Peta urges Gail's Bakery to drop extra charge for plant milk
A leading animal rights charity has launched a campaign calling for Gail's Bakery to drop its surcharge on plant-based milks, claiming it 'unfairly discriminates' against customers with dairy intolerances or those trying to make more ethical choices.
Gail's, a chain that is expanding rapidly in Britain, charges 40p to 60p extra if customers want oat or soya milk in their coffee or tea.
With at least one in three Britons now drinking plant-based milks, other high-street coffee chains tend to offer one – soya – for free, though other dairy-free alternatives such as oat, almond and coconut milk often still come at a cost.
Peta has called for Gail's to drop its extra charge. Dawn Carr, the charity's vice-president of vegan projects, told the Guardian: 'Gail's is milking customers who care about animals and the planet by offering a discount on reusable cups but still charging extra for plant milk.
'Dairy milk is an environmental disaster, cruel to cows, and bad for human health. We're calling on [Gail's] to ditch the upcharge and encourage all conscious coffee drinkers to join Peta's campaign.'
Last month, Sir Paul McCartney wrote to the US chain Peet's Coffee asking it to drop its extra charge for non-dairy milk. Within days, Peet's climbed down.
The former Beatle, who has been a vegetarian since 1975, wrote at the time: 'It recently came to my attention that Peet's has an extra charge for plant-based milks as opposed to cow's milk.
'I must say this surprised me, as I understand that your company is committed to reducing methane emissions and water waste, yet cow's milk significantly contributes to them.'
Pret a Manger stopped charging extra for plant-based milks such as oat, almond, soya and rice-coconut in the UK in 2020 after calls from animal rights advocates. Starbucks dropped its vegan milk surcharge in the UK in 2022. Leon and Joe and the Juice do not charge extra for any standard dairy-free milk alternatives.
Costa Coffee and Caffe Nero do not charge for soya milk, but oat and coconut milk are an additional 45p at both. Costa also has an 'ultimate blend' plant-based milk alternative at some stores for 35p. Peta has also renewed its calls for these extra charges to be dropped.
Campaigners and animal rights advocates have long said these extra costs discriminate against people searching for dairy-free alternatives, with some claiming it amounts to a 'tax' that should instead be applied to dairy because of its cost to the animals and the environment. But critics have said that almond milk uses large quantities of water in its production.
Dale Vince, a green energy industrialist and ambassador for the charity Veganuary, said the charges were an example of 'premium pricing' for plant-based foods, which tend overall to have a lower environmental impact. 'This is a rip-off, plain and simple – part of the premium pricing of plant-based foods, which by their very nature cost less,' he said.
Sign up to Down to Earth
The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential
after newsletter promotion
Carr added: 'It's true that almond milk uses more water to produce than oat milk, but the amount pales compared to that needed to make dairy milk. Slurry run-off from dairy factory farm manure and urine pollutes waterways, methane damages the ozone layer, and transport and slaughter of cows is extremely energy-intensive.
'If anything, businesses should charge more for dairy to better reflect the true cost to the animals and the planet. But they certainly need to eliminate the unfair and damaging upcharge on vegan milks.'
Toni Vernelli, Veganuary's head of communications, said: 'The cost of many plant milks has come down dramatically in recent years, so many of the surcharges – which range from 25p to 50p – are out of proportion to the extra expense the vendor incurs.'
Gail's declined to comment. Last year the chain, which has been described as a 'political bellwether' for middle-class Britain, faced controversy over its expansion plans amid fears it would push out independent coffee houses. Its first outlet opened in Hampstead, north-west London, in 2005 and there are now about 170 branches in the UK.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
11 hours ago
- Spectator
OnlyFans is giving HMRC what it wants
Fenix International occupies the ninth floor of an innocuous office block on London's Cheapside. The street's name comes from the Old English for marketplace, and once upon a time Cheapside was just that: London's biggest meat market with butcher shops lining either side of the road. Today, the street houses financial institutions and corporate HQs. But Fenix still runs a marketplace. Some may even call it a meat market, albeit one that operates on the phones of hundreds of millions of users worldwide. Its name: OnlyFans. OnlyFans is best understood not just as a porn site, but as a social media platform with a paywall. Creators – mostly women – post photos, videos and voice notes behind monthly subscriptions. Users pay extra to tip the women, customise content and have one-to-one chats with their favourite models. Not everything on OnlyFans is X-rated, but that's the content that makes the money. An entire ecosystem has grown around OnlyFans since it was founded nine years ago by two British brothers, Tim and Thomas Stokely. One 'e-pimp' explained that successful models outsource much of their work to offshore call centres to give the illusion of intimacy with customers. Low-paid workers in Venezuela or the Philippines are hired to impersonate creators over text chats, maintaining dozens, even hundreds, of relationships with lonely men. OnlyFans' profits are enormous. In 2023, it generated nearly £5 billion in sales – up more than 2,000 per cent in four years. The company paid £127 million in tax last year, £110 million of that in corporation tax. Because Fenix is based in London, the bulk of that cash is flowing straight into the Treasury. For comparison: Britain's fishing industry – supposedly a red-line issue in Brexit – brings in just £876 million and pays next to nothing in corporation tax, while also receiving £180 million a year in tax concessions. We don't think of OnlyFans as a media company (if we think of it at all) and so we ignore what it is in business terms: a staggering success. With more than four million 'content creators' and 305 million subscribers, it would easily rank in the top three British publishing companies. It is perhaps the most successful creator-based subscription service ever. Traditional platforms can't compete – OnlyFans' revenues are twice that of North America's Aylo, which operates the world's biggest porn websites. Britain's sex industry brings in far more to the economy than politicians are comfortable admitting Britain's sex industry brings in far more to the economy than politicians are comfortable admitting. The Office for National Statistics estimates Britons spend in excess of £6 billion annually on it. It is one of the few British industries which remains a net (digital) exporter. Indeed, OnlyFans is perhaps the strongest unicorn (a privately held start-up worth more than $1 billion) in the country. It's more profitable than any other British tech start-up. And it's doing something our other digital start-ups can't: exporting to America while keeping tax revenues onshore. Two-thirds of its revenue now comes from the US, proving that even in a global tech economy dominated by Silicon Valley, British firms can still compete. OnlyFans' success makes it all the more striking that, according to Reuters, Fenix is in talks to sell. Los Angeles-based Forest Road Company is leading a group of investors in negotiations to buy the business for £6 billion. It's rumoured that other suitors are vying for attention and that shares may be sold on the stock market. Either way, one of Britain's few successful exports could soon be gone. It's awkward to defend pornography, and so politicians don't try. Parliament hosts thousands of lobbying events every year – payday lenders, bookies, vape companies, even arms dealers turn up for drinks and canapés. There is no 'sex tech reception'. Ministers fall over themselves to visit impressive-looking factories that are in fact barely relevant. For example, Glass Futures, a research and production plant for the glass industry based in St Helens, was recently picked by Keir Starmer as the perfect location for his speech decrying 'Farage's fantasy economics'. The plant is a not-for-profit that makes £7 million in annual sales. OnlyFans pays more in tax in a month than Glass Futures earns in a year. But no MP would be caught dead at OnlyFans' Cheapside HQ, despite, I'm told, many invitations to visit. Neither has any politician ever defended the porn industry in a debate on innovation, exports or growth. The most recent House of Lords research note on 'the impact of pornography on society' contains no mention of the words 'economy', 'tax' or 'finance'. Of course, money isn't everything. The harms of porn – to women, to relationships, to the minds of teenage boys – are real and considerable. We might well be better off banning the whole thing. But if we are going to wage a moral war on porn, we should at least be honest about what we're sacrificing. The money is real – and it's already in the bank of HMRC.
Spectator
11 hours ago
- Spectator
In defence of the Trump playbook
The standard explanation for why charges for plastic bags reduced waste is economic. People were reluctant to pay 10p for a bag and so brought their own instead. This is partly true. But it would still be highly effective if the charge for a bag were merely 1p. That's because charging any amount, however trifling, was sufficient to change the implicit assumptions about normal retail behaviour. Previously, if you went into Boots and bought, say, a toothbrush and a tube of Anusol, the default was for the cashier to put them in a new bag – it would have seemed rude not to do so. Suddenly, however, the imposition of a charge meant that shopkeepers had to ask whether you wanted a bag or not. Often the answer was 'no'; you had one already, or, if you were a chap, your clothing was miraculously equipped with things called 'pockets'. There are many ways in which you can achieve large changes in behaviour without imposing large economic penalties. For instance, I contend that you could significantly reduce intergenerational inequality simply by the imposition of a property tax of 0.1 per cent annually on all homes. The relatively small amount raised could be hypothecated to fund child benefit, or to reduce the income tax burden on the young. For the purposes of comparison, the typical property tax levied by those well-known leftists in the State of Texas is slightly over 1.8 per cent. Bear me out. I am borrowing here from the Donald Trump playbook. This is an under-rated approach to legislation where you impose taxes not for their direct effect, but for their symbolic value. By sending a surprising signal, you can change behaviour by unseating the unthinking assumptions people hold about the future. You don't necessarily have to do anything massive – you simply raise the possibility you might. Most human behaviour runs on implicit deterrents of this kind. By sending a surprising signal, you can change behaviour by unseating the unthinking assumptions people hold Before The Donald, it had become an axiomatic assumption in all businesses that no democratic government of any political stripe would ever deviate from the smug Davos neo-liberal globalist consensus in any shape or form. This artificial certainty meant that for decades you could offshore employment with abandon and treat your native staff fairly shabbily, without fear of any adverse consequences. Today it's different: even if you later reduce many tariffs to near zero and stop randomly abusing Canada, the signal has been sent. I hate to say this, but this approach could work well to solve many other problems. For instance, Britons have been lulled into planning for their future on the assumption that three unwritten rules underpin the tax system. 1) If you actually get up in the morning and do some useful work for which you get paid, you'll be taxed to buggery; 2) If you acquire wealth and then ride the wave of asset-price inflation (i.e. you have more money than you need 'cos you're old), you will be treated very generously; 3) If the asset in question is your own home, you won't be taxed at all, and nor will your good-for-nothing kids when they inherit it all. A large part of the reason why young people cannot afford to buy homes is nothing to do with the use value of a home – it is driven by the as-yet-unshaken belief that residential property has been sanctified as an asset class. It is this belief which possibly accounts for 25 per cent of the price of a home and a similarly large part of oldsters' pathological reluctance to downsize. Residential property is seen as Britain's only tax haven. To unseat this assumption, you don't need to rewrite the whole tax code, or go full Henry George – much as I would personally support this. You just have to make the unthinkable suddenly thinkable.
Metro
20 hours ago
- Metro
Millions could be paying off debt well into retirement amid 'pension postcode lo
A 'postcode lottery' means people face carrying hefty mortgage debt well into retirement, an analysis has found. Years of putting off home buying amid rising property prices and extended mortgage terms mean some Britons will be paying off loans for decades. According to the study released today, 48% of over 50s are in some form of debt, with 14% having yet to pay off their mortgages. But regional inequality is rife in the UK, with at least 20% of over 50s in Northern Ireland being set to pay off home loans well into their golden years, the highest number in the UK. They have an average of £50,409.09 in outstanding debt. The highest percentage of debt-raddled over 50s in England is in the North West, at 19%, with an average mortgage debt of £48,839.55. But 30% of the age group in the region have no private pensions, with the average income being less than £25,000. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video London faces what the survey-maker called a 'perfect storm' of low homeownership, mountainous debt, financial anxiety and pay cheques that barely cover the bills. Just 55% of older Londoners own their home, while many take only £31,164 each year, far lower than in other regions. Over 50s cough up around £1,230 each month for their homes in the capital, far above the average payment elsewhere in the UK at £887. While fewer over 50s in East Anglia have mortgages to repay, the region has the most eye-watering average mortgage debt at £96,471.43. The South East is not far behind with an average debt of £95,905.77. In Scotland, more than half (53%) of the surveyed age group are in debt. Mark Screeton, CEO of SunLife, the life insurance group behind the survey, said: 'Our research shows a clear 'postcode lottery' when it comes to retirement, where people's ability to enjoy later life appears to be impacted by where they live. 'Whether it is mortgage repayments dragging into retirement or higher levels of consumer debt, older people in some areas are facing greater financial concerns than others.' More Trending The retirement age in the UK is 66 for men and women, which is when people receive their state pension. SunLife said that of the 2,000 people aged over 50 polled, the cost of living remains a top concern in certain regions. Worries over spiralling costs were highest in: Northern Ireland (74%) Scotland (71%) East Midlands (68%) London (56%) View More » Screeton added: 'For homeowners over 55 – even those with an outstanding mortgage – equity release could offer a way to clear debts, stop monthly repayments, and unlock the value in their home without having to move. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Map reveals the 5 cheapest London postcodes where properties cost less than £300,000 MORE: I loaned my parents a few hundred quid — then they stole thousands MORE: Here's how you can find out if you're owed money from your state pension Your free newsletter guide to the best London has on offer, from drinks deals to restaurant reviews.
