MEPs Urge EU Ministers to End Seasonal Clock Changes

Forty-four members of the European Parliament from fifteen countries have urged EU transport ministers to restart stalled negotiations on ending twice-yearly clock changes. As lawmakers press for action ahead of the autumn time shift, member states remain divided over whether to adopt permanent summer or winter time.

Parliamentary Pressure on Transport Ministers

The push to revive the dormant legislation comes as citizens across the continent prepare to alter their schedules. In the middle of the night on Saturday, October 24, Europeans will turn their clocks back by one hour to end daylight saving time, recovering sixty minutes of sleep lost during the spring shift.

Forty-four MEPs representing six political groups addressed a formal letter to the transport ministers of all twenty-seven EU member states on Tuesday. The signatories demanded that national governments break the legislative deadlock and restart negotiations within the Council of the European Union.

German MEP Peter Liese spearheaded the initiative. He criticized national capitals for failing to reach a consensus, calling the delay irresponsible. Liese also serves as a medical doctor and noted that shifting time twice annually triggers measurable health complications, including sleep disturbances, fatigue, and difficulties concentrating.

EU Citizens Voted to End Seasonal Time Shifts

The legislative effort traces back to 2018 when the European Commission launched a public consultation on abolishing seasonal time shifts. The consultation drew 4.6 million responses—marking the most successful public outreach in EU history—with 84 percent of participants voting in favor of ending the practice.

The European Commission proposed formal legislation in September 2018 to scrap the changes, and the European Parliament backed the measure by a large majority in 2019. However, national governments in the Council failed to agree on a unified path forward. Questions regarding whether to standardize on summertime or wintertime, how to coordinate with neighboring nations, and which regions would benefit most left the proposal stranded.

For eight years, national governments cited the lack of a comprehensive impact assessment as the primary reason for inaction. Liese dismissed that justification as a political pretext.

Fresh Study Examines Consequences of Abolishing Time Shifts

The European Commission has commissioned a fresh study examining the consequences of abolishing seasonal time shifts, with publication scheduled for the end of the year. EU transport commissioner Apostolos Tzitzikostas noted during a debate in Strasbourg that the original rationale for the practice—securing energy savings following the 1970s oil crisis—no longer holds up under modern scrutiny. Recent research questions whether any meaningful energy savings remain, pointing instead to negative impacts on public health and economic performance.

While Spain, Poland, and Finland revived discussions last year, other member states remain unconvinced. The open question remains whether national governments can bridge their disagreements on time zones once the upcoming impact study is released, or if cross-border coordination hurdles will continue to stall the transition.