Brussels, Belgium – Spain has reignited the dormant debate over the biannual clock change in the European Union, with Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez publicly advocating for its permanent abolition. The Spanish government’s renewed push aims to end Daylight Saving Time (DST) by 2026, citing mounting evidence of negative health impacts, negligible energy savings, and overwhelming public opposition. This move could reshape daily life for hundreds of millions of Europeans, challenging the existing synchronized time system that has been in place for decades.
The practice of Daylight Saving Time, or "summer time" as it's known in Europe, involves advancing clocks by one hour in spring and reverting them in autumn. It was first implemented nationally in 1916 by the German and Austro-Hungarian Empires. Its broad international adoption followed the 1970s oil crisis, justified as a measure to conserve energy. The European Union later standardized this schedule in 1996 through a directive mandating all member states to observe the clock changes on the last Sunday of March and October.
However, the efficacy and necessity of DST have faced increasing scrutiny. In 2018, the European Commission launched an unprecedented public consultation, which saw 4.6 million responses, the highest number ever received for an EU consultation. An overwhelming 84 percent of participants voted to end the clock changes, reflecting widespread discontent across the continent. This strong public sentiment prompted the European Parliament to vote in favor of abolishing DST by 2021. The initiative, however, stalled due to a lack of consensus among member states on whether to permanently adopt summer or winter time, coupled with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has taken to social media to champion the cause, asserting that "changing the time twice a year no longer makes sense". He highlighted that the practice offers minimal energy savings and negatively affects people's health and daily lives. The Spanish government plans to formally present its proposal to the European Council, with the explicit aim of eliminating DST by 2026, aligning with the expiration of the current EU time-change schedule.
Madrid's stance is reinforced by domestic public opinion, with surveys indicating that approximately two out of three Spaniards (66%) support ending DST and maintaining a single time throughout the year. Spain's Minister of the Presidency, Félix Bolaños, has indicated that the proposal will allow for flexibility in the discussion, open to considering either permanent summer or winter time. The Spanish Secretary of State for Energy, Joan Groizard, further ensured the issue's inclusion in a recent ministerial summit agenda in Luxembourg.
While Spain's government frames this as a genuine effort to modernize EU policy and align with citizen well-being, some analysts suggest the timing could also serve to garner "international oxygen" and distract from domestic political challenges. Regardless of underlying motivations, Spain's proactive stance marks a significant attempt to revive a debate that has languished for years.
One of the most compelling arguments against DST centers on its detrimental effects on human health and circadian rhythms. The abrupt clock changes, particularly the spring forward, have been linked to a range of adverse health outcomes. Research indicates an increased incidence of pathologies and accidents during the weeks immediately following both transitions.
Studies have shown that the spring time change can disrupt sleep patterns, leading to fatigue, stress, and decreased life satisfaction. Some research suggests a correlation between clock shifts and an increased risk of heart attacks, strokes, and traffic accidents. A 2022 study in 16 European countries observed that mortality decreases in spring and increases in fall during the first two weeks following each DST transition. Moreover, a study from the London School of Economics (LSE) estimates that DST costs economies over 750 euros per capita annually due to its toll on health and well-being, with overall welfare gains of 754 euros per capita per year achievable by ending the practice.
These health concerns are not just limited to individuals; they also translate into economic costs. Reduced workplace productivity, sometimes referred to as "cyber-loafing," following the time change, has been estimated to cost hundreds of millions annually in other regions.
The original justification for DST – energy conservation – has largely been debunked by modern research. While the practice was initially intended to maximize daylight and reduce electricity consumption for lighting, contemporary studies suggest minimal, if any, actual energy savings. Some analyses even propose that DST might increase overall energy consumption due to higher heating needs in cooler mornings and increased demand for air conditioning in warmer evenings.
With advancements in energy-efficient technologies and altered lifestyle patterns since the 1970s, the rationale for DST has significantly weakened. Experts argue that electricity savings, if any, are negligible, effectively rounding to zero percent in the EU. This erosion of the primary economic justification further strengthens the case for abolishing the practice.
Despite broad public support and compelling scientific evidence, the path to abolishing DST across the EU remains complex. The primary hurdle continues to be the lack of a unified position among member states on which time — permanent summer or winter time — to adopt year-round. Countries at different latitudes often have varying preferences; for instance, northern European nations might favor permanent winter time to avoid excessively dark mornings, while southern countries might prefer permanent summer time to maximize evening daylight.
Critics warn that a failure to coordinate a common time could lead to a "patchwork" of time zones across the continent, potentially disrupting the seamless functioning of the single market, cross-border trade, transport, and communication. Countries like Portugal and Greece have previously expressed opposition to ending DST, fearing negative impacts on their economies and international connections. Conversely, Finland and Poland have supported Spain's position, advocating for the cessation of clock changes.
The challenge for Spain and its allies will be to build sufficient consensus within the European Council, requiring a qualified majority vote from member states. This means securing approval from at least 15 countries representing 65% of the EU population. Given the varied geographical and economic interests, reaching such an agreement demands significant diplomatic effort and compromise.
Spain's renewed advocacy has injected fresh urgency into the long-running European debate on Daylight Saving Time. With the current directive set to expire in 2026, the opportunity for change is imminent. The arguments against DST, particularly concerning health and the absence of significant energy savings, appear to be gaining traction, backed by public opinion polls. However, the practical complexities of harmonizing time across a diverse continent, and avoiding a fragmented time landscape, present formidable challenges. The coming months will determine whether the European Union can finally align its clocks with the wishes of its citizens and scientific evidence, or if the biannual ritual will persist into the foreseeable future.
