Cameron turns nanny state into overbearing Mother State

“I think this whole debate about nanny state is nonsense.

“Parents want help. It is in our interest as a society to help people bring up their children.

“We’re taught to drive a car. We’re taught all sorts of things at school. I think it makes perfect sense to help people with parenting.”

For once, David Cameron is right.  This is not the nanny state at work.  No, this is the modern, intrusive, hectoring and all powerful Mother State in action, desperate to direct the way parents bring up their children – irrespective of whether they need help at all.

The major concern here is that parents who reject the intrusion of the state into the raising of their children could end up listed as presenting a risk to their youngsters for not welcoming agencies in with open arms.

Whenever the organs of the state are held at bay by parents, its agents develop a suspicion of the parents’ motives.  When one considers events that have taken place behind the closed doors of  family courts and the case review meetings of social services departments – and the way in which the state can simply decide to remove children from families on the basis of guesswork or prejeudice – it can only be cause for concern that the tentacles are being given extended reach.

Children are the responsibility of their families.  The state has no business routinely muscling in on the upbringing of those children.  Where families are dysfunctional and their children are genuinely neglected or at risk, then there are already measures in place to provide support to them – although time and again we see stories of abuse and neglect of youngsters who are ‘in care’ yet are allowed to fall into a nightmare of drug addiction, sexual exploitation and criminality.

The parents who are unable to cope are nearly always known to the various departments and agencies due to their existing problems.  Surely those people can be offered guidance in how to feed, bathe and care for their offspring as part of their existing contact with the agencies, without a nationwide programme being introduced at huge cost that effectively positions the government as surrogate parents.

Far from working towards a smaller state and affording people greater privacy and personal freedom, this latest government wheeze flies in the face of all three pledges.  It is the real face of the control freak autocrat who occupies Number 10.

6 Responses to “Cameron turns nanny state into overbearing Mother State”


  1. 1 LJHills 18/05/2012 at 2:07 pm

    Most importantly, if we didn’t subsidise those least likely to raise their progeny to become responsible adults, there wouldn’t be so many feral children to occupy the social service classes.

  2. 2 John Coles 18/05/2012 at 3:46 pm

    “”I think this whole debate about nanny state is nonsense.””
    Note the tone – Head Prefect dealing with naughty 4th Formers. Cameron is so inadequate that he follows the latest brief put in his IN tray with no self-questioning about whether or not he (or his Government) should be involved. Now he’s off to Washington to show concern for the failing Euro, never once considering that it is in our national interest that the Euro should fail. After that, back home for one of his “Kitchen Dinners” (what the hell is that?) and then he can settle down to an hour or two of Fruit Ninja on his iPad. What a specimen.

  3. 3 Dave H 18/05/2012 at 9:36 pm

    I have no objection to the state offering services, provided that no judgement is made on those who choose to use the services, nor on those who choose to refuse.

    As a side comment, I’d say that part of the problem is that we’ve had a whole generation grow up without learning parenting skills from their own parents because the state kept putting them in daycare or after-school clubs so they hardly got to see their parents to learn. If the state really wants to help people with parenting skills, I hope they teach self-reliance and encourage personal responsibility. In other news, low-flying bacon has been reported in parts of the country.

  4. 4 right_writes 19/05/2012 at 9:51 am

    I reckon that the phrase “nanny state” is a name that the journos and the politicos rather like, it perhaps engenders a feeling that one’s government is in some way “caring”.

    When the reality is that it is another way of saying “controlling”….

    Seeing as though we are using these “familial” terms, perhaps we “sheeple” should turn into rebellious teenagers.

  5. 5 Alan Douglas 19/05/2012 at 10:18 am

    Sadly the term “Big Brother” has been traduced by reality TV, otherwise that would have been the correct term to use.

    Perhaps we could invent a new one ?

    Big Bully State ?

    It is indeed terrifying that declining to be “assisted” by these “agencies” could/would lead to suspicion and more severe methods being employed, such a Booker details almost weekly in his DT column, with the courts rather than being arbiters of truth and justice acting as the hammer used on the victims.

    Ronald Regan had it right :

    “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’

    Cameron really SHOULD know better. But then, it seems he is NOT a conservative.

    Alan Douglas

  6. 6 Moggsy 22/05/2012 at 7:58 am

    Sure I was taught how to drive a car. But not at school.

    Maybe they did at PM Cameron’s school, but I do not think think government paid his school fees.


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive