Double British Summer Time

Alex Mayer Excerpts

Thursday 27th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

Spring is in the air, and it is almost time for a familiar ritual. On Sunday, the clocks will go forward by an hour, and our evenings will become lighter overnight as British summer time begins. Frankly, each time the clocks go forward and back, it is a bit of a faff. I think we have all looked in confusion at the clock on the car dashboard, trying to remember how on earth to change it. I understand that clock mechanics will be carrying out the task of adjusting the time on more than 2,000 clocks across the parliamentary estate, including on Big Ben —no mean feat! I have to say that I am always a lot happier with the spring clock change than with the autumn one, which plunges our communities into longer evenings of darkness.

Is this the right time system for today? I think it is time to talk about time. It was in 1907 that the first serious proposal for daylight saving time was made in Britain. Angry at the lack of daylight during summer mornings, a campaigner by the name of William Willett self-published a pamphlet called “The Waste of Daylight”. Although he did not live to see his proposal enacted, British summer time was first established during world war one by the Summer Time Act 1916, which is still in force today.

However, it is the experiment during the second world war—British double summer time—to which I would like to turn today. As Britain faced peril, Winston Churchill took the decision to move the clocks two hours in advance of Greenwich mean time in the summer and one hour in advance of GMT during the winter months. Why? To save energy. The crisis at the time meant that bold ideas were required. We needed to think outside the box.

Today we face a different emergency—the climate crisis—but one for which the same prescription could really help. I believe that we should learn the lessons of wartime Britain and move to double summer time: one hour ahead of GMT in the winter and two hours ahead in the summer months. We know that we must cut our emissions and reduce our reliance on fossil fuels. We have a Labour Government who are seizing the moment, through Great British Energy—our new, publicly owned clean energy company—and by retrofitting homes to help families to save money on their energy bills and reduce emissions as the warm homes plan accelerates.

Another immediate, practical and effective way to cut emissions could be to make better use of the daylight that we have. By choosing Churchill time, we can reduce our energy use and lower our carbon footprint. When it is lighter in the evenings, households and businesses switch on lights and heating later. That small shift, spread across millions of homes, adds up to a significant difference. Researchers at the University of Cambridge found that an extra daily hour of sunlight in winter evenings could save £485 million in electricity bills each year. They calculated a saving of 6 GWh of energy per winter day. It would reduce carbon dioxide pollution by at least 447,000 tonnes each year, which is equivalent to more than 50,000 cars driving all the way around the world.

Evidence from Queen’s University Belfast shows that Churchill time would reduce evening peak energy demands by up to 10%—roughly 5 GW of electricity taken off the grid during the busiest time of day—offering significant reductions in energy costs and emissions. All that is great news for the planet. Lighter evenings mean more time spent outdoors, in parks or on walks. They mean more time visiting cafés and pubs on our high streets, giving local businesses, particularly in the hospitality and retail sectors, a much-needed boost. When the sun sets at 4 o’clock, people rush home; they do not linger in our town centres or high streets or stop for a coffee. When the sun sets at 5 pm or 6 pm, we change the rhythm of our days. We create opportunities for commerce, connection and community. That would especially be the case in autumn half term.

In 2011, the British Association of Leisure Parks, Piers and Attractions claimed that lighter evenings would increase tourism earnings by between £2.5 billion and £3.5 billion and would bring increased tax revenues and have a positive impact on the UK’s balance of payments, particularly from overseas visitors. This week, the Tourism Alliance told me that there is a real case for Churchill time to boost tourism in the so-called shoulder seasons, helping more visitors to enjoy everything our amazing country has to offer all year round, which means jobs and growth.

Some will ask, “What about the mornings? Don’t we need light in the mornings?” Those are fair questions. However, the evidence tells us that the cost of dark evenings is higher than the cost of dark mornings. Studies show that road collisions increase by 19% in the two weeks after the clocks go back in October. The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents points out that during the working week, accidents are always higher in the afternoon/evening peak than in the morning peak. For much of the winter, during that most dangerous afternoon/evening peak, about an hour and a half is currently in darkness. This change would more than halve that.

