Nanny state is a term ofBritish origin that conveys a view that a government or its policies are overprotective or interfering unduly withpersonal choice.[1][2] The term likens such a government to the role that ananny has inchild rearing. An early use of the term comes fromConservativeBritish Member of ParliamentIain Macleod who referred to "what I like to call the nanny state" in the 3 December 1965 edition ofThe Spectator.[3][4]
The term was popularised by journalistsBernard Levin[5] andAuberon Waugh[6] and later by Prime MinisterMargaret Thatcher.
The term has been used to describe the policies of both federal and state governments. Canadian journalist and magazine publisherTyler Brûlé argued that Australian cities were becoming over-sanitised and the country was on the verge of becoming the world's dumbest nation. This was blamed on the removal of personal responsibility and the increase in the number and scope of health and safety laws.[7]Liberal Democrats senatorDavid Leyonhjelm also used the term when launching anAustralian Senate enquiry into laws and regulations that restrict personal choice "for the individual's own good".[8] The term has also been used to criticise mandatory bicycle helmet laws, gun control laws, prohibitions on alcohol in public places, plain packaging for cigarettes and pub/club lockout laws.[9]
The term was used by theNew Zealand National Party to describe the policies of their political opponents, theFifth Labour Government, who were in power from 1999 until 2008.[10] In turn, the child policies of the National Party'sPaula Bennett were later given the 'nanny state' label by a Māori Community Law Service manager in 2012.[10] In 2017, theQueenstown-Lakes District Council's proposed restrictions on residents renting their rooms on the short term rental site,Airbnb, prompted criticism by the company, which described the move as "nanny-state".[11]
Thecity state ofSingapore has a reputation as a nanny state, owing to the considerable number of governmentregulations and restrictions on its citizens' lives.[12] FormerPrime MinisterLee Kuan Yew, the architect of the modern Singapore, observed: "If Singapore is a nanny state, then I am proud to have fostered one".[13] In an interview in theStraits Times in 1987, Lee said:
I am often accused of interfering in the private lives of citizens. Yes, if I did not, had I not done that, we wouldn’t be here today. And I say without the slightest remorse, that we wouldn’t be here, we would not have made economic progress, if we had not intervened on very personal matters–who your neighbour is, how you live, the noise you make, how you spit, or what language you use. We decide what is right. Never mind what the people think.[14]
In 1980,Lord Balfour of Inchrye strongly opposed the introduction ofseatbelt legislation, saying it was "yet another state narrowing of individual freedom and individual responsibility". He worried that future intrusions of the "nanny state" would include restrictions on cigarettes, alcohol, and mandatory life jackets.[15]
In 2004,King's Fund, athink tank, conducted a survey of more than 1,000 people and found that most favoured policies that combatted behaviour such as eating a poor diet and public smoking – this was reported by theBBC as the public favouring a nanny state.[16][17]
The BritishLabour Party politicianMargaret Hodge has defended policies she acknowledged had been labelled as "nanny state", saying at a speech to theInstitute for Public Policy Research on November 26, 2004, that "some may call it the nanny state but I call it a force for good".[18]
The "Soft Drinks Industry Levy", the UK'ssugary drink tax proposed in 2016 and effective from 2018, was described by Member of ParliamentWill Quince as "patronizing, regressive and the nanny state at its worst".[19]
By the 2000s, the term entered use in the United States by some political commentators. The term was used in an at-large sense against the legislative tendencies of liberal political ideology such as in the banishment of smoking in public places or the enactment of mandatory bicycle helmet laws.[20][21]
In 2012, a proposal byNew York City MayorMichael Bloomberg to restrict the sale ofsoft drinks in venues, restaurants, and sidewalk carts to 16 ounces led to derision of the mayor as "Nanny Bloomberg."[22][23]
David Harsanyi has used the term to describefood labeling regulations, thelegal drinking age, andsocially conservative government policies.[24]
Conversely,Dean Baker of theCenter for Economic and Policy Research think tank used the term in 2006 to describeconservative policies that protect the income of the rich.[25]
In September 2021, theWashington Post editorial board decried "dictatorships" that "impose decisions about what people can see, hear and — to the extent the regimes can manage it — think." Xi Jinping, as General Secretary of the Chinese Communist Party and President of the People's Republic of China, the board wrote, is "pushing the nanny state into people’s personal lives" with regulations on online gaming among the country's teenagers, as well as other matters. "Not many [parents]," the board argued, "want to cede parenting decisions to an authoritarian party-state."[26]
The measures have led to occasional derision of the mayor as Nanny Bloomberg, by those who view the restrictions as infringements on personal freedom.
