| Special interest group pleading |
|
| Written by Tim Worstall | |
| Thursday, 18 October 2007 | |
t behooves a man to have a hobby and mine, sad as it is, is to try and
spot special interest group pleading. You know, the anguished pleadings
that something should be banned ("for the children" of course) said ban
having the entirely unexpected result of driving up the profits and
incomes of those doing the pleading. Entirely unexpected .A powerful coalition of companies - whose members include the supermarket Waitrose, baby food manufacturer Organix, chocolate maker Green and Black's, and Britain's biggest organic brand, Yeo Valley - has accused the government's Food Standards Agency of failing to consult it over new guidance for parents on the side-effects of E-numbers, and of ducking the opportunity for tighter regulation.Something of a classic case there I think. The actual research on the additives (colourings and a preservative) showed that some children were affected. Just as some children are affected by, say, nut allergies. The correct public policy response therefore being what we do with nuts (no, not elect them) which is to add their presence to the contents label and assume that consumers are rational: they won't feed things to their children which they are allergic to. The organic producers have much higher production costs because they don't use these colourings or the preservative: thus, "tighter regulations" (most of those calling for them are in fact calling for a complete ban on their use) will reduce their cost premium over the alternatives. To the great benefit of their profits and incomes. Entirely unexpectedly, of course.
Bookmark
Comments (0)
 Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed