The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 1926. DAYLIGHT SAVING

Southland Times, Issue 19831, 30 March 1926, Page 6

The Southland Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. Luceo Non Uro. TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 1926. DAYLIGHT SAVING

Even those who are firm in the belief that the introduction of Daylight Saving will supply benefits far outweighing the inconveniences forecasted by those who oppose it, will be far from satisfied with the arguments put forward in connection with this latest effort to increase interest in the proposal before the next session of Parliament. Replies from local bodies in various parts of the Dominion suggest that those who are charged with the administration of public affairs are fully seized of the advantages which will accrue from making fuller use of the daylight available in the summer months, and so far as the towns are concerned, it is doubtful if any strong body of opinion against the scheme could be found. The most powerful objections come, and have come, from the country, though in the rural areas there are farmers who advocate the introduction of summer time because they believe it will be of advantage to themselves and to their families, and the latest references to this topic show that the Daylight Saving advocates are anxious to win the agriculturist from his opposition. It is doubtful, however, if the cause of Daylight Saving can be advanced by the statement that the passing of the Bill will not affect the fanner. A Press Association message from Wellington, referring to this aspect of the controversy,

There appears to be some misconception, it is asserted, as to the effect which legislation will have on primary producers. There is nothing in the Bill to compel those engaged in them from doing anything different from what they are doing. At the present time farm, workers, whether engaged in dairy work, agriculture or orchards, are not bound to any hours of labour. There is no award which binds them to the time of starting or finishing, and legislation will not force them to take their milk or cream to the factory at any hour that is not convenient to themselves. The only producers who will be affected are those working in conjunction with an early morning railway time-table, and an examination will show, it is urged, that there are very few country stations where there is an early departure of trains.

It may be quite clear that there can be no coercion of farmers as a direct result of the passing of the Bill, but there is a world of truth, and a deeper significance than may be at first noted, in the statement that the “only producers who will be affected are those working in conjunction with an early morning railway time-table,” because it is difficult to see how the working hours of other interests can be changed without ultimately affecting the dairy factory, for instance, and even the agriculturist’ who must sooner or later come in contact with these other interests. We think that the introduction of summer time will be of general advantage and will not cause the trouble in rural areas that some people expect, but we do not think the scheme will be worked successfully without influencing the farmer to adopt it as well. It is unwise to suggest that the agriculturist can remain uninfluenced by the passage of the Bill. We think he will be pleased with the system if it is introduced, but he cannot remain immune.