MightyPinecone: Whether an EU commisioner could come up with a reason is neither here nor there, but there are reasons. Feel free to read about the arguments made by both sides here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daylight_saving_time#Dispute_over_benefits_and_drawbacks That article claims that there are energy saving benefits and the opponents simply call them "inconclusive", but even the EU commission itself agrees nowadays that any energy saving benefits of daylight saving are miniscule, if even that.
That is probably why the EU commissioner didn't try to claim (anymore) that it saves energy. The only benefit I keep hearing is indeed that some people like to get out of work "one hour earlier" in order to get one more hour of sunlight in the evening.
Also as said, I think these are two different discussions (albeit related):
- shifting time twice a year, between daylight saving time and normal time.
- in which timezone each country decides to live (e.g. I recall when Russia abolished daylight saving time shifting, at first they had daylight saving (summer time) all the time, but later changed back to normal time (for the whole year).
I've mentioned it before but the time shifting is a true pain in the ass for me when trying to agree on recurring international meetings with e.g. Indians (who never shift time) or Americans (who shift it on a different date than EU, as this thread demonstrates). Twice a year always the same problem (actually,
four times with the Americans because they shift time on a different date):
"Sorry we can't participate in that weekly meeting anymore because now it overlaps with another meeting here. Could you move it by one hour?"
"Sorry I can't because then it would overlap with another recurring meeting I have at that time."
Maybe this wasn't much of a problem back in the 1800s or early 1900s when everything was more local, but now we live in a global world.