Should Canada stop changing the clocks twice a year? MP says it’s time

An MP says all of Canada should end the practice of changing the clocks twice a year — and is planning on introducing legislation she hopes will ensure the custom is lost to time.

Canadians will often engage in conversation and debates about why it is we change our clocks back and forward, Ottawa Liberal MP Marie-France Lalonde said Thursday during a news conference on Parliament Hill.

Today, I’m here to say the time has come to address time change.

A majority of jurisdictions in Canada observe the biannual time change, pushing the clocks forward an hour in the spring only to wind them back an hour in the fall.

WATCH | MP says time change is ‘outdated’:

MP proposes ditching ‘outdated’ daylight saving time

Liberal MP Marie-France Lalonde was joined by sleep experts on Thursday morning to announce her intention to introduce a private member’s bill next week addressing the biannual time change.

Lalonde said she is planning on introducing a private member’s bill that wouldn’t explicitly eliminate the time change, but calls on the federal government to organize a conference with various stakeholders to formalize and establish a set clock that would hold year round.

Saskatchewan, Yukon and parts of B.C. and Nunavut do not observe the practice — with Yukon having only just made the permanent switch to daylight saving time in 2020.

Other provinces have mulled the idea of getting rid of the time change but seem reluctant to make the move on their own.

Atlantic premiers mused publicly about adopting permanent daylight time in 2022, but said they would not pursue it unless others take the lead.

WATCH | Should Canada ditch time changes?:

Is it time to ditch daylight saving time?

March 7Duration2:06Many Canadian provinces and several U.S. states are considering getting rid of seasonal time changes and experts say sticking to standard time is better for natural sleep patterns.

B.C., Manitoba and Ontario have all tied their time change policy to certain U.S. states. Quebec and the Northwest Territories have both held public consultations on the possibility of eliminating time changes but neither have made an official decision.

Meanwhile, Alberta held a referendum in 2021 on whether to continue changing clocks twice a year. Albertans voted 50.2 per cent in favour of continuing the practice.

Lalonde suggested her initiative would bring the country together to collectively decide on how to proceed.

Let’s stop speaking individually and start speaking collectively, she said.

I’m doing this because I think that provincial [governments] have had these conversations. Now let’s bring everybody [together].

Some experts argue that there are several consequences from forcing people to shift their clocks twice a year.

Research suggests that health problems, such as strokes and heart attacks, are more likely to occur in the first few days following a time change. Car accidents are also more likely to occur, according to some experts.

On the other hand, ending the change would have some negative impacts, depending on what is permanently standardized.

Most provinces mulling a single year-round time have chosen to adopt permanent daylight time, which is typically observed during the spring and summer months.

But sleep experts say that could greatly impact sleep patterns, specifically in the winter when the sun would rise later.

Morning light has more of an effect on the circadian clock, which governs the body’s sleep-wake cycle. Moving to permanent daylight time would mean most Canadians would wake up before sunrise in the winter months.

But a permanent switch to standard time could mean earlier summer sunsets and — depending on the part of the country someone is in — a very early sunrise.

Rébecca Robillard with the Canada Sleep Research Consortium joined Lalonde for the news conference and welcomed the initiative.

All in all, I believe that our decisions around time change should be based on informed societal reflections as opposed to individual preferences, Robillard said.

The scientific community is keen to support these reflections.

Lalonde acknowledged that because she is putting forward a private member’s bill, the legislation won’t likely move through Parliament quickly. But she said she’s keen to at least start the conversation.

This article is republished from RCI.