I agree with you, Anne, in asking Tudor not to tar everyone
with the
same brush but for a different reason. I also endured the
British
Standard Time experiment and hated it. Even down in this neck
of the
woods, I found myself driving driving to work and going home
in the dark
during the middle of the winter.
That is exactly what happened to me in GMT, and the main reason
why I hate reverting to GMT. I never saw daylight, other than
through an office window, from Sunday afternoons to Saturday
mornings between the start of GMT and about the beginning of
March.

It's said that it's safer for schoolchildren to cycle home
from school
in the light
The trouble is that when the hours of daylight are shorter than
the school day, they either have to cycle/walk to school in the
dark or cycle/walk home from school in the dark. I would have
thought that they are more likely to be alert in the mornings
and better able to avoid accidents than after a day's hard work
at school when they are tired and de-mob happy.

I think I remeber reading somewhere the the RoSPA had calculated
that sticking to BST would actually reduce the number of deaths
and injuries compared with reverting to BST, even in northern
parts of the UK. If that is so, how can reversion to GMT
possibly be justified?

but first of all, why not get them to have lights on their
bikes? When I last checked this, 69% of cyclists here did not
use any
lights when cycling at night.
Quite. And I also think that any motorist involved in an
accident with someone wearing dark clothes on an unlit bike at
night should be presumed innocent. As it is, even if the cyclist
is not obeying the law by displaying a light, the motorist
automatically gets the blame.

I'd say we should ditch the whole "daylight-saving-time" idea
and stick
to GMT.
I'd say, obviously, the complete opposite! We should do
during the hours of darkness what can be done indoors, and save
the hours of daylight for things that need to be done out of
doors.

Anne