Nanny has something of a horror of seeing children, or indeed adults, enjoy themselves. Frivolity, in her world, is a waste of time and energy and should be stamped out.
Needless to say, the sound of Greensleeves and the sight of a brightly coloured van selling ice cream is regarded by Nanny as being just toooo frivolous. Therefore she has decided that Mr Whippy, and his chums, should be banned from selling their highly dangerous and evil ice cream near schools.
Mr Whippy and his chums have been playing Greensleeves and selling ice cream to generations of British kids, and their parents, for the past 60 years. Now Nanny's chums in the health lobby have decided that ice-cream vans are a danger to children's health.
An amendment to the Education and Inspection Bill will be put forward this week. In the amendment, local authorities will be given new powers to stop ice-cream vans from operating near school gates.
This miserable bastard move comes on top of regulations being imposed by local authorities that ban ice-cream vans from using pay-and-display parking spaces, and rules that set up "ice-cream-free" exclusion zones around busy shopping streets.
Nanny's chums in Newham council informed Mr Whippy and his mates last month that it would fine van owners up to £80 if they used pay-and-display bays. Greenwich council has banned the vans from its streets altogether.
Miserable, sad, pathetic, jobsworth, bastards!
West Dunbartonshire council has introduced an exclusion zone around schools for vans.
As one dietitian said, all this daft ban will do is push the children into buying less healthy food and sweets at their local store.
Catherine Collins, the chief dietitian at St George's Hospital, Tooting said:
"This is the kind of blanket ban that gives the health lobby a bad name.
A healthy diet can factor in a sugary treat such as an ice-cream.
It is the frequency of that treat that is an issue.
Most choices from an ice-cream van would provide fewer calories and fat compared to a free choice from a newsagent."
Nanny is having none of that. Chris Waterman, the executive director of the Confederation of Education and Children's Services Managers (eh?), said:
"There are millions going into healthy food in schools, yet kids are rushing to spend their money on food from mobile vans
(Editor's note: it's called the free market matey!)
The ice-cream van industry may be saying it is in meltdown but for the sake of our children's health and safety we should keep the icons at Bournemouth and Blackpool but stop them driving around schools."
As ever Nanny fails to make the distinction between a once in a while treat, and a daily overindulgence. If you are stupid enough to eat tons of ice cream every day then you will make yourself ill, but then that's your choice surely?
For the record a large single ice cream cone contains about 139 calories. A chocolate Flake adds about 100 calories.
A Mars Bar contains nearly 300 calories.
Will Nanny be banning those as well?
The next step that Nanny will be taking is to regulate and monitor what children eat outside the school gates, ie she will be insisting on regulating what they (and their parents) eat at home.
Are you happy with letting her do that?