RR Phantom
Location : Wasted Space
Job/hobbies : Cayman Islands Actuary
 |  Subject: Does the OZschwitz nanny state know best?  Sun Jul 10, 2011 5:25 am | |
| THE PUBLICAN SCOTT LEACH
Those pushing the nanny state mentality firmly believe they know best. It's now seen as good politics to legislate to prevent people doing things to themselves, rather than giving them power over their own actions.
But is it the role of government to make decisions for people or should it instead educate people to make better decisions?
My industry - hospitality - which directly employs more than 75,000 people is increasingly frustrated with the dictatorial approach and the wowserism of those seeking to control our lives.
Take the story of an American tourist and her companions who visited our great city last year. They paid a visit to one of our hotels and sampled our vibrant nightlife.
Upon arrival, the woman was offended when she had to be scanned with a wand to detect weapons - due to a regulation. She went to the bar during a ''time out'' and was forced to wait 10 minutes before being served - because of another regulation. She then ordered six drinks for her group but was told she could only be served four - because of a regulation. She was further shocked to discover the drinks were served in plastic - another regulation. She couldn't even buy cigarettes without getting a token from the bar. Why? You guessed it - a regulation.
She couldn't believe there was so much control imposed on our entire adult population, and on unsuspecting visitors. Why do 99.99 per cent of people have to contend with restrictions because of the acts of 0.01 per cent of our population?
I am tired of the elitist moral minority who justify this because it creates statistical improvement. If I want to have a smoke, have a drink, eat fast food or play the pokies, why has it become the government's role to stop me? Isn't that like reducing the road toll by taking all the cars off the road? We want a government that will build and light our roads to make them safer, not try to govern every individual car that uses them.
It is disappointing to me that the country I love has become overburdened by regulation and having a good time now seems like a crime. Freedoms are incrementally being lost. Beware where this will lead in the years ahead.
Scott Leach is the president of the Australian Hotels Association (NSW).
THE CIVIL LIBERTARIAN CAMERON MURPHY
If you were to ask the nanny state the question it would shout an emphatic "yes''. That sums up the problem with a nanny state. It never knows when to stop. Once you let the nanny regulate your life, the nanny tends to regulate everything.
At some point we have to grow up. We have to allow adults to make decisions that sometimes may result in harm to them, and expect adults to take responsibility for their actions. Nannies are for children, not for adults - even adults who sometimes behave like children.
Everybody expects their governments to address safety concerns and social problems but we need to ensure that the level of government intervention is minimal and that individual freedom is maximised. Any intervention by the nanny state should be governed by the principle that it is a proportionate and reasonable response and that it actually provides a meaningful result.
The nanny state is at work in all aspects of our lives, whether it's censorship, consumption of alcohol or tobacco, driving, or even going to the beach. On a flight from Sydney to Melbourne recently I asked for some peanuts and was told that they stopped serving them several months ago in case someone had an allergic reaction. In this way, the nanny state deprives everybody of the enjoyment of a peanut with their glass of wine in order to protect an extremely small minority.
Australia is now littered with examples of the nanny state going too far. One only has to go to Bondi Beach, where everything from ball games to camping and kite flying is banned. The list of restricted activities numbers more than 80 and the warning sign as you enter the beach looks like the fine print from your average mobile phone contract. I am certain that this started with the intention of making the beach a safe and enjoyable place for beachgoers but somewhere in the zeal to protect people we now have a beach where anything remotely fun is banned.
Individuals usually know what is best for them. Setting rules for everyone, removing the choice of ordinary adults and families, even if the intention is good, is the wrong approach in the end.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/does-the-nanny-state-know-best-20110708-1h6o7.html |
|
