Not in libertarians’ name
Listening to BBC Five Live just after Iain Dale’s appearance in defence of Twitter, and hearing Dr Alan Maryon-Davis, President of the UK Faculty of Public Health, defend his ridiculous article ‘Why we need more nannying‘:
Is the government ‘nannying’ us too much? Is it trying too hard to micro-manage our health? I say firmly - no. … On the contrary, there’s plenty of evidence that people want to see the government doing more to help us avoid big killers like heart disease, stroke and cancer.
Of course, if you ask people a suitable question - “Do you want to regulate smoking more heavily?” - people will say (firmly) yes! Why? Because most people don’t smoke. The same applies for almost any activity one can name. Tyranny of the majority is no defence. In totality, most people oppose the nanny state - hence it becoming a pejorative term. I thought that was obvious.
But the doctor went on in his radio address from the People’s Broadcaster:
Don’t get me wrong: I’m a libertarian. But we accept rules about seatbelts. We accept rules about driving with mobile phones … Perhaps we should think about banning [smoking with kids in the car]. Some people would suggest we should ban smoking in cars altogether. … I wouldn’t want us to be overly health-and-safety and the rest of it gone mad. I just think we should think about this, about the regulations and laws, that allow people to make the good choices, the healthy choices.
We already allow people to make the ‘good’ choices. It’s called ‘not banning lettuce’. People aren’t stupid enough to think that lettuce isn’t good for them. They just decide not to eat it because the pros do not outnumber the cons. Those pros and cons are inherent to the nature of lettuce, and nothing can change that. Maryon-Davis’s argument thus falls apart.
The best way to create a happy, healthy society, is to incentivise good health. That requires an end to the absurdity of ‘unlimited, unconditional healthcare, free at the point of use’. Just as guaranteeing bank deposits incentivises risky lending, guaranteeing good health incentivises risky lifestyle choices. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing, but, as a doctor, I thought Maryon-Davis would recognise the words of Hippocrates: “First do no harm”.
Until he puts that principle first, and advocates truly sorting out our healthcare crisis, I’ll thank Maryon-Davis for not bad-mouthing the movement by association.
