MEP Jörgen Warborn, rapporteur for the Omnibus I, likes the gym, and potentially likes us to know he likes the gym – that is one option. The other option, as a friend puts it: he must have lost a bet.
In a somewhat bizarre video posted on LinkedIn, he's seen lifting weights and running on a treadmill while promoting his campaign to "cut red tape" for businesses, comparing it to weight loss through calorie burning. His motto? The "one in, two out" principle.
Now, someone should probably warn Mr. Warborn (55 years old, according to Wikipedia) that burning two calories for every one consumed is not a healthy strategy. In fact, it's dangerous. Such an extreme calorie deficit would almost certainly push you below the baseline energy your body needs just to function — leading to fatigue, muscle loss, nutrient deficiencies, and hormonal imbalance. Charming, isn't it?
And what's the business-world equivalent of that kind of crash diet?
Weight loss, like cutting regulation, can be a good thing. But it needs to be done safely and sustainably (excuse the pun). You don't drop kilos overnight, and you don't fix bureaucracy with a catchy slogan. A sensible calorie deficit depends on many factors: age, height, weight, activity level, and exercise intensity.
For example – and purely hypothetically - a 55-year-old man (say, one weighing 90.1 kg, just as we learned from that LinkedIn video) who works out regularly would still need to consume at least 2,000 calories per day to lose weight healthily.
Mr Warborn, I now challenge you to burn 4,000 calories a day!
Oh but wait, if you exercise so intensely that you end up burning 4,000 calories in a day, you will have to eat more than 2,000 calories to give your body the energy it needs just to stay functional. Quite the conundrum.
Where is the red tape in all of this? Well, like calories, it serves a purpose! We might hate them at times and love them at others (a Big Mac please). Rules, because ultimately that is what we are talking about when we talk about red tape, are here for a reason.
Last time I checked, Mr. Warborn wasn't a member of an anarchist party, so I assume he appreciates a good rule. The key word here is 'good': perhaps it's the quality, not the quantity, of rules that creates the real burden. A good and fair rule is often complex to achieve.
So maybe what we need isn't more populist soundbites or awkward influencer-style videos from politicians, but a bit more political honesty and the courage to admit that complexity isn't always a bad thing. Simplification is good - but oversimplification? That's where things start to fall apart.