
Give vegans special rations in national emergency, says crisis adviser
Prof Tim Lang said people needed to eat familiar food in times of shock, and the government must cater for dietary requirements.
An emeritus professor of food policy at the University of London, Prof Lang is an adviser to the National Preparedness Commission, an emergency planning committee set up in the wake of the Covid pandemic.
'If you want people to carry on not being in psychological shock, they need to have things that they're familiar with and comfortable with, not to experience the new,' Prof Lang told an audience at the Hay Festival in Wales.
'They have just experienced a lot of things – explosions, energy outage or whatever it is – and you want them to have things that they know they can eat.
'You don't want people used to a halal diet to eat a non-halal diet, for example, or vegetarians and vegans to have to eat meat. You've got to have some flexibility about what is normal now. It's very different to 1940,' he said.
Prof Lang shared the Hay stage with Sir David Omand, a former director of GCHQ and the author of How To Survive A Crisis: Lessons in Resilience and Avoiding Disaster.
Sir David warned that Britain was more vulnerable than ever to an attack on its infrastructure, saying: 'Historically, crises have arisen and the human race has survived.
'But what's different now is that we're more vulnerable. If you've got complex systems, they are very difficult to fix when things start to go wrong. You just need to think about cyber: would you have guessed that Marks & Spencer would have £300 million taken off their bottom line by a ransomware attack?
'So we are more vulnerable and we will struggle at the moment if some of these things actually happen. You just need to look at extreme weather events, never mind what could happen in the longer term.'
Differing diets
Prof Lang said planning by other European countries, including Germany and Switzerland, was 'getting into the minutiae about different diets, different ethnicities, different income groups and so on'.
Crisis planning should take into account what people eat, he said, adding: 'What are your fears? What are your habits? What are you used to? What do you consider 'normal' food?'
In the Second World War, the nation accepted the basic foodstuffs distributed as part of rationing. But Prof Lang said: 'Now, Britain's favourite food for children is pizza. It's a different world today.'
He suggested that the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) had failed to grasp the importance of Britain's diverse eating habits.
'Getting prepared is about anticipating and part of that has got to mean anticipating the public. You can't assume Defra knows what the public is doing, or thinks, or its diversity,' he said.
'I want some new committees, and existing committees like the scientific advisory committee on nutrition, to actually analyse British diets and say 'OK, we need to have different dietary advice for different conditions'.'
He also criticised the previous government for issuing basic advice in May last year that every household should stockpile three days' worth of unperishable food.
'This made me tear what hair I had out, because we need to think very carefully about what sort of food in what sort of circumstances,' he said. 'Can you cook? Maybe the electricity system has just gone. Let's think through the detail.'
Food storage concerns
Prof Lang said the absence of food storage in Britain would be keenly felt in the event of a crisis.
'Britain feeds itself from nine companies who account for 94.5 per cent of all food purchased,' he said. 'Those companies are very competitive, very powerful, they control long supply chains which have all been managed in an increasingly integrated way to get rid of storage.
'They go literally from the farm through to that point when you buy it in the supermarket, and your bill is re-ordering the food. They've spent 50 years, the logistics industry, getting rid of storage.
'What if it had been Tesco [hit by a cyber attack], not M&S? Tesco sells nearly a third of all food. If that goes down…'
Sir David referred to the 'paradox of warning', when a known threat is looming but there is no political impetus to solve it until it is too late.
He said: 'There is a terrible phenomenon which is that we don't actually think this will happen because it's our policy that it shouldn't happen. This is my explanation of Oct 7, when Hamas attacked Israel. They weren't expecting it, it was a surprise, because in the policy the Israeli government was following, it couldn't happen because that wasn't the policy.
'You can think yourself into hubris, complacency… and my worry is that we are rather complacent, and we'll get the wake-up call when suddenly we flick the switch and the lights don't come on because of some cyber attack or Russian attack or whatever it might be.'
Sir David said planning must also take into account 'the psychological resilience of the public' in the event of a crisis, and expressed doubt that Gen Z or Gen Alpha could cope as well as older people.
He asked: 'Is this generation or the upcoming generation more resilient than our generation was? You'll get two views but my hunch is probably a bit less, unless the youngsters have actually been abroad and done aid work or whatever it might be. When bad things happen, they're going to feel it more.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Mail
21 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
'Don't tell us where to build': Israeli ambassador hits back at David Lammy after Labour blasted country's controversial settlement plan
The Israeli ambassador to the UK has told Foreign Office officials not to 'tell us where to build in Jerusalem' after she was hauled in by David Lammy over Israel's plans for a settlement project in the occupied West Bank. 'I wouldn't tell the British where to build in London ', Tzipi Hotovely told the Daily Mail on Thursday night. 'We see E1 as part of greater Jersusalem', she added. Her remarks come after Foreign Secretary Mr Lammy condemned Israel 's controversial settlement plan in the West Bank that would 'divide a Palestinian state in two'. Mr Lammy criticised the approval of the E1 project as he warned it would 'critically undermine' hopes of a two-state solution to the Middle East crisis. Settlement development in E1, a tract of land east of Jerusalem, has been under consideration for more than two decades. This is despite Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank being widely considered as illegal among the international community and an obstacle to peace. An Israeli defence ministry committee on Wednesday approved plans for around 3,400 homes in E1. He demanded the Israeli government reverse its decision, claiming - if the settlement plan is implemented - it would represent 'a flagrant breach of international law'. Israel's far-right finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, who was sanctioned by the UK in June, said the idea of a Palestinian state was 'being erased' following the approval. It came as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a fresh blast at Sir Keir Starmer's vow to recognise a Palestinian state next month. Last month, Sir Keir announced the UK would formally recognise Palestine in September before the United Nations General Assembly in New York unless Israel meets certain conditions. This includes agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza, making clear there will be no annexation in the West Bank, and committing to a long-term peace process that delivers a two-state solution. But Mr Netanyahu repeated his claim that Sir Keir was 'rewarding' Hamas in the wake of the terror groups attacks on Israel on 7 October 2023. He told the Triggernometry podcast: 'They [Hamas] commit the greatest savagery against Jews since the Holocaust, and the Prime Minister of Britain says we will reward you with a de facto state which is committed openly to repeating the October 7 massacre over and over and over again. 'And they say we recognise Israel's right to defend itself… as long as Israel doesn't exercise that right. 'Let's imagine, what would be the response of Britain if about 15,000 people would be butchered in one day, and you'd have, I don't know, 2,500 hostages taken. 'Would you say, 'Oh, well, we should give our attackers a state right next to London?' Of course not. He added: 'The standard that is being applied is not merely wrong, it's just downright dangerous. 'Because you're really rewarding these monstrous terrorists with the greatest prize and that's because of weakness.' A two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict envisages a Palestinian state in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza, existing side by side with Israel. The UK has opposed the E1 settlement project due to concerns that it could undermine a future peace deal with the Palestinians. In a post on X/Twitter, Mr Lammy said: 'The UK condemns the decision by Israel's Higher Planning Committee today to approve the E1 settlement plan. 'If implemented, it would divide a Palestinian state in two, mark a flagrant breach of international law and critically undermine the two-state solution. 'The Israeli government must reverse this decision.' On Sunday, during a visit to Ofra, another West Bank settlement established a quarter of a century ago, Mr Netanyahu said: 'I said 25 years ago that we will do everything to secure our grip on the Land of Israel, to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, to prevent the attempts to uproot us from here. 'Thank God, what I promised, we have delivered.' Mr Smotrich, who unveiled the E1 plans last week, welcomed the approval of the project. 'The Palestinian state is being erased from the table not with slogans but with actions,' he said.


Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Government struggling to reduce migrant hotel use as asylum claims hit record level
Government efforts to reduce the use of expensive hotel accommodation for asylum seekers have stalled in the face of local opposition and court bottlenecks. During last year's election, Labour promised to end the use of hotels by 2029. But data released today by the Home Office shows that there are more asylum seekers in hotels than when Keir Starmer took office. As of 30 June this year, there were 32,059 asylum seekers staying in hotels compared with 29,585 in June 2024. The government has been trying to get more asylum seekers into residential housing, which is much cheaper than hotels, by dispersing them to more locations across the country. But the arrival of asylum seekers in new areas, and the use of residential housing to accommodate them, has provoked a backlash by residents and local politicians. This has made it crucial for the government to cut the overall number in need of housing - either by reducing the number of applicants or by processing their claims more quickly. The data, however, shows that the government is struggling on both fronts. Effort to reduce hotel use Both Conservative and Labour governments have sought to decrease reliance on hotel accommodation for asylum seekers due to soaring costs. The Home Office spent £4.76bn on asylum last year, almost four times as much as it spent in 2020-21 (£1.34bn). Of every £1 spent, 76p went on hotel accommodation alone. Housing an asylum seeker in a hotel costs around £170 per night, compared with £27 for other types of accommodation, according to estimates by Oxford University's Migration Observatory. A policy introduced in 2023, under the Conservatives, sought to reduce reliance on hotels by dispersing asylum seekers more evenly across the country. Data shows that the policy started having an impact even before it was formally implemented. In September 2022, 31% of asylum seekers were housed in just ten councils. Three months later, that figure had fallen to 24%. But Sky News analysis shows that areas which have seen more asylum seekers arriving since then are actually more likely to use hotels - undercutting the purpose of the policy. And the arrival of asylum seekers in locations across the country has sparked protests by residents and legal action by councils. You can see how the policy has affected your area using the table below. Residents and politicians have also raised concerns about the main alternative to hotels - the use of residential housing, including houses in multiple occupation (HMOs). In her maiden speech to Parliament in May, Reform MP for Runcorn and Helsby Sarah Pochin described HMOs housing asylum seekers as "breeding grounds for organised crime gangs". A huge backlog of claims The fact that the government is being criticised wherever it places asylum seekers suggests that their real problem is the overall number of asylum seekers requiring accommodation. As of June, that number stood at 102,866, more than twice as high as March 2020 (48,042) and only 14% below the record levels reached in September 2023 (119,010). The government is required under international law to provide asylum seekers with housing while their claims are being assessed if they would otherwise be "destitute". And because the government also forbids asylum seekers from working until their claims are approved, that means they have to provide accommodation for almost all of them. Since 2020, the number of asylum seekers awaiting a final decision on their claim has more than doubled. That is partly due to a slowdown in processing asylum claims. In May 2019, the Conservative government abandoned a target of processing most claims within six months. By March 2020, the share processed within six months fell from 52% to 39%. "By delaying or not taking decisions, they produced this huge backlog that also put a lot of pressure on the provision of accommodation," says Professor Nando Sigona of the University of Birmingham. A rise in asylum applications The issue was exacerbated by a surge in asylum claims after pandemic restrictions were eased in 2021. Home Office data shows that the number of decisions made on asylum applications fell during this period and only began to increase significantly in 2023. That increase in decisions has helped to cut the number of cases awaiting an initial decision over the past year from 85,839 to 70,532. On Thursday, as the statistics were released, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said the government was making progress on the backlog and had reduced it by 18%. But appeals to these initial decisions are common, and the government is required to house asylum seekers until their appeals are over. Data from the Ministry of Justice shows that, as of March this year, 50,976 claims were awaiting appeal decisions. That puts the total backlog at 129,721 cases, up from 119,066 in June last year. Professor Sigona says that the number of people applying for asylum has risen across Europe in recent years, but that other countries have avoided being obliged to house so many of them by relaxing work requirements. "In Europe asylum seekers are allowed to work much more rapidly," says Eleonore Kofman, professor of gender, migration and citizenship at Middlesex University. Without the right to work, she says, "you kind of lock them into destitution and you have to provide housing for them". The government has struggled to reduce small boat arrivals As well as increasing the processing of asylum claims, the government has sought to reduce the number of claims by reducing small boat crossings. However, a total of 43,309 people arrived in the UK by small boat during Labour's first year in office, a 38% increase on the year before. Almost all of them (99%) claimed asylum. In the year to June, people crossing on small boats accounted for 38% of asylum claims. The UK requires people to apply for asylum from within the country but does not offer a visa for those wishing to make an application. This means that most people who want to flee to the UK must come illegally - either by using another type of visa, or by entering irregularly. On 6 August, a deal between the UK and France took effect, opening up a new route for asylum seekers and a possible way for the government to deter small boat crossings. Under the agreement, France will accept the return of migrants who arrive in the UK by small boat in exchange for the UK accepting an equivalent number of asylum seekers currently in France. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said that the new policy "sends a message to every migrant currently thinking of paying organised crime gangs to go to the UK that they will be risking their lives and throwing away their money if they get into a small boat." Speaking to Sky News on Thursday, director of the Migration Observatory think tank Madeleine Sumption said it remains unclear how many people France will agree to take back. "If it's a relatively small, symbolic number... then asylum seekers may just see that there's one more risk... at the end of an already risky journey and [it's] something that they're willing to accept." As of Wednesday, 2,561 migrants had arrived in the UK by small boat since the policy took effect.


The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
DWP launches independent review into Post Office staff prosecutions
The Department for Work and Pensions is launching an independent review into its handling of prosecutions against Post Office staff. There were around 100 prosecutions by the DWP between 2001 and 2006, during the Horizon IT scandal. The decision to review the work on the cases comes after it was revealed the Post Office investigation team shared information with the DWP. The investigation will look at the period of time covered by the Post Office (Horizon System) Offences Act 2024, from 1996 to 2018. This was the legislation that effectively gave a blanket exoneration to Post Office staff convicted in that time, but it did not include DWP-related convictions. It was uncovered that the DWP and Post Office had conducted joint investigations during the scandal by Sky News last May. Responding to the findings at the time, lawyer and then-chair of the Justice Select Committee, Sir Robert Neill KC said the DWP convictions need to be 'looked at'. "I think that's the area they need to look at if we are saying their approach was tainted from the beginning - in the way the investigators adopted things - then joint operations I suspect would be just as tainted arguably as something where it has been the Post Office on its own." A DWP spokesperson said: 'We have committed to commissioning an independent assurance review where Post Office members of staff were prosecuted by the Department for welfare-related fraud. 'These cases involved complex investigations and were backed by evidence including filmed surveillance, stolen benefit books and witness statements – to date, no documentation has been identified showing that Horizon data was essential to these prosecutions.' Lawyer Neil Hudgell, who represented several victims of the Post Office scandal, said the review was 'wholly inadequate', adding that the DWP "should not be marking its own homework.' "Any involvement in the process of appointing reviewers undermines all confidence in the independence of the process," he said. The Horizon IT scandal saw approximately 1,000 individuals wrongfully prosecuted and convicted. Around £1 billion has been paid to victims so far according to the Department for Business and Trade, after a legal act which came into effect on 25 January 2024 authorised automatic compensation. The inquiry into the scandal is still ongoing, having published the first volume of its final report in July.