David Willetts, a Conservative politician, is setting up a study group to look at the problems facing children in the UK. One of the subjects his group is looking at is to “look at how children can be better protected from commercialisation”.

Part of the impetus for this study is a deeply flawed UNICEF report that claimed, by use of dubious and priggish criteria, that British and American children have the lowest “well-being” among the major industrialised countries. But as Nick Gillespie wrote in a Reason magazine article on US children back in 1997: “By every measure, children are doing better than ever. Why all the anxiety?” That could apply equally well to the UK.

Far from needing to protect children from commercialisation, it’s better for children to get to understand how commerce works. Yes, it can be annoying when children demand sweets or to ask for a toy that’s been advertised between programmes on children’s television, but it’s part of growing up to be told “no” by parents. There are important lessons in seeing commercial culture at work - seeing dad haggle with a salesman; learning that mum can’t afford to buy x if she buys y.

Willetts’ party leader David Cameron got elected pledging to “campaign for capitalism. To promote profit. To fight for free trade. To remind, indeed to educate, our citizens about the facts of economic life. The message is simple - you cannot win the battle against red tape unless you win the intellectual and cultural battle for open markets.” Yet the thinking behind Willetts’ study group - in stark contrast to Cameron’s pledge - is a superb way of hurting the free market in the long-term war of ideas. Can this please be a group that never gets round to reporting?