For Scotland's sake, the Daylight Savings Bill cannot win

Another hurdle jumped and there is light at the end of the tunnel for Rebecca Harris' Daylight Savings Bill, which today passed its Second Reading in the House of Commons by 92 votes to 10.  Unusually for Private Member's Bills, it shall advance to committee stage.  Also unusually, it has garnered wide and vocal support.  For reasons of constitutional harmony, however, I caution its advance.

There are two notable observations to be made about the vote itself, then I will come to my concerns.

First, barely one hundred were present because Parliament does not usually sit on a Friday. Most MPs spend Fridays (and Saturdays) working in their respective constituencies. So it is impossible to gauge true levels of support for this Bill, with the vast majority of MPs away. One backbench Tory MP told me: "on balance I am inclined to vote for it but I have to put my constituents first." How many had similar commitments but thought otherwise? We don't know.

Secondly, and linked to the first point, most Members present at the debate represent English constituencies, and a great amount of those not northern constituencies. Barely any Scottish MPs attended, which if it weren't for the inclement weather we have and the desire to get back home in good time, would strike me as odd because it is the position of Scotland (geographically and politically) on which this policy shall succeed or fail. Northern Ireland is similarly affected but it is not as politically prominent at Westminster.

Rebecca Harris (C, Castle Point) said in support of her Private Member's Bill that it "does not enforce an immediate change" but asks "that the government should take an objective, informed decision based on the best available evidence." The usual arguments in favour, such as a reduction in evening road accidents, more tourism and lower energy use were trotted out by supportive Members.

Edward Davey (LD, Kingston & Surbiton), the Minister for Employment Relations, Consumer and Postal Affairs, opposed the Bill on behalf of the Government, making the crucial point about the change's impact in Scotland:

"Under the proposals, sunset in Edinburgh in mid-October would move from 6.15 pm to 7.15 pm, but sunrise would not be until 8.45 am, and on new year’s eve, it would not get light in Lerwick until after 10 am, as I said earlier. It is therefore unsurprising that the Scottish Government are nervous of such a change, and that they have said that they would not want it imposed on their population."

My greatest fear is that imposing this change on the UK as a whole, as the failed experiment between 1968 and 1971 did, will ultimately lead to Holyrood declaring unilateral horological independence. Mr Davey also alluded to this possibility.

We should remember that Scotland is not only further north than the rest of the United Kingdom, but quite far west too—surprisingly, Edinburgh is west of Bristol—which means that, come winter, it has relatively little daylight, in fact about eight hours, and that that light comes later. It is possible in principle to have two UK time zones—one for Scotland, which could perhaps include Northern Ireland, and one for England and Wales—but we should rule out that option on such a relatively small island as ours. We should remain a United Kingdom.

We must remain a United Kingdom. I wrote earlier this week about how in 2004, the votes of Scottish MPs imposed top-up tuition fees on the graduates of English universities, against the wishes of English MPs. The complaint works both ways. The time change might sound like a good weeze to the MPs in the south of England who turned up today to vote for the Bill, such as Andrew Tyrie (C, Chichester), Simon Hughes (LD, Bermondsey & Old Southwark), Karen Buck (Lab, Westminster North) and Caroline Lucas (Green, Brighton Pavilion), but their colleagues in the north have very real concerns.

Angus Brendan MacNeil (SNP, Na h-Eileanan an Iar) pointed out that "more electricity would be used on darker mornings" in Scotland. Furthermore, Dr Eilidh Whiteford (SNP, Banff & Buchan) made the smart case that Scottish farmers are "less opposed to the measure than they were 40 years ago [because] they now have heating and lighting in their steadings [which] rather undermines the carbon saving argument." Two Liberal Democrat MPs, Malcolm Bruce (Gordon) and Alan Reid (Argyll & Bute) also spoke out against the Bill.

A pair of Scottish MPs did surprise me by voting in favour of the measure - David Hamilton (Lab, Midlothian) and Gordon Banks (Lab, Ochill & South Perthshire) - as well as Naomi Long, the Alliance MP from Belfast East. Mr Hamilton said he was approaching it "with an open mind." Both Mrs Long and Mr Banks spoke fairly of wanting to make better informed decisions based on proper evidence.

Until recently, I couldn't care much either way. Even now, I am willing to see what sort of arguments for and against are thrown up by a report, and to make a decision on that. Yet as things stand, this seems to me a dangerously unnecessary move. It has been tried before and this is the eighth occasion since the 1970s that someone has tried to revive it - all previous attempts ended in failure. If this attempt is successful, I worry that it would be another step down the road to the breakup of the United Kingdom. It would be another message of disunity sent north of the border - a selfish and antagonistic act inflicted on the Scots, on behalf of English and Welsh MPs.

The SNP are prone to nonsensical shortbread hyperbole (see the comments of Peter Wishart in my article on Wednesday) but Angus MacNeil hit the right tone today when he said:

"The progress of this bill is literally a wake-up call to the prospect of dark mornings for everyone north of Manchester, and has been pushed through by MPs from the south with no regard to the impact these changes would have on the quality of life for people in the north. This change would be acutely felt in Scotland, raising real safety and quality of life concerns, and this is now a real test for the Tory government and its claims of a respect agenda for Scotland."

I am still willing to be convinced, if the evidence is such to disprove my concerns. Yet I doubt it. The impact on Scotland is too great. The costs must surely outweigh the benefits and, judging by Ed Davey's comments today, I expect the Government believes this too.

UPDATE (4th December, 17.09): Paul Goodman, the former Conservative MP for Wycombe now writing at ConservativeHome, a right-wing website, pointed out in an article the day after the debate that Mark Lazarowicz, Labour and Co-op MP for Edinburgh North & Leith is another supportive Scot.  Do have a glance at Goodman's piece: you get a better flavour of the debate itself as he quotes at greater length.  He also picks up on the point about a north-south divide in terms of support for the Bill.

Au contraire, mon frere - English wine and cheese is world's best

 The French presume themselves a cultured race.  If the US is the world's policeman, France is the world's critic.  Les philosophes taught us enlightenment and reason; les révolutionnaires brought us liberty, equality and fraternity; and great chefs like Escoffier gave us haute cuisine.  The French have instructed us how to think, how to govern and how to cook.  Or so they deign to believe.

If we think of perceived French cultural superiority today, we think principally of gastronomy and oenology (at least, I certainly do, having lived in Paris in my formative years).  Food and wine.

It in their regional produce that the French proclaim gastronomic pre-eminence.  The world may have become adept at imitating its cuisine but you cannot mimic le terroir.  First growth claret, regal Burgundy, or exclusive, extravagant, celebratory Champagne.  Michelin stars.  Oozing, pungent, lavish, sumptuous cheese: Brie de Meaux, Pont-l'Évêque, Livarot, or Vacherin Mont d'Or.

In their own eyes, no other nation can match them for the quality of their wine and cheese.  Not the Spanish with their manchego and Rioja, nor the Italians with their parmiggiano and Chianti.  Certainly not the English.  The gulf between France and its ancient adversaries, les rosbifs, in matters culinary and vine is as wide as Gerard Depardieu's nose.

Of course it is.  The French could not hope to match England's green and pleasant land for wine and cheese, we have always known that, and now the world believes it too.

The writing was on le mur in 1992 when a blind tasting of West Sussex vineyard Nyetimber's Blanc des Blancs caused a fierce debate about which appellation of France it came from.  Since then, its Classic Cuvée and Blanc des Blancs vintages of sparkling wine (i.e. Champagne) have scooped numerous global awards.  Nyetimber is a three times winner of the 'Best Worldwide Sparkling Wine' at the IWSC competition as well as 'Champion of Worldwide Sparkling Wines 2009' at the Bollicine del Mondo, ahead of 13 sparklers from Champagne.

This year, the producers of Epernay and Reims could not even better Nyetimber's relatively unknown Sussex neighbour, Ridgeview, whose 2006 vintage Grosvenor Blanc des Blancs was awarded the illustrious 2010 Decanter Trophy for best sparkling wine in the world.

And just as France was recovering from collective cultural miasma, the unthinkable happened.  Not only can French sparkling wine no longer compete with England, nor can its cheese.

Cornish Blue cheese

An English cheese, Cornish Blue from Liskeard, ranked ahead of 2,600 entries from 26 countries to win this year's World Cheese Awards.  A cow's milk cheese, it has "a freshness that is a world away from the briny tang of Roquefort or the aged complexity of Stilton...a wholly different approach to blue cheese."

Former French president, Jacques Chirac, who stands trial for corruption early next year, once said that "the only thing [the English] have ever done for European agriculture is mad cow disease [and] after Finland, it is the country with the worst food."

It tickles me pink as a Ladurée macaroon to think of Monsieur Chirac, spluttering over his morning croissant as he eats metaphorical tarte pénitente.

Sherlock Holmes' portly companion Dr Watson uttered:

"Even the coeur flottant merveilleux aux fraises, presented with a great flourish, made little impression, for it was no more than what may happen to the simple, honest dish of strawberries and cream once it falls into the hands of a Frenchman."

The craft and complexity of France's soccer skills might still be too much for the English, but as this country is steadfastly proving, when it comes to gastronomy, brilliant simplicity trumps over-elaboration and pretence.

American cartoon comedy The Simpsons, in 1995, labelled the French "cheese eating surrender monkeys".  They're right about the first bit, but in the world of cheese and wine, don't bet on the French believing a word of the hype over England's triumphant offerings.

They won't surrender.  Not one bit.  Their cheese and wine will always be the best.  But after all, the French wouldn't be the French without that endearing belief in their cultural superiority.

Cheer up, mes amis, you still have the Alps, the climate and Carla Bruni.  You can plan the party.  Just leave the catering to us.