MEPs urge EU ministers to act and bring an end to seasonal clock changes

MEPs want EU governments to restart negotiations on ending the twice-yearly clock changes. The issue matters because moving clocks can disrupt sleep and complicate transport, communications, cross-border activity and the internal market. The European Parliament already backed ending the changes in 2019, but national governments have not agreed.

A group of MEPs sent a letter to transport ministers from all 27 EU countries. Led by German MEP Peter Liese, the letter asks ministers to “finally get the negotiations in the Council” moving again. It accepts that any solution must be coordinated among Member States, especially neighbouring countries.

The proposal remains blocked by disagreements over permanent summertime or wintertime. Governments have also questioned the lack of an impact assessment. A new EU-commissioned study on abolishing seasonal clock changes was expected by the end of the year, potentially giving negotiations fresh evidence.

Daylight saving time is a seasonal clock system. Clocks move forward by one hour in spring and backward by one hour in autumn. The change shifts the official time used during part of the year. In the article, the autumn change gives people back an hour of sleep lost when clocks moved forward in March.

The practice was introduced after the 1970s oil crisis as a way to save energy. Since 2001, an EU directive has required Member States to change clocks together. They move forward on the last Sunday of March and backward on the last Sunday of October. Common dates were intended to prevent different countries changing time at different moments.

The system remains controversial. Recent studies have questioned the scale of its energy savings, while MEPs highlight sleep disturbances, fatigue and concentration difficulties. The European Commission proposed ending seasonal changes in 2018, but EU governments have not yet agreed whether summer or winter time should remain permanent.

The European Commission asked people in 2018 whether seasonal clock changes should be abolished. The consultation became an unusually large public response to an EU policy question. Its result gave strong public backing to the idea of ending the twice-yearly changes, although it did not itself change the law.

Some 4.6 million people took part. That made the consultation the most successful ever held by the European Union. Among those respondents, 84 percent agreed with scrapping the changing of the clocks. The figure showed substantial support among participants for replacing the existing seasonal system.

The Commission responded in September 2018 by proposing legislation to end seasonal clock changes. The proposal still required approval from the European Parliament and national governments in the EU Council. Parliament supported it by a large majority in 2019, but EU governments later failed to agree on the final arrangement.

European countries introduced seasonal clock changes as an energy-saving measure following the 1970s oil crisis. The basic idea was to alter official clock time during part of the year. The article notes, however, that recent studies have questioned how much energy the practice actually saves.

The EU began coordinating Member States in 2001. An EU directive required countries to act at the same time, moving clocks forward by one hour on the last Sunday of March and backward on the last Sunday of October. This replaced potentially different national schedules with a shared timetable.

Coordination was intended to prevent problems caused by countries changing time on different dates. The article identifies risks for transport, communications and cross-border activities. Although the European Parliament later supported ending seasonal changes, governments have not agreed on a replacement system or on whether permanent summer or winter time should become standard.

Changing clocks twice a year affects both people and connected systems. MEP Peter Liese identifies sleep disturbances, fatigue and difficulties concentrating as health effects. The issue matters because the change interrupts millions of people’s daily rhythm, even though the autumn switch restores an hour lost in spring.

The article also explains why timing must be coordinated. Since 2001, EU countries have changed clocks together, on the last Sunday of March and the last Sunday of October. If neighbouring countries used different dates, transport schedules, communications and cross-border activities could become harder to manage. Businesses and travellers would face more timing complications.

The problem is not solved yet. EU governments remain divided over whether summer or winter time should be permanent. MEPs say careful coordination can overcome the practical risks. An EU-commissioned study, due by the end of the year, was expected to examine the impact of abolishing the changes.

EU governments have struggled because ending seasonal changes requires choosing one permanent system. They must decide whether summertime or wintertime should become the norm. The choice affects every Member State, so governments have not been convinced that one option serves all countries equally.

They also need to coordinate the change among neighbouring countries. If countries made different choices, Europe could develop a patchwork of time zones. That could cause complications for transport, communications, cross-border activities and the functioning of the internal market. The article says governments have also cited the absence of an impact assessment as a reason for delay.

The European Parliament supported ending the changes by a large majority in 2019, but EU governments failed to reach agreement. Spain later revived the discussion, backed by Poland and Finland. A new EU study on the impact of abolition was expected by the end of the year and could inform future negotiations.

Neighbouring countries need coordinated time zones because people and systems cross borders constantly. Shared or compatible clock rules make transport schedules, communications, work and other cross-border activities easier to organize. The article specifically links coordination with avoiding complications for transport, communications and the internal market.

The EU illustrates the mechanism. Since 2001, Member States have changed clocks on the same dates: forward on the last Sunday of March and backward on the last Sunday of October. More broadly, time zones divide Earth into regions with agreed clock times. Because Earth rotates, the Sun appears at different positions in the sky at different longitudes, so local clock time cannot be identical everywhere while remaining aligned with daylight.

This is why abolishing seasonal changes still requires coordination. If neighbouring countries chose different permanent times, a patchwork could emerge. The article reports that governments remain divided, while MEPs argue close coordination can overcome these practical challenges.