DAYLIGHT SAVING

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 121, 20 February 1928, Page 3

DAYLIGHT SAVING

PERIOD NEARLY EXPIRED

QUESTION OF RE-ENACT-MENT Dominion Special Service. Christchurch, February 18. On being interviewed yesterday as.to whether lie would express liis opinion on the suggestion to submit the question of davlight saving to plebiscite, Mr. T. K.’Sidey, M.P., said that the Summer Time Act, which was passed last year, contained an unusual provision, namely, that it should remain in operation for one year only. . That provision was made as a concession to those who feared its operation would be attended bv great inconvenience and hardship. It was stated that railway time-table adjustments would be required in many parts of New Zealand, and there were’ many prophecies of disaster. It was for that reason that a year’s trial was asked for in the first instance, aud instead of the Act having to be repealed, provision was made by which it would require to be re-enacted after oue year. The period of summer time, said Mr. Sidev, had now nearly expired. The prophecies of disaster bad not been satisfied. For the first year of its operation it had worked with remarkable smoothness .and it was only reasonable to suppose that as time went on the country would more easily and readily adapt itself to the altered conditions. Some of the difficulties said to have been experienced were similar to those experienced at the inception of the scheme in England, but which disappeared in the Old Country ns time went on. The Act had proved itself a health measure of very great value. It bad this year given especially to our young people the benefits of fresh air and sunshine to a degree beyond that experienced by them in any previous summer. Inconvenience to the extent that some persons anticipated had simply not arisen. There had not been, so far as lie was aware, an adjustment of a single railway time-table in the Dominion. Under these circumstances, concluded Mr. Sidey, the supporters of the Act’ were now entitled to ask that it should I>e placed on the Statute-Book without the special provision that was in the Act of Inst year, necessitating its reenactment. It would then be in the same position as regards amendment or repeal as other statutes were.