Kiwiblog

The ultimate nanny state initiative – the Public Health Bill, is not going to be rammed through before the election.

Thank God. This law would have given massive powers to the Government by treating non-communicable conditions such as obesity the same as SARS or Ebola. Advertisers, shop keepers, even the media could be regulated by Government decree in the interests of “public health”.

If Labour is re-elected they will push this law through unchanged. National has pledged to get rid of the powers around non-communicable diseases so the Government can’t set a maximum size for chocolate bars, dictate how big in store signs can be, instrict shop keepers what food to display and what food to hide etc etc.

A column from John Roughan I can only agree with:

One of the blessings of a change of government is that it changes the prevailing ethic. Should National win this year we might not see another headline like this week’s: “Rugby cards promo breaks anti-fat rules”. …

Freedom in fact was the default principle after 1984; if it was to be compromised the reason had to be watertight.

No regulator would have dared argue, as the Health Ministry has, that a child might buy 50 packets of chips and consume more than a kilogram of fat to get a complete collection of All Black cards.

Even five years ago somebody would have pointed out that children don’t collect things alone. They trade. Those who don’t want a collectable item give it to one who does, usually for something in return. …

The darkest hour in a phase of unbalanced ethics comes just before the dawn. Right now the promoters of health above all else seem blithely unaware that a change of government will probably soon restore some weight for individual rights and personal responsibility.

When John Key declared the other day that National would tackle obesity mainly with sport and recreation programmes to get children more active, he was quickly rubbished on National Radio by a woman who wants to ban unhealthy advertisements.

What’s the point, she said, of her putting out healthy eating messages when children saw contradictory enticements on television.

Food nazis is not a term I want to use but there is something very chilling in the attitude that the expression of conflicting interests is not permissible.

Helen Clark, who tackled tobacco advertising when Health Minister in the late 1980s, has resisted most of the excesses suggested during her premiership but at times it has seemed a close call.

Deliberately or not, she brought a wowser culture to power which prefers to address problems like obesity and binge drinking by restrictions on liberties that her outlook doesn’t value as high as health and safety.

A change of government will not put an end to public health campaigns and nor should it. We are better off for being aware of the fat in fast food, for ridicule of uncivilised drinking and the expulsion of smokers from confined places.

But it is time to for some balance. Credit us with the intelligence to make choices, especially children, before we create a community of fools.

It is about balance, and most of all not punishing all New Zealanders for the weaknesses of a few.

The kids at Wellington High School are showing some good sense in responding to their first brush with Nanny State and the tuck shop. Effects have been:

• The school’s cafe operator has thrown in the towel, saying she could not turn a profit under the Education Ministry’s new healthy eating regime
• a group fundraising for a Japanese trip has seized on the opportunity by setting up a daily sausage sizzle and baking stall
• The Dominion Post watched yesterday as a stream of pupils headed to the nearby Wallace St shop for mince pies, chippies and fizzy drinks.

One also has to praise the principal’s attitude:

Principal Prue Kelly was relaxed about the week-long sausage sizzle, saying she hoped pupils would support the fundraising effort. Asked if the new culinary option met the ministry’s healthy eating guidelines, she said: “Who knows? It’s how we’re coping with the problem today.

“I think they’re using brown bread instead of white.

“They look like pretty good sausages to me. In fact I might get one.”

Good on her.

The Government is as usual missing the point. The problem isn’t kids having a sausage occasionally, but if they are having that for lunch everyday. But rather than concentrate on having a varied diet, instead they are purging tuck shops of any food they do not approve of. It will get worse if the Public Health Bill is passed into law.

The ultimate nanny state bill is being pushed through Parliament, having survived select committee. And the Greens say:

The Green Party said the bill would mean the health minister could issue regulations to reduce the risk associated with non-communicable disease.

“Given that poor diet is the leading cause of preventable illness and disease, it is vital that we take steps to create an environment which encourages healthy eating in New Zealand.”

The party said it was strange that there were virtually unlimited powers to prevent communicable diseases but little to prevent or respond to non-communicable diseases.

The Greens disagreed with part of the bill that allowed people who were not vaccinated to be considered a public health risk.

So the Greens (and Labour) think we need the same state powers for a communicable disease (eg bubonic plague) as we do for primarily self imposed conditions such as obesity.

