UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

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.

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.
 
Ostatnio edytowane przez moderatora:
I don't believe that the leader of the Labour party (or the Tories, for that matter) has the right to unilaterally suspend any other member of the party, although the Saddam memes this evening are worth a chortle.

If Badenoch has any sense, her first question tomorrow will be along the lines of 'If the Prime Minister truly believes that the Health Secretary is plotting to remove him, why hasn't he been removed from his post?'
 
I mean at this point surely Starmer knows he's got nothing to lose. If an election is called today then Labour are getting destroyed so Streeting knows that he's getting destroyed whether he stands as independant OR Labour.

I also doubt any independent would risk their chances until they see how Streeting does as an independent. If he gets massacred and Greens/Reform thrash him then he's marooned politically as there's no way back into politics as an MP.

Furiously burning Streeting so he's completely destroyed would see the entire Labour backbench scared stiff into doing whatever the fuck Starmer wants to do.
Certainly a lot of food for thought - I agree that Starmer has nothing to lose, just depends how much of a total megalomaniac he is going forward.

Some late news:

* ‘Baffling hypocrisy!’ Green deputy leader OPPOSES housing migrants in leafy £500k local area after declaring ‘refugees welcome here’

* Andrew to change his name AGAIN after late Queen's request (He'll now be 'Mountbatten-Windsor')

* 'It’s a cult’: Top economist slams net zero madness as UK pays price for 'green obsession'

* Hounded BBC writer claims younger reporters ‘gatekeep’ on trans stories and gender-critical coverage 'censored'

* WATCH: David Lammy handed brutal dressing down by Speaker over 'foolish' rule break

* Britain is turning a blind eye to Islamists committing genocide. Why? Jews are not involved - Stuart Fawcett
 
Furiously burning Streeting so he's completely destroyed would see the entire Labour backbench scared stiff into doing whatever the fuck Starmer wants to do.
The issue is the party is now left with literal whos already after the past few months. Starmer has lost pretty much everyone besides Lammy atp. The night of the long knives-esc act we saw with the winter fuel allowance issue worked back then, but dwindling numbers of MPs with experience leads to not much left to play with. I imagine by the end of Starmer's term we are going to see a front bench entirely made up of mid-level ministers. I don't see him calling a leadership election, let alone a GE at all during his term as he's generally very headstrong in his methods despite his weak character so I imagine it'll devolve into basically a local council-esc group of talent running the country.
 
The issue is the party is now left with literal whos already after the past few months. Starmer has lost pretty much everyone besides Lammy atp. The night of the long knives-esc act we saw with the winter fuel allowance issue worked back then, but dwindling numbers of MPs with experience leads to not much left to play with. I imagine by the end of Starmer's term we are going to see a front bench entirely made up of mid-level ministers. I don't see him calling a leadership election, let alone a GE at all during his term as he's generally very headstrong in his methods despite his weak character so I imagine it'll devolve into basically a local council-esc group of talent running the country.
I'm not so sure, though I accept your POV.

Reasons why Starmer might go for an early GE:

* He is a narcissistic person who, if he cannot win, will make sure that others who oppose him also can't win - even if that means going to the Palace (there are rumours that he's twice threatened his MP's with doing this but McSweeney managed to talk him out of going).

* Burnham is going to be a fly in the ointment - he's potentially an improvement on Starmer and has the support of a growing amount of MP's. Though Starmer can say no to him and make it impossible for him to become a PPC, he does so at the risk of losing the support of backbenchers who want Starmer out and for Burnham to become PM or to at least have some influence in the party.

* Though he wants to be PM into his 70s, barely a day goes by without some sort of cock-up in the party, and this is tarnishing his reputation and standing. He wants to be equal to Blair - Blair at least had a Government which was able to function and not fall apart within a year, Starmer doesn't have that luxury. At the point when it gets too much for him, I would expect him to go to the Palace as he will counter any leadership election (which he'd lose) with the threat of an early GE.

* Going early for a GE might even be advantageous - it could catch Reform UK and the Libs/Greens cold and unless the latter two can form a coalition or reach an agreement where one of them stands aside in a constituency (in order to stop Nigel, possibly reaching out to the SNP and Plaid to support this as well) then they will split the left's vote. Should Farage become PM, he'll inherit a myriad of problems and maybe Starmer will think 'well they'll fall apart with in a few years and then Labour will have been forgiven, we can then go hardcore with the EU, Digital ID etc.'

A risky decision as Reform UK have already implied that the rules book will be ripped up on day one. In any case, when Starmer is no longer PM he'll still make money on the lecture tours/speaking circuits - it's no longer his problem.

Where Starmer will have no say about when a GE is called:

* Enough defections from Labour to Independents/other parties mean that Labour become a minority Government. Unless another party agrees to govern as a coalition (Lib Dems would if Starmer resigned - oops not happening) then they cannot continue and a GE would be called.

* The Budget does not pass through Parliament and triggers a VONC in the Government.

Don't forget that there were mass resignations under Corbyn's tenure and it's possible that this could happen again if Starmer is unable to control his MP's and get them to fall in line.

* External pressures/factors - the need to reset links between UK and USA, for instance, in case of an attack from Russia or other 'hostile nations'. If Starmer is seen as a liability by the Civil Service and also by MI5, MI6 and we risk a 'June 1974' moment when a coup against Harold Wilson took place, he might then go just to avoid further risk or embarassment (or the King might have to finally intervene).

If Starmer feels that he faces this, then prorogation of Parliament could be an option - remember that after November 26 there's not too much business left for Parliament to discuss (apart from Oral Questions on Business, Defence and Justice alongside PMQ's) with the house rising on December 19) therefore whilst some business and important questions will have to be delayed, it wouldn't be too problematic if Starmer/McSweeney could convince people that Parliament 'finishing early' would be beneficial and no doubt the BBC and Guardian would run cover claiming that due to a/b/c it is absolutely neccessary - a far cry from August 2019, 'but it's okay when we do it'.
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Tarnishing his reputation in the eyes of whom?
Who views the 'cock-ups' as cock-ups?
In the eyes of anybody with half a brain-cell.

Even the normally left-centric Wikipedia is stating just how bad a job he is doing, plus even the most left of Polling companies has him way down in terms of popularity and overall general confidence of the population.

When even the BBC and Guardian are asking questions that Starmer would prefer they didn't ask, then I think even they are viewing recent events as cock-ups and the more that take place the harder it'll be to silence the dissenters.

It reminds me of the story of 'The Emperor's New Clothes'... we can all see that the Emperor is naked and all the fake news and distracts aren't working. The rejection en masse of the 'established line' by Left and Right is something which the establishment has not had to face in the past and I doubt they know how to influence the sheeple back into the slumber pens.

If you want a Labour member to cock up really badly, just ask one of them 'when will this nightmare end?' and if he/she/it can only come out with 'umm err aah' then you know that they have no plan and the Labour member will know you aren't buying their nonsense.

Don't think that it's just us 'Farmers on 'the Right' who oppose Starmer, there are many non-Farmers and Lefties from Communists and Socialists to Democrats and Borderline Centrists who oppose him and want Labour gone from power asap.
 
Burnham is going to be a fly in the ointment - he's potentially an improvement on Starmer and has the support of a growing amount of MP's.
Burnham is basically a party leader in waiting, I don't think he'd be a big improvement on starmer but he could be what labour needs to claw back some votes from the greens, he actually has a personality that would resonate with a lot more people than red john major.

there has been comparisons of Polanski with Mamdani but the more apt comparison is with Harris, he's appearing on establishment shows and spouting catchphrases popular on tiktok but that doesn't really translate into more votes just makes the guardian lot clap like seals because he said a meme popular with gays, he's trying to do brat summer a year late and after it was already shown to be ineffective. Not a fan of mamdani but his style of politics is very attractive to those in big cities it's easy to see why he won, it works at a mayoral level but I don't see it leading to a potential government role polanski is hoping for.

I don't think starmer will call a ge in the next year or 2, he did get a massive majority and while he's tanking in the polls at the moment he can claim to have a huge mandate to scrape out at least another year. When he came in he had the image of a pm who would make hard but necessary sacrifices and just over a year on he just keeps digging a deeper and deeper hole for no reason to impress his human rights lawyer friends. He's in an unenviable position (not like its undeserved), half his party want him gone but he can't do that without a ge that would see reform win.

If Starmer is seen as a liability by the Civil Service and also by MI5, MI6 and we risk a 'June 1974' moment when a coup against Harold Wilson took place, he might then go just to avoid further risk or embarassment (or the King might have to finally intervene).
optimistic lol, the army is too cucked now to do anything of note they took control of fucking heathrow to scare wilson, starmer is a retard but I don't think he's that much of a liability that they'd actually do anything
 
I think either mass resignations or VONC after the budget. I do not think Reeves' budget will pass personally because she emboldened her backbench.

The problem with Starmer is not that he will not call a GE in 2 years, but he will be forced to. Every single external machination is currently in play against him, along with all political machinations. He is a king on a chessboard against a fully stocked opponent. At this point, we are avoiding the inevitable.
 
I do not think Reeves' budget will pass personally because she emboldened her backbench.
not too informed on the specifics of the budget but from a purely politiking point of view labour need to at least project the appearance of unity, the 2 child benefits cap got passed even though I would imagine most labour mps would be against it lol

The problem with Starmer is not that he will not call a GE in 2 years, but he will be forced to.
while most of his party do hate him I think they'd prefer he drag the country to hell before they let reform win, I think they'll either drag it out till the next election despite the consequences for the party overall or they'll wait for farage or another reform mp to fuck up and call a ge when they go down in the polls
 
while most of his party do hate him I think they'd prefer he drag the country to hell before they let reform win
i can see them trying to save their own skins by calling a GE- staying with Starmer in power will make any Labour member un-electable in the future and forever taint them imho. The best plan is to call a GE, even if they lose, and get Burnham/another in power to try save what is left of Labour. All politicians are self serving in the end, Reform or no Reform, and no one wants to go down with Keir when this budget-torpedo hits.
 
In the eyes of anybody with half a brain-cell.
Don't think that it's just us 'Farmers on 'the Right' who oppose Starmer, there are many non-Farmers and Lefties from Communists and Socialists to Democrats and Borderline Centrists who oppose him and want Labour gone from power asap.
I'm playing devils advocate because I don't believe, in the eyes of those in power, that they're doing anything wrong.
What, at any point in their career, makes you believe that they give a flying rats arse about what the people, party or opposition think? Starmer is Stalin without the purges, exiles and gulags.
I think either mass resignations or VONC after the budget. I do not think Reeves' budget will pass personally because she emboldened her backbench.
It will pass because they're KPI driven monsters that care only about self preservation.
while most of his party do hate him I think they'd prefer he drag the country to hell before they let reform win
Exactly this. The MPs won't sack themselves. The more popular that Reform get, the more defence the MPs have to make create crazy policies because "you don't want fascists get into power do you?!".

Sadiq Khan has more chance of getting into power than Burnham, or sheboona mahmood.
 
The best plan is to call a GE, even if they lose, and get Burnham/another in power to try save what is left of Labour.
I think at this moment in time staying in power is more important than improving the parties image, if it comes down to it I can see starmer removing the whip from rebel mps to make an example, they'll have a lot of time to worry about their approval among the general public when they get decimated by reform lol.

Sadiq Khan has more chance of getting into power than Burnham, or sheboona mahmood.
khan has a comfortable job where he's basically guaranteed to keep getting elected until labour get sick of him, he won't run for leader because he has no real need to he's in charge of one of the most important cities in the world and I don't think he would give that up to potentially lose and be out of a job
 
Where's that Clive Warren Davies poster?
You mean @Chunky Salsa, the Warrick Davies appreciator? I understand he's been caught short.
Burnham is basically a party leader in waiting
Maybe so, but the only way he gets to be leader is if he's an elected MP. Now, I suspect a seat may be opening shortly in Ashton, so he could slip in that way with a by-election, but current polling places it firmly in reform's camp. He'd have to run a hell of a campaign there. I suppose he could run on "I'm not Angela Rayner" and do fairly well. It'd be a bit of a step down from his current position, though.
 
khan has a comfortable job where he's basically guaranteed to keep getting elected until labour get sick of him, he won't run for leader because he has no real need to he's in charge of one of the most important cities in the world and I don't think he would give that up to potentially lose and be out of a job
I don't he can run again can he? Isn't that how bojo got to be london mayor because the other fella - bald head wrinkly face, name escapes me, couldn't run again?
Khan is an egotistical maniac and the 'cure to reform' if the lefties are to be believed.
You mean @Chunky Salsa, the Warrick Davies appreciator? I understand he's been caught short.
That's the little fella. Caught short? Turn of phrase or is he banned?
 
