UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • 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...
Heard from a workmate that apparently several Reform Councillors have stood down because the position isn't paid or something, is that true?
 
mingo mongo said:
It’s pretty hard to ignore Reform dominating the polls for the past year.
Click to expand...
Heinrich Maneuver said:
The political class are kept safe and protected in their cosmopolitan Westminster bubble, they could tune out the polls and lock up the racist naysayers on twitter because they have ThinkTanks that tell them otherwise and polls that show everyone loves them instead.
Click to expand...
Pretty much this, never underestimate how easy it is for the political class to conveniently ignore any data point that doesn't appeal to them or have an army of vested interests willing to tell them exactly what they want to hear. In Labour's case a lot of MPs, ministers, and council candidates likely believed that people wouldn't actually vote Reform, that the average voter would come to their senses and choose correctly once finally in the ballot booth. It's not a bad idea, but it's an idea that only really practically works during calm and prosperous times.
 
⏰ BREAKING: Keir Starmer reportedly burst into tears after watching the following video:

 
Heinrich Maneuver said:
Yes. Communist/socialist theory is predicated on the idea that 'a state with communism' (or rather, a state with X ideology) is the final evolution. Think of it like Pokemon; the belief is that you go from being a Level 1 Mudslinger, to a level 17 Modsociety, to a level 36 Commutopia. There is no deviation or 'back tracking', only progress forward, and Forward Is Always Good.
Click to expand...
Conversely, conservative theory says that it is possible for a state at a higher stage of evolution to go back down to a previous stage, like in Digimon.
 
So they sent Darren Jones on the media rounds this morning who basically said it’s up to Starmer if he resigns or not… when you thought it couldn’t get more of a clown show. He’s actually going to dig his heels isn’t he?
 
diroama said:
It's not clear to me why he would be compelled to resign. What pressure do you think there is to do so?
Click to expand...
Unlike the Tories, Labour has no mechanism to force the leader to resign, outside of initiating a leadership election, so the only pressure would be social and procedural. That means resignations, opposing or abstaining from legislation, releasing sensitive and compromising information, and ultimately a vote of no confidence. If he faced and lost a vote of no confidence, then he'd have very little recourse. At that point, the party would no longer obey and would sabotage any legislation until he left. I'd guess a leadership election would come first.
 
Recall that all 3 of the Tory PMs before Sunak survived a VONC organised by the 1922 Committee (or in Truss' case had only just taken up the job) and therefore had immunity for a year - they all ended up resigning anyway because of the ongoing pressure and their willingness to put the party before themselves.

Although I don't know that Starmer has that same sense of duty. As I said before, I hope he doesn't, because it would be funny.
 
teriyakiburns said:
If he faced and lost a vote of no confidence, then he'd have very little recourse. At that point, the party would no longer obey and would sabotage any legislation until he left
Click to expand...

True but has hasn't faced that yet and there's no indication that is being threatened, or that there is any single anti-starmer bloc able to credibly say they would force such a vote to go against him.

I heard a Labour MP on the radio this morning bemoaning the fact that Labour wasn't using it's large majority to deliver lower taxes and reduce immigration. Is he really expecting Burnham or Rayner to pursue those policies?

And if he was to lose a vote of no confidence he would be under pressure to resign, but that would also create legitimate political pressure to call a snap election. I doubt anybody in the labour party writing letters wants that.
 
Apparently he's going to quit in hours, according to the Daily Mail. I hope so.

I know who ever we get will be worse and I would far prefer a GE however more of the same nonsense,only worse will further push people away from Labour and make it worse for them in the long run. People want a GE. Anything less is going to piss them right off.
 
It's clear he doesn't want to resign after a major scandal that will taint his legacy forever (after the Mandleson news and after getting FUCKED in the locals)

The problem is that this IS his fucking legacy, and he has the chance to be known as the guy who straight up destroyed the Labour party in one term.
 
The Cabinet meeting has finished. The Starmerites (Reed, McFadden, Kyle, Kendall) went to the throng of press outside and repeated Starmer's line about there being a process to challenge him and that no-one has challenged him. None of the others said anything.
 
I genuinely don't see the point of Starmer resigning. What difference would it make? Who would do a better job? No one in the Labour party would be willing to do anything as radical (LMAO) as stopping the small boats or kicking out any of the rapefugees, so it would be a pointless exercise and I don't think anyone who voted Reform or Restore would buy it. Everyone knows it's just window dressing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom