I heart Saint Jamie • Non-Gaming • Food • Eurogamer.net

ssuellid 29 Sep 2005 14:51:17 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

You think its going to happen then? The 50p extra per meal is good.

There were mumblings on the late night news that its not what it sounds like.

Mike_Hunt 29 Sep 2005 14:52:13 23,524 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 19 years ago

rhythm wrote:
Jamie's new Sainsbury's adverts are actually seriously
mouthwatering at the mo.

You mean him pulling a live pig out of his pants?

Whatever does it for you Rhy, whatever does it for you...

[MH]

Shivoa 29 Sep 2005 14:53:19 6,314 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

I bet you I still won't be able to get a good meal in the canteen here at work.

ssuellid 29 Sep 2005 14:54:58 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Headteachers response

Whizzo 29 Sep 2005 14:55:23 44,810 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Channel 4 News said last night that the government's own panel said it should be 70p spent total, meanwhile they announce the change to be 50p. It's not an increase of 50p, it's an increase to 50p.

Plus a lot of schools no longer have the ability to cook food on site so it'll be impossible to enforce the change for at least three years.

Whizzo 29 Sep 2005 14:59:17 44,810 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

otto wrote:
It's a move in the right direction though.

True but is been given the usual, party conference spin. Which most likely means it will be quietly shelved/underfunded/canned while no-one's looking...

Mike_Hunt 29 Sep 2005 15:00:11 23,524 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 19 years ago

rhythm wrote:

Mike_Hunt wrote:
You mean him pulling a live pig out of his pants?

O_O

Which adverts are you watching? I was talking about the ones where he encourages peeps to "try something different".

The ones where he tries to smuggle a live itallian pig through customs by hiding it in his pants.

[MH]

ssuellid 29 Sep 2005 15:01:25 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Did you see the 82yr old getting ejected from the Labour conference, Otto?

Curious to know if its been broadcast abroad. Bloke on one of last nights news was saying if it had happened in somewhere like China it would be international news.

edit: below?

Edited by ssuellid at 15:04:52 29-09-2005

mal 29 Sep 2005 15:03:31 29,326 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

This news hasn't actually got anything to do with Jamie really though, has it? He was more directly involved in the decision to start spending some actually spending money on school dinners, but from there it's just been in the public interest, maintained by newspapers and just people with more than a two second memory. Credit to Jamie for getting the public at large to give a toss in the first place (or at least kudos to whoever came up with the idea for his school dinners programme), but personally I've gone back to thinking of him as a largely irritating tosser. The Sainsbury's ads help in reinforcing this view.

Whizzo 29 Sep 2005 15:05:23 44,810 posts
Seen 4 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

But if 82 year olds aren't ejected from party conference for saying "nonsense!" during Himmler's speechs the terrorists will win.

Just as well they detained him under the terrorism act for a while to send the proper message to other elderly Labour party members.

pjmaybe 29 Sep 2005 15:07:16 70,666 posts
Seen 12 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

Definitely think he's done a good job with schools, but a lot of schools are simply too poor to be able to do this stuff, and won't.

Was good to see a news report about the government getting vending machines out of schools. Only 10 years late then chaps.

Peej

ssuellid 29 Sep 2005 15:10:49 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

A lot of schools only have vending machines or heating up facilities or need upgrades. The upgrades are supposed to happen other the next 3 years but the new facilities are pencilled in for the next 15 years - and they still don't cover all schools.

sam_spade 29 Sep 2005 15:18:29 15,745 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 20 years ago

That pensioner getting hauled out reminded me of the Kursk disaster and that woman being sedated in the meeting hall.

pjmaybe 29 Sep 2005 15:23:47 70,666 posts
Seen 12 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

otto wrote:

pjmaybe wrote:
Definitely think he's done a good job with schools, but a lot of schools are simply too poor to be able to do this stuff, and won't.

I thought the whole point was that kids can be fed healthy food for the same or less money. And anyway, frankly, spending a little on nutrition for school kids will save how much in healthcare and other related costs? It's simply unacceptable that we feed poison to children. Cos it is poison.

The cost doesn't relate to the meal unit cost, as Ssuellid states above, it's more to do with what a lot of schools would have to do to reach a point where they could even cook meals onsite, let alone cook healthy meals onsite.

Believe me, I would not want my kids (if I had any) eating ANY of that crap and I'd do what you do (make 'em something myself, that was nutritional and healthy).

Having seen some of the shit served up to my brother when he was at school a mere ten years ago, I wouldn't feed my dog that. I just hope that this doesn't just boil down to a case of "Great grub for middle class or well off kids, same old shit for poor inner city comprehensive kids"

Peej

terminalterror 29 Sep 2005 15:24:44 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

I can imagine that any newsagent that is near to a school will be refitting their shelves come the ban to cope with a huge surge in demand for chocolate bars etc.

The Tesco Express in the Esso in between a boys grammar and a girls grammar school where I live gets cleared out every morning by kids buying junk. Presumably it'll just get worse once they can't buy any crap in school.

mal 29 Sep 2005 15:28:01 29,326 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

otto wrote:
mal, I do think that he's been the catalyst. Would it have happened if he hadn't pushed?

Maybe not, but I reckon there's probably other people you don't hear about who have picked up the baton and run with it. Sorry, but the Sainsbury's ads really get my goat, so I'm happy if I can just pat him on the back for a initial job well done then go back to my normal position of generally disliking the smug sod.

Peej, I didn't watch to the end of the series, but didn't he have an awful lot of trouble making healthy stuff for the required price? If he had trouble, I can't imagine non-trained professional chefs having it too easy. This problem would have been largely avoided if the allocated budget for meals had actually gone up as promised.

Dougs 29 Sep 2005 15:33:56 100,414 posts
Seen 16 hours ago
Registered 18 years ago

mal wrote:

if I can just pat him on the back for a initial job well done then go back to my normal position of generally disliking the smug sod.

Well said! Don't like the guy (I'm sure he thinks I'm great), but he did at least raise the issue up the agenda, so fair play. But if he'd kindly fuck off now, I'd be very grateful.

smoothpete 29 Sep 2005 15:37:28 37,743 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 17 years ago

otto wrote:
It's an utter scandal and really demonstrates the decline and fall of New Labour. They really need a kick up the arse. What a pity the UK's a one-party state at the moment. Putting the official opposition in power would do even more damage.

To be fair to Labour it was the stewards who ejected the old guy and the bloke next to him. You can't blame the party for a poor (well, very poor) decision on the part of some part-time bouncer knucklehead

ssuellid 29 Sep 2005 15:40:40 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

smoothpete wrote:
To be fair to Labour it was the stewards who ejected the old guy and the bloke next to him. You can't blame the party for a poor (well, very poor) decision on the part of some part-time bouncer knucklehead

Stewards are party members.

Anyway they would not let him back in after either. Nicked his card off him and held as Otto said.

For saying a single word.

pjmaybe 29 Sep 2005 15:42:33 70,666 posts
Seen 12 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

mal wrote:

otto wrote:
mal, I do think that he's been the catalyst. Would it have happened if he hadn't pushed?
Maybe not, but I reckon there's probably other people you don't hear about who have picked up the baton and run with it. Sorry, but the Sainsbury's ads really get my goat, so I'm happy if I can just pat him on the back for a initial job well done then go back to my normal position of generally disliking the smug sod.

Peej, I didn't watch to the end of the series, but didn't he have an awful lot of trouble making healthy stuff for the required price? If he had trouble, I can't imagine non-trained professional chefs having it too easy. This problem would have been largely avoided if the allocated budget for meals had actually gone up as promised.

I saw the last proggy and it would appear that most of the schools approached saw the cost as the first and foremost issue. I don't understand that at all, so what if parents had to pay more so their kids didn't end up fucked up and unhealthy through eating crap at school?

Actually that raises a good point which was shown in all its glorious detail in the evening news report about this last night. Some useless parent sitting there saying "I want the chips back, what's the use of them doing healthy food if my kid won't eat it, and comes home starving at night? Put the chips back on the menu"

I seriously wanted to grab the bloke and shake the fucker, and say "Wake up, you are killing your kid you moron! Feed 'em good stuff, don't feed 'em that crap" (he'd made up what looked like a rather junk-laden packed lunch to give to his kid instead of the kid biting the bullet and eating the healthy stuff that was on offer).

Peej

smoothpete 29 Sep 2005 15:43:45 37,743 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 17 years ago

Oh, fair enough, I missed what the follow-up had been. I withdraw my previous statement, and replace it with "Labour = wankers"

Shivoa 29 Sep 2005 15:47:57 6,314 posts
Seen 2 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

I saw the last proggy and it would appear that most of the schools approached saw the cost as the first and foremost issue. I don't understand that at all, so what if parents had to pay more so their kids didn't end up fucked up and unhealthy through eating crap at school?