I don't he can run again can he?
not familiar with mayoral term limits I assumed it was just like being pm if you keep getting elected you can stay

Khan is an egotistical maniac and the 'cure to reform' if the lefties are to be believed.
I think polanski more accurately fits that label, khan isn't even that popular among average londoners, he just keeps getting in because he's labour
 
not familiar with mayoral term limits I assumed it was just like being pm if you keep getting elected you can stay
I thought there were term limits on PM as well? Hence Blair, Cameron and Thatcher bouncing? All three were tories, if that counts for anything.
I think polanski more accurately fits that label, khan isn't even that popular among white londoners, he just keeps getting in because he's a paki
FTFY
 
If Starmer feels that he faces this, then prorogation of Parliament could be an option - remember that after November 26 there's not too much business left for Parliament to discuss (apart from Oral Questions on Business, Defence and Justice alongside PMQ's) with the house rising on December 19) therefore whilst some business and important questions will have to be delayed, it wouldn't be too problematic if Starmer/McSweeney could convince people that Parliament 'finishing early' would be beneficial and no doubt the BBC and Guardian would run cover claiming that due to a/b/c it is absolutely neccessary - a far cry from August 2019, 'but it's okay when we do it'.
Only issue that proroguing guarantees a speech from the throne upon Parliament resuming and that itself is also a confidence vote. There will be enough punditry discussion swirling on exactly why Starmer is doing it (no matter BBC's and Guardian's water carrying) that it arguably makes that possible vote riskier for him.
 
I thought there were term limits on PM as well? Hence Blair, Cameron and Thatcher bouncing? All three were tories, if that counts for anything.
not in the uk, blair and thatcher resigned because they could see the writing on the wall and knew they couldn't win the next election and cameron left because he was a remainer who only called the brexit referendum because he promised it as a part of his campaign in 2015

(no matter BBC's and Guardian's water carrying)
recently they've been more critical of labour since they've moved (nominally) more centre on issues like migration and benefits, the guardian anyway the BBC is literally a government mouthpiece but they're not too kind to lame duck candidates, the coverage of sunak last election wasn't exactly teaming with praise
 
there has been comparisons of Polanski with Mamdani but the more apt comparison is with Harris, he's appearing on establishment shows and spouting catchphrases popular on tiktok
I agree here, I cannot stomach Zach Polanski in the slightest. That video of him listing various flavours of Not British people as if they're literal flavours in the literal melting pot of Birmingham (Fresh Indians anyone?) should've been a bullet in the head for his campaign. It's as retarded as it is creepy.

That gaffe aside, I cannot fathom how anyone can take him seriously knowing his history of magical breast-growing hypnotherapy. He and anyone fond of him can claim it's in the past until the end of time but it won't stop it being an enormous indictment of his credulity and intelligence. If he'll believe that shite he'll believe any pseudoscientific garbage he's peddled. "He doesn't believe that any more" does not resolve the enormous quandary of him having ever believed it at all.

Not to mention the fact that the Green's anti-nuclear stance is deeply anti-intellectual. You can't take snipes at people being anti-mask, anti-vax, climate-skeptic (i.e. "settled science") when you yourself are scaremongering about nuclear power or acting with childlike naïvety about nuclear disarmament. I cannot fucking stand the Green party.

Final potshot, he's a dysgenic rat-faced weirdo.

Edit: derailed myself by seething. Mamdani was at least extremely consistent about meaningful policy, cost of living, etc. He wasn't doing slam poetry bites about how yummy Somalians are. Polanski thinks he's Bernie but he's far closer to Hillary.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole