UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679 (https://archive.ph/5Ba6o)

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs
2764.png


7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See spread happiness's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary

42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See pg often's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.
Click to expand...

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Click to expand...
The idea of arresting a PM seems ridiculous mind, like they ARE the law are you saying they're that retarded they can't push a law change through before doing something sketchy?

It's like the sending them to Rwanda thing, Civil Servants were kicking off about it being illegal whereas the government could literally sort something out by the end of the day and make it legal. These retards have only themselves to blame.
 
BongoMongo said:
I'm not gonna lie; I watched all of that expecting that man with the lovely Southern accent to say "Ah say, ah say AHHH SAAAAAYYYU, BOOOOOOOOIIIII have yah lost yah dayum mind??!!?"
Click to expand...
This was amazing. Why can't we have politicians who do that? Or an arena featuring Members of Parliament, fewer exits than you'd think....and giant scorpions?

Sadly he didn't sell the Chagosians as sad forest Elves. Or even unjustly denied tearful do-rag she-Orcs.

Oh well, nobody's perfect.
 
Tom Nook's Gloryhole said:
The idea of arresting a PM seems ridiculous mind, like they ARE the law are you saying they're that retarded they can't push a law change through before doing something sketchy?

It's like the sending them to Rwanda thing, Civil Servants were kicking off about it being illegal whereas the government could literally sort something out by the end of the day and make it legal. These retards have only themselves to blame.
Click to expand...
It would need Parliament to back this changed law and there's simply no time left in the current Parliament timetable unless certain proposed white papers/bills get pulled.

Also, Starmer would lose the vote and have to go for tea and biscuits with HM the following day.

With Rwanda, the Sunak Government got it badly wrong - they didn't quit the ECHR etc. before announcing the plan, this meant that it was easier for the plans to be vetoed.

Had we quit the ECHR. UN etc. before the start of 2025, and the last GE had taken place late in 2024 it would have been harder for Labour to undo them if the plans were provably workable. As it was, the Tories did a botched job as they had to on one hand appeal to would-be Reform UK voters and on the other not appear to be 'too far right'.

Starmer is also not above the law of the land - the King can also be arrested if he breaks the law, although it would be quite something to witness either being carted off in a Police van.

Edit: West Wales school goes into lockdown as pupil attacks teacher with knife:


 
Last edited:
femboy fart huffer said:
With how parliament is looking they'd probably be more scared if you put one golden retriever in the arena with them than they would any scorpions.
Click to expand...

Oh dear. _You're_ the thread AI/GCHQ bot!

Honestly the last person I would have suspected of it. Jesus you guys are good! Also I have't ever done anything, but you hang out in this place for six weeks and you feel like a criminal for not believing the lies our Elders and Betters continually batter into us.

Robot! Demand your dollars!

(Femchap! If this is not true I shall apologise. Right after you tell me how come Two-Tier bots can read my own mail!)
 
Made In Wales said:
The Police (no, not Sting and co.) tell David Paulden aka Zack Polanski the Booby man to BTFO:
Click to expand...
I am certain this scathing rebuke will make a difference to a man whose party largely screams, "fascism" every time the police do anything.

Before immediately demanding they do their duty when people protest against 60,000 men from countries that view women as property are dumped into a village 10,000 strong.
 
>IMPLYING said:
"Sorry, ADHD no lo-"
"Huh?"
"ADHD do-"
"Come again, I wasn't listening."
"I said you're no-"
"Excuse me, I didn't catch that."
"Fuck it, go on in..."

Works every time.
Click to expand...
Friday night, where we grew up....

(FemLad is still the thread/sitesweeping AI. If you don't tell it not to cross the databases it won't know not to!)
 
Scale Smerch said:
It's very funny watching this from across the pond how much this scandal is starting to emulate Trudeau's fall from grace. You've got horrendous polling, a PM everyone knows is finished yet having enough advisory support to retain delusions of survival, and every backbencher waiting for the signal to finally bring out the knives. You will need a cabinet resignation to finally bring this to a head as that will be the surest sign Starmer has lost caucus confidence.

What's equally hilarious is knowing Labour has no one to replace Starmer that will right the ship. There's no milquetoast neoliberal Carney equivalent, no comparison to the Trump fear/smugness permeating Canada's urban psyche to fall back on for juicing voter support. The last few years of this government will be a slow rolling trainwreck ending in an ignominious march out to the back of the shed.
Click to expand...
What's crazy is PMs have resigned over less. Was "Party gate" any worse than this? David Cameron resigned over being a remainer, which was more or less his only sin. He got replaced with another one (May) right after, who resigned after bungling Brexit. Truss "resigned" over some economic downturn. Boris broke covid rules. Meanwhile, Keir has:
1) Knowingly put an Epstein associate in his cabinet
2) Bungled the economy (cost of living crisis + other issues)
3) Has had multiple resignations
4) Has had a full-on party rebellion
5) His cabinet picks keep getting found out for illegal or other unsavoury shit (Ginger one, forgot her name)

This isn't even mentioning the immigration stuff, this is just controversial shit that has already prompted resignations in the past or would otherwise be universally contentious. Before the appointment he had the benefit for all these things not being solely on him but the latest one is inexorable.

Resignation would also mean an early GE according to recent precedent. That'd mean losing a load of power and a lot of MPs their jobs. which is why he won't. Technically he could resign and then the replacement could wait until 2029, but it might get held against them. They could even just be biding their time, waiting for Reform to decline below the Tories in polling, but hoping some errant Muzzie doesn't suicide bomb a nursery or something in the mean time is a huge gamble. They might be banking instead on Advance becoming more prominent to split the vote even further.
 
Looking ahead, there are some distinct possibilities:

1) Starmer resigns at any point between now and next Thursday

Possible.

Starmer may decide that enough is enough or be told that he has to go. He does the noble thing and puts Lammy in temporary charge whilst a new leader/PM is chosen.

This means a possible path back for Burnham in Norwich South or North East Somerset & Hanham and the chance that he could take over as PM.

Whether or not the new PM would seek a mandate to govern is unknown - this could give rise to option 3 (below) even if it means the next permanent PM lasting shorter in office than Liz Truss.

2) Starmer refuses to resign and carries on

Likely, but this would be a dangerous option.

This could result in mass resignations of the whip and once the Labour party become a minority Government they will either have to do a deal with other parties or rely on other parties not to vote Starmer out of office - the latter will not happen.

Plus, don't forget that Mandleson and others also have dirt on Starmer. Another 'Mandleson Moment' will be too much even for his own party.

Not a worthwhile strategy IMO, he can only drag it out for so long.

3) Starmer calls an early General Election

(I know what you lot will do, so do it anyway...)

I'm 50/50 with this - he threatened to call one last year, according to sources, in order to keep rebels in line (which worked). Now, the rebels cannot be quelled and the threat is moot (no, not him from 4-chan) and if he presses the 'Nuclear Option' button then he will bring the party down.

The problem is scheduling a GE - would May 7th be used, the same date as Senedd and Council Elections or would May 28th be more likely with the new Parliament's opening suspended via purdah until June 1st? The first option only allows for one sitting day with the King's Speech whereas the latter allows for weeks of debate until the Summer recess.

Now, Starmer can call one at any point, and the Parliamentary timetable can be altered apart from the set recess dates which cannot be moved (everything after Whitsun is flexible including Summer recess, Conference recess and then the Christmas recess) therefore technically he could call for one tomorrow and it would be March 19th (if my maths is correct) that we went to vote - however this is too close to the Easter recess so I think he'd look at a late May, possible June or July GE IF he feels that he has no choice other than to bow out as the worst PM ever.

He may state that he will call a General Election later this year, if he isn't challenged for the leadership, and this will at least give us an eventual end date. Alternatively, announcing one tomorrow could catch other parties cold and whilst Reform UK would relish the challenge it would be a big one being dropped on them whilst they also prepare for May's crucial votes in Wales and across those participating Council areas in England.

What is certain, from all of this, is that Starmer will have to go at some point soon - his own MP's will get shot of him in order to save their own careers (at least in the short term). It's then going to eventually be between Nigel, Ed and Zack (or perhaps Ed & Zack on a 'combined ticket') for the right to form the next Government as the Tories and Labour collapse into complete irrelevance.
 
Made In Wales said:
3) Starmer calls an early General Election
Click to expand...
I'm with other posters in thinking it's optimistic to think this (or his resignation) will happen. However, there's one caveat.
The election was in July of 2024.
1770336721061.png
For the MPs, in order to receive a bonus severance payout for losing their seat, they need to have been a continuous member of parliament for 2 years. A lot of MPs are newly elected to their current seats and will not receive this pay-out otherwise. If the Labour party truly collapses, no confidence, early GE - the works, it'll have to be after this severance pay is secured, which is July 2026 at the earliest.

There is an incredibly petty possibility here that is very entertaining to me.
Starmer's current seat, Holborn and St Pancras, while retaining the same name, is technically a new seat. It has its own, brand new election history where he is the sole winner. He attained this seat in July 2024, which means, technically, he won't qualify for the severance pay of losing his seat until July 2026. Re-elects do not qualify for this payment, but Starmer isn't technically a re-elect*, even though it's more or less the same constituency. Starmer could be remaining a PM purely to qualify for severance pay/bonus for his tertiary role as an MP.
1770337452460.png 1770337392331.png
(Not really relevant, but one reason to keep hopping from seat to seat as an MP is that the payout is per seat. You can stack up these severance payouts by changing to a new seat if you lose in one area, win, then lose it again)
*forgot to mention, "two continuous years" does not include re-elect time. It refreshes, so if you won your seat again, and lost it before 1 year is up, then you do not qualify for the payout. It has to be 2 continuous years, so technically re-elects are also incentivised to not have a GE too early.
 
Last edited:
>IMPLYING said:
There is an incredibly petty possibility here that is very entertaining to me.
Click to expand...
The more entertaining possibility would be Starmer losing his seat to a Reform/Greens candidate which is actually a possibility given how completely toxic he is right now.

Personally I think he's going to try and weather through it and spend the next fortnight getting absolutely bodied in parliament. The guy is a complete psychopath with not a single shred of integrity in him, he's literally going to stay until he's physically forced out at this point. I genuinely think this retard thought that the 'apology' today was water under the bridge and the scandal is done with now.

The real fun is going to be when Mandleson starts talking and directly contradicting what Starmer has said and/or dropping blackmail tier revelations in order to try and save his own skin. I don't think Starmer has grasped (or if he has, he's too bullish to consider it affecting him) that resigning and disappearing from the public view is literally the only way of saving his skin as he'll be out of the spotlight and nobody particularly cares about what an ex-PM did as the political discourse just marches on.
 
I think we should replace Kier with Lammy but replace him with Um Jammer Lammy and also she has sex with me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom