Vol. 35 No. 1
I move:—
That Seanad Éireann hereby approves of the Summer Time Order, 1948, made by the Minister for Justice under the Summer Time Act, 1925 (No. 8 of 1925).
I am formally moving the motion, but I think that the Minister intends to make an explanation of the matter himself.
This is an Order to extend summer time at the end of the normal summer time period for approximately three weeks. In accordance with the Summer Time Order, 1926, summer time commenced on the 18th April, and is due to expire on Sunday, the 3rd October. The new Order proposes that it should be extended, this year, to Sunday, the 31st October, which is the date fixed for the termination of summer time in Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
In accordance with Section 3 of the Summer Time Act, 1925, the Order will not come into operation unless it is approved by a resolution of each House of the Oireachtas. It was approved by the Dáil on the 14th April.
An Order was made in February last providing for the introduction of summer time in Great Britain and Northern Ireland on the 14th March and its extension to the 31st October. When this became known, I considered the position, but as I was not convinced that a similar Order was desirable for this country I recommended to the Government that no action should be taken. As a result, however, of representations made to me subsequently by the Dublin Chamber of Commerce, the Great Northern Railway Company and other bodies, I decided to make an Order providing for the extension to the 31st of October.
There are obvious advantages in our time being synchronised with the time observed in Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and up to the war period there was always synchronisation. The Post Office, transport organisations and the public generally benefit from synchronisation. The Great Northern Railway Company, whose lines cross the Border at several points, find it very difficult to provide adequate local connections, when there is a difference between the times observed here and in Northern Ireland. There is also the necessity for special timetables for a short period. There is, of course, a difference of opinion as to whether the advantages of synchronisation are sufficient to justify the extension of summer time to the end of October. After careful consideration, however, I am satisfied that the balance of advantage is in favour of the extension, and I recommend that the Seanad should approve the Order.
As a farmer, I have no objection to the extension of summer time from the 3rd to the 31st of October as I feel that during that period it makes very little difference to farming operations, but I have a decided objection to the whole Summer Time Bill.
That does not come under consideration.
Give him a chance.
That is very ruthless.
You cannot discuss the whole Summer Time Bill.
Tríd is tríd, níl aon locht agam ar an Ordú seo. Tá an scéal seo an Áma Samhraidh pléite chomh minic sin cheana sa Dáil, sa tSeanad agus taobh amuigh sa tír, nach bhfhuil aon rud nua le rá. Is mian liom a rá, ámh, gur dóigh liom go bhfhuil an t-am tagtha anois go ndéanfhadh an Rialtas scrúdú ar an scéal ar fad i dtaobh Áma Samhraidh. Bhí Coimisiún ar bun sa mbliain 1940 agus chuir an Coimisiún sin tuarascáil isteach. In éindigh leis an tuarascáil sin, chuir an Coimisiún molta isteach agus moladh amháin go háirithe go raghadh an tír seo ar ais go dti an hám féin, go mbeadh a meridian speisialta féin ag Éirinn mar ba chóir agus go measfaí an t-ám dá réir sin. Taispeánadh sa tuarascáil sin go cruinn na buntáistí móra don tír trí chéile dá dtéadh Éire ar ais go dti an t-ám aicionta, nó nádúrtha.
Táim sásta leis an Ordú, ach amháin, mar a dúirt an Seanadóir Counihan, go gcuireann sé as do n-a lán daoine, agus ba mhaith liom a mholadh don Rialtas go gcuirfí molta an Choimisiúin sin faoin Ollamh Smiddy i 1940 i bhfheidhm. Ba mhaith liom go gcuimhneódh an tAire air agus go ndéanfadh baill an dá Theach scrúdú air.
I am anxious to support this motion, but it seems to me that it covers two things—extension this year and synchronisation. Now whatever period we decide upon we should in future years have exact synchronisation with Great Britain and Northern Ireland. We have had the arguments for the case before and the Minister has covered the ground in his speech, but I would like to make a recommendation to the Minister that in future years, whatever the length of the period in the Bill, we should not have a time different from that obtaining in Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
I do not agree with the extension to the period mentioned. I think that summer time as a whole has objectionable features and in this particular instance it is still more objectionable because the days are getting shorter in October; the nights are getting longer and summer time is of very little value in that period. It has additional disadvantages in the country. October is a very important month from the harvest point of view and I think that it would hinder the harvest. I agree, of course, that there is a case to be made for synchronisation of our time with British time but there is no reason why the British should not be reasonable in fixing their time-table. I do not agree to the extension.
I am not too happy about this motion because it seeks to extend the period of summer time in the harvest. A much better case could be made for extending it in the spring. If there is to be synchronisation, why was not it done on the 14th March?
The election was too late.
We should make our own decision as to when we should cease to operate summer time. I bow to the superior knowledge of the Minister but I am not satisfied with the reasons given. The farming community are affected in this matter. There is a limit to the type of work that can be done on a farm in the morning, even in good weather, because of dew. At the period when the most vital operations of farming are carried out, the men will knock off in the evening unless they are paid overtime. I submit that that is a very strong argument against extending the period of summer time to the 31st October. There would be a great deal of sense in having any synchronisation that there would be as from the 14th March but synchronisation in the harvest time is not to our advantage.
It would, of course, be better if, by negotiation, there could be agreement between us and the British authorities that summer time would operate for the same period year after year. It might then be decided to split the difference and there would be some measure of co-operation in the matter. I cannot agree that, because the British authorities decided to extend summer time to the 31st October, we should follow them simply because it suits transport companies. Of course it suits Senator Summerfield and others who have argued in favour of synchronisation but I am not satisfied that it helps the farming community.
Living very close to the Border, and farming a considerable amount, at least as much as I can afford, I am rather inclined to support summer time. With us, workers have become accustomed to it and it has one outstanding advantage, in that it means that shops open earlier and we can get parts of machines and implements that we may require. I do not desire that all the farming community should be opposed to summer time. I am rather sympathetic to it. I appreciate seeing the citizens of the towns enjoying the sunshine in the evening when they can. I would prefer that our time should be synchronised and that we should keep as close as we can to the Border, while we have it.
I am against this extension of summer time. We do not seem to consider—very few people remember now—that it is not Irish summer time we are keeping, but it is English summer time, and therefore we are not an hour wrong but an hour and 23 minutes and some seconds wrong, which makes a tremendous difference. It is roughly nine weeks to mid-summer. It is not too bad in the morning although it is bad enough, cold and damp, but, if this is to be extended to the 31st October, it will then be about 19 weeks from mid-summer and the mornings will be anything but healthy and pleasant, especially for children. We have not got our own time. If we had our proper time and then advanced it the hour at certain periods to suit ourselves that would be all right, but the further we keep away from England in this as in everything else, the better. Certainly it was a fierce disappointment in October, 1916, when they got back their hour and we got back our time less 23 minutes. God put us on a meridian and I do not see why our time should be shifted backwards and forwards in order to suit other countries or companies.
I know it is a foregone conclusion that this motion will be agreed to but I consider that it is wrong and unwise. We will have to face the long cold mornings of October, 19 weeks after mid-summer. In my opinion it is not wise. Until 32 years ago we had been 23 minutes, roughly, different from British time. I cannot see that it made any difference. It was one of the greatest little sorrows in my life when I saw the second face on the clock at Holyhead removed, when our time was made to conform with British time. The advantages are not for the people as a whole. They may be for some. The hour in the summer time is all right but when it goes beyond that it is all wrong. We are still without our 23 minutes plus an hour and I understand that beyond Athlone there is a further difference of ten minutes. I am certainly against the extension of summer time.
I am not opposed to this extension but I would like to follow Miss Pearse. We are not asked to agree to an hour extra in the summer but we have to accept one and a half hours. Many of us remember that this was an imposition by the British Government in 1916, shortly after the Rising, as a war measure, substituting Greenwich time for Irish time. We are almost one and a half hours behind the time. A commission was set up in 1941 to deal with this matter and its report, like the report of many other commissions, was simply pigeon-holed. The commission made a gesture to the town worker and to the farmer. They suggested that we should be half an hour behind Greenwich time, giving half an hour to the city man and half an hour to the farmer. I would suggest in all sincerity to the Minister that it would be no harm to study the report of that commission and he might find that it would be of advantage to the country to implement its recommendations.
It seems to me that opinion on this matter may be divided, roughly, into three issues: (1) whether it is a good thing for this country to adopt Western European time, which is adopted by many countries in Western Europe and which is not simply British time; (2) as to whether there should be summer time or not, and (3) if there is to be summer time and if we are to have Western European time, is it desirable that we should synchronise?
As far as I am concerned, I can see arguments for and against the first two although I think in present times this and other countries will have to make some little sacrifice to get a greater degree of unity in Western Europe as a whole. Apart from that, what makes me able to make up my mind without doubt is the existence of the Border. While it is there, it is highly desirable that we should do what we can to see that the Irish time is the same for all the year. Whether we like it or not, we cannot arrange the time in the Six Counties and when there is no very strong reason against it, it is highly desirable that the same time should be kept. I consider that of far greater importance than the question as to whether our time should synchronise with British time or not. If our time is not synchronised with British time, there is a certain amount of inconvenience but nothing like the inconvenience that there is on both sides of the Border when our time is not synchronised with the time kept in Northern Ireland.
Personally, I consider this a wise motion. I would agree with the Senator who said that he hoped it might be possible to have some consultations in this matter but, whatever consultations there may be, let us make every effort, while we continue summer time, to have it the same for the whole of Ireland, both sides of the Border.
I should like to add a word to what has been said against putting on the clock. In most parts of the country the clock is not interfered with at all. It does not suit the farmer. In many of the villages and small towns the clock is not interfered with and old time is kept. Country people and the farming community like old time because they find, when it comes to saving hay and corn, that an hour in the evening is worth two in the morning. That is very obvious to those-who understand rural conditions and it is very difficult to explain to those who do not understand rural conditions. I am in agreement with those who have spoken against putting on the clock.
