Quite honestly ONLY the BBC would give prime time space to a loon who suggests that we need MORE Nanny State intervention! In this instance, Dr Alan Maryon-Davis suggests a ban on smoking in cars carrying children and a ban on massive price-cuts on alcohol would not be nannying but just responsible government. How about we are given the CHOICE as to what we buy and what we do? How about we are given a CHOICE as to whether we pay so much as one penny for for the BBC?

Bookmark the permalink.

25 Responses to MORE NANNY

  1. martin says:

    Better still how about McFatty One Eye giving us the choice of voting for him or not?


  2. mark adams says:

    Well, I’m pretty conservative, but I’m all for a ban on smoking around children – anywhere.


  3. David Vance says:


    ..which is fine but the BBC only allowed one perspective on this.


  4. Miv Tucker says:

    Maryon-Davis is part of the mildly amusing cabaret music group Instant Sunshine (which used to feature the much-missed Miles Kington).

    Maybe he ought to stick to showbiz.


  5. Peter Briffa says:

    What was so unnerving about this Maryon-Davis buffoon was that his opening line – the very first thing he said – was that he was “instinctively a libertarian”.

    I suppose he’s just trying to hoodwink the rest of us into thinking he’s a normal person. It doesn’t work, of course. It just makes you think he’s not only a nutter, but a deluded one too.

    What’s wrong with saying you’re “instinctively a totalitarian”? It could almost make you think he’s a tiny bit ashamed of himself.


  6. frankos says:

    the most chilling thing he said was “the state is saving us from ourselves” What strange branch of Libertarianism is that?
    Why can’t I stab him?


  7. kanbur1 says:

    The health fascists won’t be happy until there is (in the the words of P J O’Rourke), “government regulation of bed-time”.


  8. frankos says:

    I wonder if the BBC has ever considered that the concept of the overbearing Nanny state causes people heart problems and as such should be abolished.
    I think the Nanny state should bring abouts it’s own demise as a public service.


  9. GCooper says:

    Aunty, Nanny – what’s the difference?

    They both adopt the same tone of voice and both know ‘what’s best for us’


  10. Ben says:

    This has been picked up in an admirable piece by Douglas Carswell. I particularly like his comment:

    “But when did you last hear Today asking the Adam Smith Institute why we need less government?”



  11. Jim Miller says:

    On this I must respectfully disagree. There are many American news organizations that would say exactly the same thing. In prime time.

    Alas, it isn’t only the BBC.


  12. Anonymous says:

    “but I’m all for a ban on smoking around children – anywhere.”

    Stupid, and completely unenforceable, just like bans on drinking, fast food, cars and other “health risks” would be

    The sooner we realise that this whole “SAVE THE CHILDREN OMG” spiel is being used to remove our civil liberties, the better!


  13. David Vance says:


    Fair point but the BBC make us pay for the honour of this sort of nonsense!


  14. BBC lies says:

    No doubt one of heir Brown’s illiterate brown shirts with seven ‘O’ and four A’ levels would arrest anyone smoking near Adrian Chiles.


  15. Grant says:

    Next it will be passive drinking.


  16. Garden Trash says:

    “but I’m all for a ban on smoking around children – anywhere.”

    It’s the bloody children who are doing the smoking and the drinking,plus any other noxious substance they can inhale and ingest.


  17. Little Black Sambo says:

    “I’m all for a ban on smoking around children – anywhere.”
    Then you must have missed the research that showed that children brought up in households where people smoked were healthier that those that weren’t. But that wouldn’t stop your fascist tendencies, Mark, would it?


  18. GBS says:

    As long as the state provides your health, education and transport services, then they will be wanting to dictate how you live your life. It’s as simple as that.

    The founding fathers of the US are turning in their graves at what has become of their republic; it’s why they rightly rejected democracy – the tyranny of a ruling class and the influence of their quangos.

    It’s only going to get worse. Alas, UK people are not very good at revolutions; we are a rather accepting lot aren’t we?!


  19. AndrewSouthLondon says:

    Next it will be passive drinking.

    Now there’s a thought. People having to hang around the door outside pubs and clubs to drink their pint.

    The Public Health doctors who worry a lot about inequality and don’t see patients – but get the same salary as those who do see patients – are particularly prone to nannyism. Perhaps its only natural for real doctors that if you spend your week telling three smokers a day that they have lung cancer and less than three months to live, then you feel ambivalent about the freedom to chose to smoke.

    But the spin doctors and “public health” doctors would have nothing to do all day if they weren’t nannying. Its what they do and Labour loves them for it, churning out endless work to the “it’s not fair” script.


  20. Jon says:

    “One of the most frequently heard pieces of propaganda is that passive smoking causes childhood asthma. Children of the fifties did more passive smoking in one visit to the cinema than modern children do in their whole lives. Childhood asthma was then virtually unknown. It has increased steadily in subsequent decades, while environmental tobacco smoke has declined. It is now a major health problem. These facts are incontrovertible. Yet to state them is to arouse wrath. The sad side-effect of the dogma is that it diverts impetus from the search for the real cause: not a unique result of zealotry.”


  21. Jim T. says:

    Good point, Jon. When I were but a lad, everyone smoked, not something I took up, but all the family and visitors did. When I first started work they all did, and as you said, cinemas were full of the stuff. Never affected me or anyone I know. Having said that as I got older I hated it and always avoided places where smoking was permitted and was relieved when it was banned in restaurants.


  22. Jon says:

    Jim T. | 04.02.09 – 8:42 pm |

    When I was a lad pubs had smoking and non-smoking bars – you could smoke on the top floor of a bus but not on the lower deck. Smoking at an open bus stop with a gale force wind blowing did not mean a fine.


  23. Atlas shrugged says:


    Just when you start to think they can possibly take the utter piss anymore. They then do so.

    This country has not turning into an authoritarian corporate socialist fascist paradise, it already is.

    If the plan was to make otherwise UK loving people, hate the country of their birth with a passion. They have already won in spades, do they really need to rub in ever more extra salt?


  24. Philip says:

    I agree with the anonmous poster – the diminution of our civil liberties by this authoritarian administration is being achieved by waving the spectres of dead, abused and unhealthy children at us.

    If you don’t like it you must be a Drunk/Junkie Paedo/Child killer/Immoral/Unspeakable – tick which applies


  25. As I Please says:

    ‘They have already won in spades, do they really need to rub in ever more extra salt?’

    It seems our nanny government can’t even provide enough of that at the moment!