Clocks could go forward by an hour permanently subject to UK-wide consensus.

The government has decided to back the bid for a three-year trial that would see the UK join the central European time zone — but only if devolved administrations agree.

It would mean lighter evenings but darker mornings, especially in Scotland, where many people are strongly opposed. Campaigners believe, however, that moving to lighter evenings would reduce energy use and hence carbon emissions, cut road deaths and boost tourism.

British summertime ends this weekend when clocks go back on Sunday. If the trial went ahead, it would see Britain's clocks go unchanged. Clocks in winter would be set to GMT plus one hour (British summertime) and GMT plus two in the summer.

The stipulation for agreement across the UK is one of the amendments ministers want to make to the daylight savings private members bill, which is set to move to committee stage in early November.

The bill, first put forward by Conservative MP Rebecca Harris in 2010, calls on the government to conduct a cross-departmental analysis into the potential costs and benefits of moving the clocks forward to create lighter evenings.

If this review showed that the move would be beneficial, the government would then initiate a three-year trial to evaluate the impact of the change. David Cameron signalled that he was willing to consider the switch, but has said that the argument would only be won when people across the country feel comfortable with the change.

Time zones are the responsibility of individual EU member states and vary across the continent. The devolution arrangements for time zones also vary – responsibility is devolved in Northern Ireland, but reserved in Scotland and Wales.

Some have suggested that England could make the change alone, but Cameron has said that he wants a united time zone for a UK.

Edward Davey, the business secretary, said: "This is an issue which affects everyone across the country, so we cannot rush headfirst into this. As the prime minister has made clear, we would need consensus from the devolved administrations if any change were to take place. We have therefore tabled amendments to the current bill to make sure that it addresses these concerns.

"It is only right that we at least look at what the potential economic and social benefits of any change might be. Lower road deaths, reduced carbon dioxide emissions and improved health have all been argued over the years as possible benefits."

Harris said she was delighted with the decision to support the bill.

"There are so many conflicting arguments on both sides of the daylight saving lobby. I believe we need a comprehensive and objective assessment of them.

"Of course any eventual change to the clocks would affect everyone in the country so I do not believe it should be considered unless there is good evidence in favour of it and a broad public consensus, which would naturally include the devolved assemblies."