Within a matter of days we were told, firstly, that the 21 units a week (for men) we had been told were the safe limits to drinking had only been someone’s “best guess”. Now it seems that only nine large glasses a week could put us on the way to boozy oblivion.
Next came news that by 2050, some 60 per cent of men and 50 per cent of women will be clinically obese. Then, to cap it all, came the report of 400 scientists that “humanity’s very survival” is at risk from the rate at which we are using the world’s resources.
Throw in relatively mundane issues such as the faltering housing market and higher interest rates, plus gloomy weather and it seems likely that a lot of people will be feeling rather downbeat about life. This isn’t the state of mind that retailers want to see prevail in the run-up to Christmas.
It could, of course, have a perverse effect on shopping; Some consumers, believing things will get worse next year, may decide to have a last fling and spend more than last year.
The real worry is less about sales than the implications for the balance between Government regulation and voluntary action. Faced with such problems, the common reaction – articulated by an assortment of NGOs – is that only more intervention by Government can tackle them.
The underlying thrust of intervention will, of course, be restrictive. If consumers cannot resist the temptation to drink too much, then temptation must be reduced or removed. So, in Scotland, the government proposes to prohibit bulk discounts on alcohol and put limits on store selling space.
Similarly, if consumers are still eating too many unhealthy foods, it is argued that the only solution is to reduce choice by “editing out” less desirable products.
Who will decide what should go and what should stay? No doubt a quango composed of the usual experts, evangelical restricters and single-issue fanatics.
The favoured response to climate change is also more regulation. A survey by MORI a few months ago reported that 75 per cent of the population believes it’s the Government’s job to solve the problem.
Targets are much in vogue, although the means of delivering them rely primarily on voluntary action by industry. Meanwhile, retailers are getting on with cutting costs by using their assets and inputs more efficiently.
Governments can help by restoring a balance to the public debate and countering tabloid-driven hysteria. More education, less meddling. As the old saying goes: “Half of being smart is knowing what you’re dumb at.”
Kevin Hawkins, director-general, British Retail Consortium
No comments yet