Are ‘Nanny State’ worries just a political delaying tactic?
I recall a number of conversations over the years where politicians didn't take forward progressive policies because 'the public will never go for it'. Sometimes they really believed it I think, but as they never asked, they never found out! (Mitochondrial donation being a prominent example where they did ask and found they were wrong).
Back in the real world, citizens increasingly believe that governments who don't 'prioritise wellbeing over profit' are failing in their fundamental duty to the electorate.
Below, citizens in dialogues as part of The National Conversation about Food last September firmly rejected the prevailing political narrative that ‘people don’t want a nanny state telling them what to eat’ and ‘all people want is cheap food’. There was support for seriously restrictive measures on food even from those on the right or those who were ideologically against 'big state politics'.
For interest, they wanted to see the following:
- A healthier, greener food environment, including restrictions on junk food advertising, higher standards for catering in spaces like schools and hospitals, and tighter controls on the availability and marketing of ultra-processed foods (UPFs)
- Support for farmers to farm more sustainably, going beyond existing policies with more investments and incentives to do the right things
Taxes and regulations to hold big food businesses to account – such as adopting the polluter pays principle for environmental harm – and to reduce production of unhealthy foods
- Practical help for citizens to eat more healthily and sustainably – for example, the redistribution of revenues from taxes/fines on food companies so those on low incomes can afford healthy and sustainable food, better information campaigns about the impacts of the food system, and better labelling
- Visible political leadership when it comes to food, and a plan of action that brings together the different parts of government, building on the National Food Strategy
Report here:
So, what do we really want from food?
Kier Starmer seems to be up for taking more steps to avoid being the 'neglectful state' (looking for a funkier term there!) and says he is 'up for a fight over nanny state accusations" in this BBC article below. He could be more the 'Teenage Babysitter On The Phone State' than the super-strict Nanny State, only the detail to come will tell us which it is to be!
I’m up for the fight over nanny state accusations