pez: (Karupin - Unimpressed)
Pez ([personal profile] pez) wrote2010-07-01 08:17 am
Entry tags:

I never expected them to be anything but detached from reality, but still...

Scrapping EEDA. Attacking public campaigns on better foods and the school food campaign because they create a "nanny state". The new government is very keen on attacking the stuff the old one did, which isn't unusual. But they're picking on the wrong stuff.

[identity profile] giving-ground.livejournal.com 2010-07-01 08:43 am (UTC)(link)
Ugh. "Nanny state". Ugh.

[identity profile] yuki-scorpio.livejournal.com 2010-07-01 09:24 am (UTC)(link)
For some issues, I reckon things have gone so wrong that measures the tories deem "nanny" are necessary. Take school food - guidelines and regs should have been in place to start with, rather than letting go and watching it slip until it's a matter of who's the lowest bidder. Improving standards to the way it should be is not nannying.

It's like, this parent is hurting their child. Intervening is not nannying, it's protecting.

But of course, getting your health ruined by bad food is not nearly as bad. As long as you can't see any blood or bruises, you can turn a blind eye on it. Just like how mental care is much poorer than care for people with physical disabilities. It's disgusting.

[identity profile] giving-ground.livejournal.com 2010-07-01 10:00 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah. I really don't understand how providing decent food is meant to be bringing down civilisation, but hey...

And I really hate that whole term, nanny state - I mean. A state is MEANT to be able to look after people in situations which they actually can't deal with by themselves. Right? I thought that was some kind of part of the point these days. But apparently this is a terrible idea. I guess people should just pull their socks up! And stop whining! -_-
ext_38043: (Sanada says you suck - teh_shinies)

[identity profile] elyndys.livejournal.com 2010-07-01 05:38 pm (UTC)(link)
A state is MEANT to be able to look after people in situations which they actually can't deal with by themselves

Exactlyyyyyy! I agree with both of you - if anyone objects to their children not being allowed to eat unhealthy food in school, why do they even think think they're fit to take care of children? -_- That's not nannying, it should be the norm!

[identity profile] yuki-scorpio.livejournal.com 2010-07-02 08:58 am (UTC)(link)
Sometimes I wonder if it's because those parents are worried that their children will like the healthy food, and then come home and complain about the food their parents give them. Afterall, healthy food is supposed to be more expensive and complicated to cook! Why cook when you can just whack a pizza full of fake cheese in the oven?

[identity profile] semishade (from livejournal.com) 2010-07-01 10:55 pm (UTC)(link)
They're working through the "quick wins" list of things that have riled Daily Mail readers.

I will be spending much of next year telling contractors that their jobs have gone, whilst hoping mine isn't.

[identity profile] yuki-scorpio.livejournal.com 2010-07-02 08:59 am (UTC)(link)
Basically, for the people who don't want to be told they fail as parents.

=/