Similarly, the AA estimates that around 100 lives a year would be saved by reducing accidents in the dark evenings. Brake, the road safety charity, told me ahead of this debate that with five people killed on our roads every day, more strategies that reduce road deaths and injuries can only be a positive thing.

Changing to lighter evenings could prevent hundreds of accidents and injuries every year. That is not just statistics; it is lives protected, hospital beds freed up and families spared tragedy. The result would be fewer injuries, less pressure on our emergency services and reduced strain on our national health service.

Sunshine cheers us up, too. According to the NHS, a lack of sunlight may lead to lower serotonin levels, which is linked to feelings of depression. Getting outside has many mood-boosting benefits.

“Surely the health, the refreshment, the happiness of such a gift cannot be overestimated!”—[Official Report, 8 May 1916; Vol. 82, c. 305.]

That is what the then hon. Member for Blackburn said in this place back in 1916 when debating daylight saving time. Lamenting the waste of daylight, he asked your predecessor, Madam Deputy Speaker, if there could

“be a more wasteful, more unhygienic, more senseless proceeding” —[Official Report, 8 May 1916; Vol. 82, c. 304.]

I will not go quite that far.

Simply put, I believe that we should make the most of what we have. I urge the Minister to consider letting us spring forward to a greener and brighter future.

Local Post Offices

Alex Mayer Excerpts

Thursday 30th January 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

I commend the hon. Member for Taunton and Wellington (Gideon Amos) on securing this important debate. I think that most Members and most people are pro-post office. After all, post offices are part of the fabric of our nation. Many Members of my age were brought up on Postman Pat and his black and white cat. It would not have been the same without Mrs Goggins at the local post office.

The Leighton Buzzard post office first opened its doors at its current location near All Saints church back in 1887. We all recognise that a lot has changed in the last 137 years, and since Postman Pat hit our screens in the 1980s. I used to queue at the post office to get my car tax. Emails have transformed how we communicate. TV licence sales have moved online or to phone or direct debit. What has not changed is the way that post offices foster a sense of community pride. Half of UK consumers say that their local post office creates a sense of belonging and community identity. An Association of Convenience Stores survey ranked the post office third for having a positive impact on local communities.

Post offices also drive footfall to our high streets because when someone goes to the post office in the town centre, they often spend money elsewhere. More and more, post offices support e-commerce, and they are important to small businesses, half of which use them at least once a month. Increasingly, they are a vital means of accessing cash.

Since 2015, my constituency has lost 60% of its bank branches. In recent months, two more high street banks, Lloyds and Halifax, have left Leighton Buzzard town centre. In September, when Halifax announced its closure, it was explicit that it expected the post office down the road to take up the slack. Whether that will be possible is a question I will turn to shortly.

I was proud to stand on a Labour manifesto that committed us to strengthening the post office network. I welcome the Government’s £37 million investment to support post office branches, along with the £20 million boost to sub-postmasters’ pay and the plans to publish a Green Paper seeking public views on the future of the Post Office. This all comes at a critical time.

The 100-plus-year-old Leighton Buzzard post office is a Crown post office. The desire of the Post Office to move to a fully franchised model is not new. It has been on the cards for some time, but it is causing understandable concern for local people who deeply value the service that their post office provides, for all of the reasons I have outlined. I welcome the expressions of interest in taking on those Crown branches. Although not all of those applications will be viable, it is encouraging that third-party operators are willing to step in, potentially integrating retail elements to make these branches more financially sustainable.

However, as my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) mentioned, the recent announcement by WHSmith, which hosts around 200 post office counters, has raised concerns about whether third-party takeovers truly are a long-term solution. I would be grateful for the Minister’s views on that. I would also be keen for him to explore with the Post Office whether there is merit in treating Crown branches where it owns the freehold of the building differently from those where it leases the premises.

Let me turn briefly to the related issue of postboxes. Some new developments simply do not have them. That means that someone who lives in Bidwell West would have to go on a half-hour hike to post a letter. The law states that residents should be within 500 metres of a post box, but that is simply not happening. Perhaps the Minister might raise that with the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, to ensure that housing developments include post boxes as standard. After all, letters are vital for a thriving postal service.

