It’s no beer Keir! As Labour reveal latest attack on booze, how Starmer’s nanny state drive to ‘boost health’ threatens to decimate Britain’s hospitality industry

Welcome to Sir Keir Starmer’s Great Britain – where pints are smaller than ever, pubs are struggling to keep the lights on and parents are told to watch their children as they brush their teeth.

Yesterday, the government put Britain even more firmly on its path to perpetual tedium as it announced they were mulling overhauling the licensing laws. 

The Prime Minister’s public health minister Andrew Gwynne claimed this proposed policy -the details of which are currently unknown – would boost the nation’s health and tackle anti-social behaviour. 

He indicated that the measures being considered include tougher action against irresponsible landlords and – far more controversially – ‘tightening up on some of the hours of operation’. 

The proposed tweaks have been devastingly unpopular, including within Sir Keir’s own cabinet minister Pat McFadden vowing to table an ’emergency resoloution’ to ensure venue licensing times aren’t changed. 

One of Keir Starmer’s top health gurus has suggested looking at overhauling the licensing laws

Public health minister Andrew Gwynne said the government is looking at overhauling the licensing laws in a drive to boost the nation’s health and tackle anti-social behaviour

Sir Keir has been branded ‘No Beer Keir’ by outraged punters after news of the proposed policy broke

The government’s faltering party conference has already been tainted by doommongering, gaffes and protests

Naturally, the health guru’s machinations triggered an immediate backlash from the hospitality trade with Kate Nicholls, chief executive of UKHospitality, warning the ‘half-baked plans’ would be detrimental to the trade, with 50 pubs already closing each month.

Despite being in power for less than three months, Nanny Keir’s Labour government has already made waves with a series of fun sponge proposals for the hospitality industry which they claim are essential for the benefit of the nation’s health. 

Put that light out!  

The first sign of the Labour government’s Nanny drive came in August when the Prime Minister threw his full support behind controversial plans to ban smoking from outdoor places like pub gardens.

The seemingly unenforceable plans would make it illegal to smoke in pub gardens as well as outside football grounds and children’s parks.

Nightclub smoking areas, restaurant terraces and even shisha bars could all have their right to light up axed in shock new plans by Keir Starmer‘s Labour government.

Pavements by universities and hospitals would also be outlawed, but the governent would allow you to smoke in your home or in the park. 

Other locations are said to be grey areas and still under discussion – including beaches and enclosed, popular parks.

The report also mentions vape-free zones, although it is unclear whether the ban could also include e-cigarettes. 

Nightclub smoking areas, restaurant terraces and children’s parks could all be axed in shock new plans by Keir Starmer ‘s Labour government. Pictured: File photo

The shock move is expected to spark fury towards Starmer’s party – with criticism of ‘nanny state’ politics and memos from the Business Department already warning the hospitality sector could be hit. Pictured: File photo

Defending the unpopular policy, the Prime Minister argued that ‘over 80,000 people lose their lives every year because of smoking’ which is a ‘preventable death’. 

The precise science of whether it is more harmful to smoke in an outdoor space or inside your own home is presumably unknown. 

‘This is a preventable series of deaths’, continued the PM, ‘and we’ve got to take action to reduce the burden on the NHS and the taxpayer.’

The proposed policy was of course blasted by the hospitality industry and the general public. 

 A survey of MailOnline readers showed three-quarters (75 per cent) did not agree with Labour’s plan for a ban on smoking in outdoor areas.

This compared to a quarter (25 per cent) who did agree with a ban on smoking outside pubs, due to concerns about public health.

Emma McClarkin, CEO of the British Beer and Pub Association, also called on Labour to reconsider its ‘misguided’ plans.

She said: ‘It is deeply concerning and difficult to understand why the Government would bring forward proposals that will be yet another blow to the viability of our nation’s vital community assets.

‘We know from experience that this restriction would have a devastating impact on pubs who are already struggling with soaring energy prices and the cost of doing business.

‘For generations pubs have welcomed people, not turned them away, have helped combat loneliness, and provided a vital place where people meet and make friends. 

