I have no axe to grind in the halal/non-halal animal cruelty & welfare debate, as I eat meat and have undoubtedly eaten some not particularly well cared for animal flesh in my time.
However. I live on the East London/Essex border in an area which has become increasingly Muslim in the 26 years I've lived here. Not a problem. Most takeaways and restaurants in the area are halal. Not a problem. All the local butchers are halal. Not a problem.
But I have a DD who is an immensely picky eater. Subway is one of the few places we can stop to have something to eat when out because she can specify exactly what she wants. Which is always a plain ham sub with cucumber. I've just checked that link to branches, and all 3 of the Subways in our town are halal. The nearest (and only) non-halal branch is (you can't make this up) in East Ham, which is totally out of our way and would not be en-route to the shops.
If this is actually true that the halal branches are no longer serving ham at all (I intend to check this in person tomorrow), then that is one less place I can rely on to get DD something to eat when we're out and about. I've tried her with the halal substitutes for pork that other places in town have and invariably they have some kind of spice in them, so she can't eat them.
IF it's true, I am rather cross, as there are more than enough halal places in our town for people to eat at. I don't get why having pork products for pork eaters in a shop that serves everybody would offend Muslim sensibilities so badly - no-one's forcing them to have ham in their subs, and there shouldn't be cross-contamination of ingredients anyway. In fact our corner shop, run by a nice Muslim family, sells bacon and sausage in their fridge area, so I'm rather confused by all this.
If of course, it's true. As Mrs DV says, we have elections coming up... 