The Post Office is a national institution. It brings essential services to countless communities, whether sending a parcel, withdrawing cash or topping up an electricity meter. It supports local businesses, high streets and local identity. Yes, it must change, but it must not wither. Local people must enjoy a first-class service.

Fireworks: Sale and Use

Alex Mayer Excerpts

Monday 9th December 2024 Westminster Hall

[Ruth Cadbury (Brentford and Isleworth) (Lab)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Edward. I thank the hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) for introducing this very important debate, and I thank all those who organised the petitions, especially my constituents who signed one or both.

In Hounslow, as in many areas represented by Members here, we have almost continuous fireworks through Diwali, bonfire night and the birthday of Guru Nanak, as well as new year’s eve nowadays, which I do not think used to happen. On new year’s eve, the fireworks can last for 24 hours, as local people who hail from different parts of the world let them off at the same time as their family and friends back home, or just because they feel like it. There is also the danger of exploding fireworks. I have a relative who, as a child, lost her eye when the kids were messing around. One new year’s eve, when we were at a party in our neighbour’s house, suddenly all the children were no longer in the back room watching films—it was suspiciously quiet. They were in the road, egging on a group of very drunk young men who were letting off fireworks with no safety measures whatsoever. Yet again this year, I have had a string of emails over the autumn from concerned constituents who almost certainly signed these petitions.

As Members have said, and as others will no doubt say for the rest of the debate, a common complaint is fireworks being let off well after midnight, sometimes up to 3 am, disturbing families and those doing shift work. People do not object to public displays at a social time, but they do not want them in the middle of the night. The impact on animals is increasingly cited by constituents, and the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals has stated:

“There is increasing evidence that fireworks can have negative effects on the behaviour and wellbeing of animals.”

Constituents cite the increasing number of days on which late-night and early-morning displays happen over a number of weeks from October through to the new year.

I agree with others that the legislation needs updating for our safety, for our ability to get a reasonable night’s sleep, and for the wellbeing of our pets and wild animals, so I welcome the Bill introduced by my hon. Friend the Member for Luton North (Sarah Owen). Legislation has not been updated for 20 years, but, as other Members have said, fireworks being bought in shops are far louder and more powerful than they were in the past.

The current legislation says that fireworks can be bought from unlicensed traders for Chinese new year, Diwali, bonfire night and new year, but not at other times. Why the religious discrimination in favour of some and not others? How does that work in a highly diverse constituency such as mine, where people celebrate, often with fireworks, on many days, anniversaries and other religious festivals? Sometimes, they might just be celebrating grandad’s birthday. Animals do not know whether it is a religious holiday or grandad’s birthday; they are equally traumatised whatever the occasion, so would it not be fair if there were a level playing field, with organised, licensed displays and quieter, safer fireworks?

[Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)]

I want to draw attention to another petition handed into Downing Street recently, which had 1.1 million signatures. Does my hon. Friend agree that it would be helpful to encourage manufacturers to design and produce quieter fireworks?

[Ruth Cadbury]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We know that it is possible to buy bright, colourful, exciting fireworks that do not make nearly so much noise, and some jurisdictions already legislate for that.

During the firework season, our hospitals work even harder than ever, treating what are too often life-changing injuries. Local authorities do not have the resources to enforce the 11 pm to 7 am legislation, so, in my experience, that aspect of the law is not worth the paper it is written on.

I support restricting the use of fireworks in some way. Scotland allows local councils to designate firework-free zones in areas where fireworks are likely to have a greater impact on animals, the environment and vulnerable people. As has been mentioned, we could have a decibel limit, as is the case in New Zealand, where the sound level has been brought down from 120 dB to 90 dB. We should certainly address who can sell fireworks and in what circumstances. When I was very young, I was working for a community organisation and I was sent to buy the fireworks for the bonfire night display that we were organising. I found the address of the seller—a flat high up in a tower block in Camden, packed from floor to ceiling with boxes and boxes of fireworks. If that is not a justification for licensing sellers, I do not know what is.