Schools get a fixed budget. We can feed them right and drop French or try and get away with giving them an education and hope they learn to bring in something healthy and eat a hot meal in the evening. Unless the Gov_t fully funds the upgrades and increased costs then you're going to be eating from the already meagre budget to actually teach the kids. Hence if you speak to teachers about it they don't give a flying as only being able to buy enough textbooks for one class and swapping them is bad enough. When you take all the textbooks away they're screwed.

sam_spade 29 Sep 2005 15:48:22 15,745 posts
Seen 1 week ago
Registered 20 years ago

/points at Honey, we're killing the kids!

Tonight BBC3.

The fact is that parents don't realise that they are poisoning their kids with food. Or they do realise and don't really care.

mal 29 Sep 2005 15:49:34 29,326 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

pjmaybe wrote:
Actually that raises a good point which was shown in all its glorious detail in the evening news report about this last night. Some useless parent sitting there saying "I want the chips back, what's the use of them doing healthy food if my kid won't eat it, and comes home starving at night? Put the chips back on the menu"

I seriously wanted to grab the bloke and shake the fucker, and say "Wake up, you are killing your kid you moron! Feed 'em good stuff, don't feed 'em that crap" (he'd made up what looked like a rather junk-laden packed lunch to give to his kid instead of the kid biting the bullet and eating the healthy stuff that was on offer).

Yeah, and this is what Oliver and the production team did so well - they get a significant minority of voting parents to stop thinking like that.

Anyway, I should stop going on about him - I haven't heard him mentioned in relation to this report on anywhere apart from that BBC website article and on here, so I don't think anyone's trying to claim this is all down to Jamie. Perhaps that's what you get for getting your news from Radio 4, mind you.

mal 29 Sep 2005 16:24:49 29,326 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

/pukes

terminalterror 29 Sep 2005 16:39:26 18,932 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

otto wrote:
TT that may be so but it's no excuse to offer it officially sanctioned in places of education.

I never said it was an excuse, only a side affect that will happen when this comes about. At the RGS they should be able to avoid it because they've got a cashless card system going where you load up a card with money (with money using a machine or by cheque) and then spend it in the canteen (and up till the ban the vending machines). Means if parents give their kids cheques then they can't spend the money at a newsagent/Tesco instead and will only be able to buy healthy food. If the kids take in actual money then they can spend it in a shop instead.

I didn't eat very healthily at school at all. I mostly had chips or pizza or burgers, with the occasional beans on toast with sausage and bacon. Mianly because although they had a healthy option, it was generally very unappetising (quality and preparation, not what it actually was). Also got through a reasonable (but not excessive) amount of chocolate from the vending machines and the tuck shop. I wonder what they'll do to the tuck shop now then?

Nemesis 29 Sep 2005 16:49:38 20,312 posts
Seen 6 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Trust me, if the stuff is good the kids will eventually eat it.

How?

Make the puddings the best thing EVAH with the stipulation that they eat the dinner first. It's what they did at my school and it worked. Nothing makes you eat cabbage except the thought of a decent sponge pudding for a horrid job well done.

I still didn't eat the fish. Fucking horrible dark fish with the smell like a Canestan testlab.

It's a step in the right direction, let's see how it's adopted by next September.

With regards to Mr Jamie, the lad has some decent morals and, whilst it is telly, it's done for the right reasons. Suddenly I feel the need for a ham sarnie.

/glass half full

ssuellid 29 Sep 2005 17:02:20 19,142 posts
Seen 2 days ago
Registered 20 years ago

Nemesis wrote:
Make the puddings the best thing EVAH with the stipulation that they eat the dinner first.

Don't think that would work these day. Kids would just threaten the kitchen staff and demand the puddings.

mal 29 Sep 2005 17:49:10 29,326 posts
Seen 3 years ago
Registered 20 years ago

otto wrote:
Make the damn stuff tasty. That's the beginning and end of the story. It's not rocket science.

Is it really that simple? It's only recently I've found that I've got a taste for cabbage, and leeks, and spinach, and butternut squash and all sort of veggies I thought I didn't like. I'd assumed it was because they thought that kids tastes things differently to adults. But maybe it's just because my mum used to boil the crap out of everything?