If this law is passed, and not changed, then I predict it will become more unpopular than the EFA and the anti-smacking law combined. Give the state a few years of telling people what food they are allowed to sell or buy on what days, and you might be able to get the parties responsible for it below 20%.

TVNZ and Canwest have slammed the awful Public Health Bill which would give health bureaucrats the power to regulate, well anything at all, if they think it is for the public good.

In the past decisions to, for example, restrict alcohol advertising on television would be decided by a new law in Parliament, with six months of consideration, public select committee hearings and ultimately votes by all 120 MPs.

This new law would allow the Director-General of Health to ban chocolate bar advertising from all media, if he or she decided it was desirable for “public health”. There would be no vote in Parliament.

But it gets even worse than that. As TVNZ points out, the health bureaucrats could even force TV programmes off the air. They could promulgate a code stating it is illegal to have a TV show which shows characters with unhealthy lifestyles.  So there goes Homer on The Simpsons, and Denny Crane on Boston Legal.

Now is this not far fetched and unlikely. Well, yes – but why on Earth would we even consider giving such draconian powers to the Government. Should one just blindly rely on the Government to choose to be self restrained and not use all the powers Parliament votes it?

Helen Clark has said she does not know of any reduction of freedoms that have occurred on her watch. Such blindness must be how this bill made it through Cabinet.

The ultimate Nanny State bill continues with select committee hearings:

Yesterday, Fight The Obesity Trust spokeswoman Dr Robyn Toomath told the parliamentary committee considering the bill that was exactly what people wanted.

“People are desperate for Nanny State’s help. Parents are desperate for help to get children to eat healthily,” she said.

It is not help but coercion they will be getting.

The food industry soon struck back, as the Confectionery Manufacturers Association painted a picture of the Director-General of Health being granted the power to ban Pineapple Lumps, Perky Nana bars and Easter eggs.

This is not an exaggeration. The Public Health Bill gives immense powers to the Director-General of Health – more powers than Cabinet currently has.

I’ve yet to blog much on this, but the Public Health Bill before Parliament is unimaginably bad. It starts with an incredibly flawed premise – that conditions such as obesity should be treated the same as communicable diseases and health bureaucrats should have the same powers.  Now communicable disease such as SARS can spread throughout a population through normal every day contact, and kill hundreds and thousands in its wake. You need pretty draconian powers in reserve for such an eventuality.

But you do not, I repeat do not need those same powers because kids are exercising less, and obesity and diabetes are increasing.

The Commonwealth Press Union has opposed the Bill:

The Commonwealth Press Union’s media freedom committee (MFC) told Parliament’s health select committee it was alarmed about the broad powers the Director-General of Health would have under the Public Health Bill. …

“Editors fear that this bill as drafted will give the Director-General of Health the power to impose a code of practice on any matter deemed to be of interest to public healthcare policy makers.

“It could include the reporting of suicide, the issue of healthy foods, fatty foods, different lifestyles, alcohol and so on.”

He said if the director-general could not get agreement from all sectors of the media, he or she could ensure the code was enacted by legislation after the prescribed three-year review of how the code was working.

This is all true. The Director-General of Health will become the most powerful person in NZ.  He or she can just impose codes on any industry or sector. Big issues of the past such as advertising of alcohol have been decided by Parliament with (normally) consicence votes after six or more months of consideration of an issues. Under this Bill, the DG of Health can now simply impose a new law as a regulation without even a debate in Parliament.

And it gets truly scary for retailers. They could have health bureaucrats marching into their stores and instructing shop owners where to place any product they disapprove of.  They could even ban some foods from certain shops, because for example they are within say 500 metres of a school. Easter Eggs could have size restrictions placed on them or be banned totally.
Reducing obesity rates in New Zealand is a worthy goal. But if one was truly serious about it, then one would just extend school for an hour a day, and have one hour a day of PE and exercise – that would do far far more good than having the state take over the running of dairies and supermarkets. And for adults, you could allow doctors to prescribe free gym memberships for  poor overweight people. Our authorities seem obsessed with blaming everything on food choices, and nothing on exercise choices. I’m not saying the above suggestions are what should happen, but the powers in the Public Health Bill must be pared back or preferably removed.