Last week in these pages The Grocer’s Ian Quinn – the nearest the industry has to its own Woodward and Bernstein – posed what I might call the John McEnroe question. He examined The Guardian story about dropping plans for in-store restrictions, multibuy promotions and even nixing the soft drinks levy. Having done so, and in common with industry executives all over the nation I am sure, he exclaimed: “You cannot be serious!”
This week I’m here to tell you that I think they can.
It’s no coincidence the leak came in a week when the government really wasn’t flying kites and that it came in The Guardian. Someone in the Treasury or DHSC, no doubt already outraged by the poop-deck dismissal of much-admired (by civil servants) permanent secretary Tom Scholar, saw the possible HFSS rollback as a bridge too far and sought to scupper it.
I rather doubt they will succeed. Apart from the questionable courtesy of leaking such a story during the period of national mourning, my guess is that the only real result will be to confirm the PM, the DPM and the Chancellor in their firmly held view that the Treasury is an Augean stable in urgent need of cleaning.
We will know pretty quickly whether this analysis is correct. The week to come will see a pell-mell series of announcements. They are collectively designed to set the tone for the government and its policy priorities. They will leave no doubt that Liz Truss and her ministers are going to, as she promised in the moment of her election, ‘govern as Conservatives’.
In that context, the wider regulatory review makes perfect sense, provided it can identify enough instantly recognisable targets to splat to loud applause from the political right. As so often in politics, the policy has to signal to the government’s base as righting perceived wrongs.
It scores very highly on the Truss government’s clapometer. It rolls back the nanny state – as suggested by Chris Snowden at the Institute of Economic Affairs (double points). At face value, it frees up industry from onerous bureaucracy (lots of points). Most importantly, intuitively it should cut input costs and removes a tax, thereby cutting prices (hits the jackpot).
So Truss, Thérèse Coffey and Kwasi Kwarteng are quite likely to be deadly serious about the plan. The symbolism is impressive. The industry needs to be very, very careful about the reception it gives the decision. Many will, of course, be very queasy about welcoming the move. Others – particularly retailers – will draw attention to the costs already incurred. Some, perhaps including those businesses that contemplated or actually undertook legal challenges to the original legislation, will feel vindicated.
In a literal sense this is going to be a divisive period. Of course, every business will react in line with its commercial agenda, but in making those decisions it’s worth keeping in mind that the choices made in the next few weeks will define the relationship with the government for the life of the administration.
No comments yet