Daylight saving: Either do it all year round or don’t bother

Sunday 5 April 2009 - Filed under Life Outside Work

What do Queensland, Saskatchewan, and Arizona have in common? Hint:

(Picture: WebExhibits)

Those are the brave states that said No-thanks when the rest of the country fell for the ludicrous idea of shifting time to extend daylight. Known to have been first proposed by a New Zealander in 1895, the notion of saving daylight by manipulating the local time has brought confusion and inconsistency to many parts of the world. Farmers hate it, airlines and travellers have no reason to like it, and the general public don’t know what to do with the extra hour before sunset. Just when they thought they’d gotten used to it, ta-da, everyone has to go back to an extra hour of darkness, which, they are told, is normal.

So here’s my suggestion to time-shifting governments: If you like daylight so much, save it all year round. After all, an extra hour of daylight in winter is an extra hour of daylight, too. Fix the time zone and save the cost of having to fiddle with every time-aware mechanical and electronic device in the country particularly in these challenging economic times.

There’s no reason to stop there. You might as well permanently shift the time forward by two or even three hours so that the sun sets at 11pm in summer and around 8pm in winter – just like how it is in the western parts of China. That is catching two birds with one stone: both consistency and extreme daylight productivity.

Cynicism aside, I think any decision on a nation’s time zone should be based on reasons arising from trade and national security rather than people getting an extra hour in which to exercise (or eat) in broad daylight. Here I cite three cases:

• The time zone of Korea used to be UTC+8.5 hours, which was geographically correct being sandwiched between Japan and China. It was then brought forward by 30 minutes to match the time zone of Japan (UTC+9), the nation’s second biggest trading partner and now the biggest source of tourism revenue. Rumour has it that the adjustment was influenced by the United States, which wanted to simplify the administration of its armed forces that to this date have a heavy presence in both Korea and Japan. Trade and security before geography – sounds like the right call to me. Perpetual daylight saving by half an hour is a bonus.
• Western Australia (UTC+8), a state that was previously not interested in daylight saving time, is having a three-year trial to be followed by a referendum. Now, for six months in a year, the local time is out-of-sync with Western Australia’s most significant international business and tourism partners: Singapore, Malaysia, other Southeast Asian neighbours, and China. This is in exchange for… nothing that I can see within reason. Bringing Western Australia’s time forward by an hour doesn’t match it with any other states of Australia, either. I sure have lost count of the number of time zones or houses of parliament in Australia.
• The UK can use perpetual daylight saving. It will set the country in sync with France, Germany, and the rest of Western Europe for at least half of the year (since those countries do their own daylight saving during summer). Screw the Greenwich Mean Time. Before London, Paris was the longitudinal centre of the world anyway. Persuade the rest of Europe to stop their daylight saving, and all Europeans will happily be doing business in one time zone.

Now here’s a whacky thought: Since it’s impossible to get the Australians to agree on a single time zone among themselves, look for other options that can benefit the region. Set the eastern states of Australia on daylight saving time (UTC+11) all year round, and adjust the New Zealand Standard Time (UTC+12) backwards by an hour. Sydney and Auckland in the same time zone – that’s synergy. That, I suppose, can set the stage for the next big, inevitable move: a single Australasian currency.

2009-04-05  »  JK