‘These benefits to the community and local economy must not be taken for granted and we urge the Government to reconsider this misguided restriction.’

Two thirds of Carling please barman!  

Following the smoking ban controversy, woke scientists from the University of Cambridge also stuck their oars in and argued that not only did Britons smoke too much – they probably drank too much as well. 

In the first trial of its kind, researchers convinced 12 pubs to ditch their pint glasses in favour of two-thirds servings for four weeks.

With the biggest serving size now a third smaller, pub-goers drank almost 10 per cent less beer and cider compared to when pints were on the menu.

However, should this recommendation become policy, the study found that bars could face falls in revenue of to 9.6 per cent. 

Scientists want to shrink the size of your pint in order to cut down Britain’s boozing habits after a study found that smaller serving sizes reduce alcohol consumption 

The precious pint has come under threat as scientists are now urging boozers to downsize their glasses amid a battle to reduce the country’s alcohol intake (stock image)

Although Britain’s beer consumption has fallen off in recent years, health experts are still worried that the UK’s drinking habits could be damaging our health.

As the researchers point out in their paper, published in PLOS Medicine, cutting down alcohol consumption reduces the risks of seven common cancers and diseases.

Lead researcher Professor Theresa Marteau, director of the Behaviour and Health Research Unit, told MailOnline: ‘Alcohol harms health, increasing the risk of over 200 different diseases and injuries including bowel, breast and liver cancers.

‘In England it is the fifth largest contributor to early death, disease and disability, and the leading risk factor for those aged 15 to 49.’

Upon hearing of the scientist’s schemes, which haven’t been officially endorsed by the government, the Great British public rose up in outrage to defend the humble pint. 

MailOnline travelled from one end of the country to the other – chatting to commuters and City workers in the capital and punters at a pub in Newcastle – to take the nation’s temperature on the controversial proposals.

Researchers found that by swapping out the 568ml imperial pint for a smaller 379ml two-third pint serving, pub-goers drank 10 per cent less beer than they otherwise would have. Although, slightly more wine was sold than before 

John Gibson, 69, said: ‘I will drink more to catch up with that they are making money whichever way they look at it’

One drinker, proudly clutching a pint of Fosters in the North East, gave a forthright assessment of the plans. 

John Gibson, 69, said: ‘I will drink more to catch up with that they are making money whichever way they look at it. 

‘Each person knows their limit. When I have had about six or seven of them I go home. 

‘It’s my life. The government didn’t bring me into the world my mother did. 

‘Somebody said such a thing as free speech, they’ll probably stop that next.’

Fellow pub-goer Dan Rogers, 21, also voiced scepticism, saying any changes would need to be reflected in price. 

He said: ‘People are just going to drink more. They are probably going to drink more. 

‘It will just kill our pub culture more if anything. It will make people want to drink at home and then go somewhere out instead of wanting to be in a pub.’

Sir Keir Starmer  warned that British children were now ‘fatter than the French’

Critics say Sir Keir Starmer’s plans to ban junk food adverts before the 9pm watershed will hurt business and consumer choice

We must act before British children get any more fatter than the French!

In September, Sir Keir made good on his party’s pre-election promise to ‘steamroll’ the food industry by announcing a blanket ban on junk food adverts before 9pm to crack down on childhood obesity. 

Announcing the policy, which will come into effect next year, the Prime Minister grimly warned that British children were now ‘fatter than the French’. 

He also said he wants to introduce supervised toothbrushing for young children and ban energy drinks for under-16s and was open to considering sugar taxes or social media restrictions.

‘I know some prevention measures will be controversial but I’m prepared to be bold, even in the face of loud opposition,’ Sir Keir said.

Indeed, there’s nothing bolder than supervising the dental health of the nation. 

Of course, nobody wants fat children, but critics have argued would do little to tackle Britain’s bulging waistlines, while hurting businesses and consumer choice. 

ITV hit back at Labour’s plan to implement a 9pm watershed for junk food advertising on television, saying there is no evidence it will reduce obesity.

The broadcaster said the ‘only certain outcome’ of an ad ban would be to make it harder for commercial public service broadcasters to invest in content, including dramas.

