'Starmer’s boldest public health drive would be facing harmful nanny state digs' (original) (raw)

The Mirror's Kevin Maguire says interventionist government is a friend not a foe and say it's far superior to a feckless, uncari8ng state

An interventionist government is a friend not a foe

Facing down harmful, stupid and sanctimonious nanny state jibes would be Keir Starmer’s boldest public health drive.

Up went the predictable cries from Right-whinge reactionaries about interference when the Prime Minister backed junk food bans to rescue the nation’s young from obesity and early graves.

Nanny state digs are thankfully losing their sting. Voters want a Mary Poppins administration to help them and their family.

The rich hire their own – Jacob Rees-Mogg famously retaining his childhood nanny in adulthood. An interventionist government is a friend not a foe.

Draw a Venn diagram and there is a fatal overlap between those now denouncing health initiatives – like smoking and vaping bans, as well as restrictions on fast food adverts, sugar laced and high caffeine energy drinks – as nanny state and the mob who ridiculed health and safety.

Demanding a bonfire of regulations is deadly politics, as is made clear in Sir Martin Moore-Bick’s damning report into 72 avoidable deaths in the Grenfell Tower inferno.

Prevention is key to creating an NHS fit for the next 76 years after eminent surgeon Ara Darzi’s disturbing report detailed where a cherished key service, founded in 1948 by a landmark Labour government, now lets us down.

Food Foundation research suggests bad diets inflict record amounts of disability among people who are overweight or obese.

The charity estimates 6,000 lives a year could be saved and 10% of disability cases avoided if we eat 30% more fruit and veg, 50% more fibre and 25% less fatty, salty and sugary food plus 30% less meat.

If Starmer wants to be a nanny and cajole us into eating more greens, that’s fine by me. A nanny state is far superior to a feckless, uncaring state.