more is than one in the morning. Relative to the equinox, the move to BST, at the end of March, equates to putting the clocks back in mid September, which would be absurd.

Why is this idea important?

I feel the move from BST, to GMT, in late October is well timed but I feel the move from GMT, back to BST, could come in early March, rather than at the end of it. The worst of the cold weather (If not wet weather!!!) is usually over by March and so an extra hour of daylight, at the end of the day, is more is than one in the morning. Relative to the equinox, the move to BST, at the end of March, equates to putting the clocks back in mid September, which would be absurd.

Let’s have a Constant Time All the Year

In the 2nd, world war, the idea was adopted of changing clocks forward one hour in summer, as it was believed that this would help to get munitions workers up early in the morning, to improve arms manufacturing for the war effort.  Now, 10 years into the 21st. century, we are still stuck with this anachronism.  Why? 

Ideas by those defending this clock-fiddling every spring and autumn have included suggestions that it's good for the farmers, or it's safer for schoolchildren, or that it saves daylight.  None of these suggestions stands up to logical scrutiny.  Farmers tend to work all hours of daylight available; schools could benefit children greatly by staggering their hours, so as to avoid the "school run" traffic jams, and adjusting their hours at different times of the year, so as to maximise the use of daylight hours for children who walk or cycle to and from school.  And the daftest argument of all is that of "saving" daylight".  In short, it makes far better sense for different industries & services to make their own arrangements as regards optimum working hours, than to expect the whole nation to change all their clocks twice every year. The number of daylight hours we get is fixed by nature, and you can't get a single second of extra daylight by changing the datum point from which we count zero hours.  Before World War 2, Greenwich Time was our standard, and it still remains the world standard, with local time in each country being referenced as being x hours before or after GMT, now described as UCT. 

People can readily adjust to gradual changes; that is Nature's way.  Abrupt changes enforced on us are not easily adjusted to.  This sudden change every March & every October is accompanied by higher accident rates, disturbed sleep patterns, and a higher suicide rate. 

And let's not be stalled by arguments such as "Oh well, we're waiting for Brussells to decide on a common EU time."  Stuff them!  Let's do what is in our own best interests.

Why is this idea important?

In the 2nd, world war, the idea was adopted of changing clocks forward one hour in summer, as it was believed that this would help to get munitions workers up early in the morning, to improve arms manufacturing for the war effort.  Now, 10 years into the 21st. century, we are still stuck with this anachronism.  Why? 

Ideas by those defending this clock-fiddling every spring and autumn have included suggestions that it's good for the farmers, or it's safer for schoolchildren, or that it saves daylight.  None of these suggestions stands up to logical scrutiny.  Farmers tend to work all hours of daylight available; schools could benefit children greatly by staggering their hours, so as to avoid the "school run" traffic jams, and adjusting their hours at different times of the year, so as to maximise the use of daylight hours for children who walk or cycle to and from school.  And the daftest argument of all is that of "saving" daylight".  In short, it makes far better sense for different industries & services to make their own arrangements as regards optimum working hours, than to expect the whole nation to change all their clocks twice every year. The number of daylight hours we get is fixed by nature, and you can't get a single second of extra daylight by changing the datum point from which we count zero hours.  Before World War 2, Greenwich Time was our standard, and it still remains the world standard, with local time in each country being referenced as being x hours before or after GMT, now described as UCT. 

People can readily adjust to gradual changes; that is Nature's way.  Abrupt changes enforced on us are not easily adjusted to.  This sudden change every March & every October is accompanied by higher accident rates, disturbed sleep patterns, and a higher suicide rate. 

And let's not be stalled by arguments such as "Oh well, we're waiting for Brussells to decide on a common EU time."  Stuff them!  Let's do what is in our own best interests.

Harmonise British Summer Time with the rest of Europe

To harmonise our time in line with mainland Europe, thus avoiding the unnecessary requirement to change your watch or clock every time you cross the channel.

Why is this idea important?

To harmonise our time in line with mainland Europe, thus avoiding the unnecessary requirement to change your watch or clock every time you cross the channel.