Last year I opposed a motion which was introduced by the Minister's predecessor on the grounds that it was commencing summer time when there was a fall of snow outside the window. Some members of the House will remember that we were discussing the motion early in the morning when there was snow and frost on the ground. It did not seem a very suitable time to discuss the extension of summer time to this country. If the present Minister had taken the same line, I would have opposed the motion, but he has not done so: he is maintaining the added hour from the 3rd to the 31st October and there is nothing else at issue.
All these questions about Western European time, synchronising our time and British time and the hardships of the summer and the autumn, do not arise. They have no application here at all, because we have an Act of Parliament which fixed summer time during prescribed dates and if the Minister did not come here and if this motion were never moved in this House we would have to advance our clocks, so far as official time is concerned, between the 18th April and the 3rd October. There is nothing else at issue.
Senator O'Callaghan very wisely pointed out that over great parts of the country this is a matter for the local people. If you want to work at night after the clock shows six or seven or ten, nothing in this motion prevents you; and if you want to stay in bed in the morning nothing that the Minister can do under this motion will get you up and out of bed. It seems to me that for any large section of the people, particularly the farming community, the solution is in their own hands. It is true that if they are going to a fair or want to catch a bus or train or have contact with the post office or wherever there is official time, they will have to take cognisance of the fact that our clocks have been advanced under this Statute; but for farming operations there is nothing in the world in this motion which will alter their way of life.
I think it would be unwise for the Seanad to divide on this motion. There was a division in the Dáil; it was a free vote and if anyone looks at the voting list, they will be very much surprised about the alignment of Parties. In fact, you have a real coalition on summer time in the Dáil. I notice in reading the list of those who voted for the motion there—a similar one to this one—along with the Taoiseach, Mr. Costello, we had Deputy Aiken, Deputy Briscoe, Deputy Eamon de Valera and Deputy Vivion de Valera voting for the motion. It was a most magnificent coalition created in the Dáil by this motion. It would be a pity to destroy the harmony of that situation by dividing this House at its first session on such a matter as advancing the clock from the 3rd to the 31st October.
Seeing that the Senator is giving us as a headline the voting in the Dáil, I think it is the best case that could be made for a division.
We are discussing, I understand, not the question of summer time as a whole but whether it should be extended this year by a period of three weeks. Having swallowed summer time in principle, it seems hardly worth while discussing whether we should or should not extend it by three weeks. Senator O'Callaghan talked about the difficulties of saving hay and the advantage of an hour in the evening in fine weather. I do not profess to know very much about agriculture, but I think there is very little hay saved at the end of October.
The Senator will surely know that all the corn is not saved by the end of October.
We have been told here that anyone who wants to work after 6 o'clock can do so. My experience in rural districts is that, when men are hired by farmers, if their work normally ceases at 6 o'clock it will cease at 6 and they will not work any longer, except at overtime rates, and not always then if they are asked to work after 7. I can understand the disadvantages to farmers and that objection to summer time, as not even an Act passed by both Houses of our Parliament will raise the dew off the grass one minute earlier.
There is the difficulty I have come across in rural areas—the effect on school children. You put on the clocks an hour and there is a difference of one hour and 25 minutes. The school children suffer most, as the rural community—farmers, shopkeepers and even the Church—ignore summer time, but the children have to obey it.
No.
I do not suppose this is the time or the place to discuss it.
The managers have the option.
They do not always exercise it. In dealing with this motion—which I agree with, since we have accepted summer time in principle—the Minister mentioned that we need to synchronise our time and that of Northern Ireland. I do not know whether he must use that term because it is an official term, but it seems to me that whenever possible we should describe that part of our territory correctly and refer to it as the Six North-Eastern Counties.
I wish to support this motion, not because I have any grádh for summer time, but because I always held that if there is any period when we should have summer time it is in the winter, as it is then that it is needed. I have great pleasure in supporting it for the three weeks longer on that account.
The net issue is not as to whether summer time should be introduced here or not. As I said, summer time is here whether we like it or not and this motion is to add three weeks to it. I can assure country Senators that when this matter came before me after the change of Government, Deputy Seán MacEoin was quite positively opposed to summer time, but as Minister for Justice, having heard the case put to him in its favour, he had to act as he should act as Minister for Justice. Therefore, you have this motion before you and the Dáil.
Some people criticise what I have done. I would refer them to the Report on Summer Time issued in 1941 and they will see that I might be only two days out, as the report recommends that summer time should be extended from the first Sunday in April to the first Sunday in November. I am just a couple of days behind it and I am giving effect now to the view taken by my predecessors' friends in this matter. I am satisfied that this motion is in the interests of the country as a whole, that it does not affect the farmers or the school children, and that it has none of the faults that people have supposed there are in it.