ITV told the Mail: ‘We have explained to successive governments that there is no evidence that a pre-9pm TV ad ban will reduce childhood obesity – 95 per cent of all TV viewing before 9pm is by adults.

‘Despite huge declines in children’s exposure to TV advertising over the past ten years, there has been no corresponding reduction in levels of childhood obesity, if anything the opposite. 

‘The only certain outcome of an ad ban is that it will take money away from the investment the commercial PSBs (public service broadcasters) make in content across the UK, especially drama which is increasingly expensive to produce.’

Previous attempts at making adverts healthier have seen Transport for London ban a promotion featuring strawberries and cream during Wimbledon. Benjamin Elks, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance branded the announcement as ‘even more nanny state over-reach’.

‘A clampdown on daytime advertising for junk food will do little to tackle obesity and simply hurt businesses and consumer choice. The Government should bin this pointless ban,’ he said.

Former Tory Cabinet minister Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg added: ‘Mary Poppins thought that a spoonful of sugar helped the medicine go down but Nanny Starmer wants to ban all fun and indulgence.’

The proposal, which comes just a month after it emerged that Labour is planning to ban smoking in beer gardens and outside restaurants, triggered an immediate backlash in the licensed industry (stock image)

Last night, Kate Nicholls, chief executive of UKHospitality, warned the ‘half-baked plans’ would be detrimental to the trade, with 50 pubs already closing each month (stock image)

Last orders at 9pm? 

During conference, Labour’s latest campaign against the nation’s social life began in earnest with top woke health boffins admonishing the public for staying out too late. 

Public health minister Andrew Gwynne said the government is looking at overhauling the licensing laws. 

This means in essence that pubs could be forced to cut their opening hours under ‘nanny state’ plans to tackle harmful drinking. 

Mr Gwynne’s move comes against the backdrop of growing concerns within the Department of Health and Social Care about the rising cost of treating preventable diseases such as cancer, obesity and type 2 diabetes.

Speaking at the Labour conference in Liverpool, Mr Gwynne said the government’s chief medical officer, Professor Sir Chris Whitty, has shown ministers slides that reveal the cost of treating preventable diseases currently accounts for 40 per cent of the NHS budget and would rise to 60 per cent if trends continue.

He said there ‘isn’t enough money to carry on with the rate of demand’, stressing: ‘Alcohol harm is one of the key areas: the availability of alcohol, the harms that over-drinking, domestic violence, the licensing laws.’

While licensing decisions are a matter for the Home Office, a clampdown in licensing hours could cut crime – as well as improving health, he said.

‘Actually there is a big win for the Home Office because a lot of domestic violence they have to deal with is as a direct consequence of alcohol,’ the minister said.

‘These are discussions that we have got to have – even if it’s just about tightening up on some of the hours of operation; particularly where there are concerns that people are drinking too much,’ he said.

Mr Gwynne said the government’s chief medical officer, Professor Sir Chris Whitty (pictured), has shown ministers slides that reveal the cost of treating preventable diseases currently accounts for 40 per cent of the NHS budget and would rise to 60 per cent if trends continue

Asked about Professor Whitty’s position on reining in licensing hours, Mr Gwynne replied: ‘He is very keen that there is a refresh of the licensing laws.’

Mr Gwynne pointed to recent government moves to ban junk food advertising on the internet and on TV before the watershed.

He added that the government will not hesitate to legislate against firms who produce ultra-processed foods if they fail to make their products healthier voluntarily.

But he stressed Labour are ‘not in the game of being the fun police or a super-nanny, wanting to bear down on all the fun things in life’, adding: ‘This is actually an economic argument and a moral argument that it is not sustainable and it is morally reprehensible that someone falls into ill health at the age of 52 with entirely preventable disease’.

Chris Snowdon, head of lifestyle economics at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: ‘The last Labour government’s decision to relax licensing laws was a great success but it seems the new Government wants to hammer pubs any way it can.

‘We already have 50 pubs a month closing and any move to ban outside smoking and restrict hours will put more at risk.

‘Ministers’ full-throated support for nanny-state measures is very concerning and should be resisted for the proaction of this country’s heritage.’