There is some evidence that there would be fewer accidents, based on the years 1968-71 when we were on permanent BST. It is acknowledged that nowadays different factors come into play so maybe it’s time to give it a trial.
Following bits taken from The Daylight Saving Bill 2010-11, Rebecca Harris MP’s Private Member’s Bill. It would have required the production of a cost-benefit report on advancing time by one hour throughout the year for the whole UK, and permit a trial clock change to take place. The Bill ran out of Parliamentary time.
Research based on the British Standard Time Experiment 1968-71 calculated that over one winter during the experiment 1120 less people were killed or seriously injured, and 2340 less were injured. This study also found that the “groups which had benefited most from the [retention of BST] were those aged 5-15, pedestrians and those living in Central England and Southern Scotland”.
Referring to all the evidence, the National Audit Office stated:
There are clear seasonal patterns to collisions which injure a pedestrian, with peaks generally occurring in October and November (Figure 8). The end of British Summer Time appears to be a significant factor. On average for the years 2000 to 2007, there were 10 per cent more collisions killing or injuring a pedestrian in the four weeks following the clocks going back than in the four weeks before the clocks changed. Research has shown that the period immediately after the clocks go back is more dangerous for road travel, even compared to other dark months such as January… Child pedestrians are most at risk from 3pm until 7pm, especially during the weeks after the end of British Summer Time.
The Committee recommended that:
There is substantial evidence that fewer people would be killed and seriously injured on Great Britain’s roads if this country were to put the clocks forward by one hour throughout the year. The Department should take the lead in re-examining the practice of changing clocks at the end of British Summer Time with other central Government departments
As a move to SDST may reduce the number of people killed and injured on the roads, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) supported an SDST experiment:
The only way to reach a conclusion about the effects of a move to SDST in this country, to align the UK clock with that of its European neighbours, is to conduct an experiment similar to that held during 1968/71. A trial implementation of SDST over at least two years, with modern evaluation methods and all data correctly and comprehensively recorded, will result in data that is unequivocal in terms of casualty savings and could cover much wider issues also. Such an experiment would give people an opportunity to experience the change for themselves and may be useful in crystallising opinions.
All that we are is what we have thought.
7ryMJjyBMgowKMZdQ~~_7.JPG "cee-dee"){kind=avatar}
