THANKS to everyone for making it along to this emergency meeting at such short notice – and may I extend a particular welcome to our colleagues from the Marmalade Marketing Board.
It’s so important for us to work together to keep preserves high on the policy agenda.
They say all publicity is good publicity, but we’re facing a challenge here. On the one hand, great news: everyone is talking about jam. This is the week we’ve been waiting for ever since we established our network four decades ago. On the other hand, no-one is talking about the sweet, simple joy of a jam sandwich, the ecstasy of jam on sourdough toast or the illicit thrill of jam straight from the jar at 11pm on a Tuesday night. Instead they are talking about mouldy jam. Contaminated jam. Bad batches of jam that could land addicts in hospital. This will not do.
READ MORE: Experts urge Theresa May to kick her mouldy jam habit
We have worked tirelessly to take back control of the definition of jam. Our efforts have succeeded beyond our wildest expectations. When we began our covert campaign against Council Directive 79/693/EEC back in 1979, few would have predicted that we would be successful not only in protecting the integrity of the fruit-based preserves market but in removing the UK from the EU altogether.
It has been a long, difficult and sticky road, but our goal is within reach. One final push will ensure that across the nations of the UK, fruit means fruit and jam means jam. Post-Brexit, my friends, there will be no “carrot jam”. There will be no “pumpkin jam”. There will – please hold your applause – THERE WILL BE NO “CUCUMBER JAM”!
Rhubarb jam will of course still be allowed, because it is absolutely delicious. Tomato jam will not, because everyone knows that “tomatoes are a fruit” is one of the many lies cooked up by unelected Brussels bureaucrats, who would probably try to claim a jar of mashed Brussels sprouts was “jam” given half a chance.
The honey threat, too, has been significantly reduced thanks to our targeted campaign of bee murder and our successful efforts to blame the resulting population decline on pesticides and climate change. Our membership has also had great success in getting anti-bee propaganda published in the letters pages of national newspapers. Particular credit must go to raspberry farmer Derek Sugarman, who successfully bribed a jam-dependent tabloid reporter into running the news stories “Bee sting drama shuts down hospice fundraiser” and “Honey I poisoned the kids”.
Now, however, we must turn our attention to an equally pressing problem – the pernicious falsehood that jam is “unhealthy”, “full of sugar” and should be consumed only “in moderation”.
We’ve seen jam disappear from school dining rooms and hospital canteens, and the jam industry hit hard by a sugar tax.
It is no exaggeration to state that there a war is being waged against jam. We must rally our troops to defend all that is sweet, fruity and neither liquid nor solid.
This week’s flurry of publicity has demonstrated that we still have jam-lovers in high places, but what we really need are “influencers” – people who are respected, admitted and listened to rather than pitied, despised and ignored.
We need glamorous social media stars willing to take baths of jam wearing thong bikinis, not penny-pinching politicians who are too weak to screw jar lids on properly. We need YouTube videos of hyped-up, apple-cheeked toddlers chuckling adorably as they are spoon-fed jam – NB not puree – by parents rapping about the vitamins in fruit to beats by Jam Master Jay.
READ MORE: Exclusive: We reveal the special place in hell reserved for Brexiteers
Going forward we must pursue a two-pronged strategy of inserting subliminal messages about the joys of jam into the mainstream media and pushing jam to new markets such as young people in nightclubs, stressed executives and elite athletes seeking a competitive edge.
We must flood the food banks with gateway jams such as strawberry and apricot, then target heavy users with blackcurrant, fig and guava.
Our members must step up their efforts to be selected for the audience of Question Time, and any who prove successful should smuggle in some jam then smear it around their mouths before the cameras pan past their smiling, satisfied faces.
If called upon to ask a question, this should be framed in terms of the Government being “in a jam”, or the need to “preserve the integrity” of the United Kingdom.
It’s regrettable that Jacob Rees-Mogg did not co-operate with our request for last night’s show to include a demonstration of trickle-down economics using one of those cute mini jars you find in hotels, but there really is no limit to the number of ways in which jam could be incorporated into political debate.
Worried about the impact of a no deal on supplies of fresh fruit? Screw the lid on tightly and your jam will keep forever. Nervous about travelling overseas this summer? Stay at home, pick your own, and get your whole family hooked on jam. Concerned about the threat to workers’ rights? In a few weeks’ time you’ll finally have the absolute right to call a Great British fruit a fruit – can there be any more precious a freedom than that?
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel