Glasgow second cheapest Scottish city for fish and chips
According to research by WDW Bingo, the average cost of a portion of fish and chips in Glasgow is £10.37 - significantly lower than the UK average of £11.71.
Read more: Glasgow ranked as second funniest city in UK
This places the city just below Dundee, where the popular dish comes to an average of just £9.47.
Harrison Score, the head of WDW Bingo, said: "The data shows that the North dominates the top 10 cheap eat locations for this iconic dish."
The study, which analysed thousands of menus via Just Eat and desk research, examined fish and chip shops across over 50 towns and cities.
It revealed stark contrasts in pricing, with Manchester taking the top spot for value at just £8.94, while Exeter was named the priciest, at £16.55 per portion - nearly double the cost.
Scotland performed particularly well in the affordability rankings, with all major cities offering a portion for less than £11.
Glasgow ranked 10th on the list of the most affordable places to buy the takeaway UK-wide, while Dundee was high up the list at third place.
Aberdeen and Edinburgh were not far behind Glasgow in prices at £10.67 and £10.93, respectively.
Although Edinburgh was the most expensive Scottish city studied, it still ranked far below some of the highest prices found in southern England, where coastal towns like Torquay, Bournemouth, and Southend-on-Sea featured prominently among the priciest.
Read more: Glasgow ranked as second most generous city in the UK
Harrison said: "Fish and chips are more than just a meal – they're a national institution.
"Whether you're paying under a tenner in Manchester or splashing out in Exeter, it's a dish enjoyed by generations across the UK.
"When it comes to value for your fish supper, it pays to know where your chances are highest of bagging a low-cost meal."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Why govt's promise of 'biggest boost to affordable housing in a generation' may be overblown
Angela Rayner is set to announce plans to build 180,000 new social homes in the next decade, as the government seeks to "turn the tide on the housing crisis". It would be six times greater than the number of social homes built in the 10 years up to 2024 - and forms part of a drive to build 300,000 new social and affordable properties by 2035. The plan is backed by a £39bn investment announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves in last month's spending review. 2:29 The deputy prime minister called on the social housing sector to "work together to turn the tide of the housing crisis", and said the investment was "the biggest boost to social and affordable housing in a generation". "We are seizing this golden opportunity with both hands to transform this country by building the social and affordable homes we need, so we create a brighter future where families aren't trapped in temporary accommodation and young people are no longer locked out of a secure home," she said. Ms Rayner's target for social and affordable housing is part of a wider long-term plan - also due to be published on Wednesday - setting out how the government will build both more houses and improve housing standards. Here, Sky News looks at what the plan will mean for the country, how it compares to previous programmes, and how it could be affected by the increased cost of construction. 3:17 Crunching the numbers The £39bn 10-year Affordable Homes Programme is an ambitious investment in affordable housing, representing a real terms increase from the previous programme of over £1bn annually. However, claims of the "biggest boost in a generation" may be slightly overblown. When factoring in inflation, the annual investment of £3.9bn falls short of the equivalent £4.5bn annually from 2008 to 2011 under the previous Labour government. This was however a notably short-term uplift, and the sector will welcome the stability of the new settlement which secures funding for 10 years - compared with five years or fewer under previous programmes. The programme sets out to deliver 30,000 affordable homes per year on average, with at least 18,000 of those being for social rent, rather than other tenures such as shared ownership. This would be more than twice the number under the previous programme, which is estimated to have delivered about 8,000 homes annually for social rent by its completion. Similarly, however, it is fewer than were delivered by the previous Labour Affordable Homes Programme, which was over 30,000 a year from 2008 to 2011. A further challenge to the government's goal of a "generational" uplift is the increasing cost of building, meaning they may face diminishing returns on their investment. The previous Affordable Homes Programme initially aimed to deliver 180,000 homes, which was revised down significantly to between 110,000 and 130,000 due to increasing costs and delays. This government can expect to face a similar economic landscape, particularly with an ambition to deliver a greater share of socially rented homes - the most expensive type of affordable housing to build.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Aukus deal's importance ‘well understood' by Trump administration, Penny Wong says – but no iron-clad guarantee given
The strategic importance of the Aukus agreement is 'well understood' by the Trump administration, Penny Wong says, despite a snap Pentagon review casting doubt on the future of the pact. In Washington DC for talks with Quad nations foreign ministers on Wednesday, Australia's foreign affairs minister said the US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, had heard Australia's position on the need for the agreement to proceed, though she did not receive any iron-clad assurances from her counterpart. The Aukus deal outlines the sharing of nuclear-powered submarine technology between Australia, the US and the UK at a cost of about A$350bn. The federal government has already made payments worth A$800m. Despite the review being led by an Aukus sceptic and US undersecretary of defense, Elbridge Colby, Wong said she remained confident the partnership would 'last decades'. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email She said Australia and the US understood 'the importance to both our countries and to the United Kingdom'. 'We understand a new administration is going to engage in a review,' Wong said. 'That is not surprising. The United Kingdom did so. 'This is a multi-decade partnership. It will take governments and administrations of both political persuasions over many years to deliver. We will continue to work with the United States and the United Kingdom on delivering it.' The talks come as Donald Trump and the US defense secretary, Pete Hegseth, push Labor to lift Australia's defence spending to 3.5% of GDP. The federal government is resisting that pressure. Australia is on track to lift defence spending from about $53bn a year, or about 2% of GDP – to an estimated $100bn, or 2.4% of GDP, by 2033-34. The Quad talks included Japan's foreign minister, Iwaya Takeshi, and India's external affairs minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Wong said Rubio had expressed regret that Trump had not met with Anthony Albanese at the G7 summit last month. Trump left the talks in Canada a day early to deal with the war between Israel and Iran. 'I explained to him we perfectly understood why the president had to leave, given the circumstances, and we agreed that we will reschedule this meeting,' she said. 'We both look forward to the leaders meeting. 'I think that the Trump administration and President Trump has made very clear to the world that he envisages a different role for America in the world.' One possible opportunity for a meeting between Trump and the prime minister at the White House could be after the UN general assembly in New York in September. India will host the next Quad leaders' summit later this year. Australia could benefit from demand for critical minerals from Quad countries including Japan and India, with exports forming part of efforts to secure supply chains as a balance against China's domination of the market. Rubio said the US wanted to diversify global supplies and processing. 'It's critical for all technologies and for all industries across the board,' he said. 'Having a diverse and reliable global supply chain of these is just one example of many that we can focus on and build upon and achieve some real progress on.' Wong called progress on critical minerals part of efforts to secure 'concrete outcomes' for a stable and peaceful Indo-Pacific region. 'This is a supply set of supply chains we need to assure. Australia has, I think, 36 of the 50 critical minerals. We certainly have a capacity to do more for those, to secure those supply chains.'
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
The PM faced down his party on welfare and lost. I suspect things may only get worse
So much for an end to chaos and sticking plaster politics. Yesterday, Sir Keir Starmer abandoned his flagship welfare reforms at the eleventh hour - hectic scenes in the House of Commons that left onlookers aghast. Facing possible defeat on his welfare bill, the PM folded in a last-minute climbdown to save his skin. 0:23 The decision was so rushed that some government insiders didn't even know it was coming - as the deputy PM, deployed as a negotiator, scrambled to save the bill or how much it would cost. "Too early to answer, it's moved at a really fast pace," said one. The changes were enough to whittle back the rebellion to 49 MPs as the prime minister prevailed, but this was a pyrrhic victory. Sir Keir lost the argument with his own backbenchers over his flagship welfare reforms, as they roundly rejected his proposed cuts to disability benefits for existing claimants or future ones, without a proper review of the entire personal independence payment (PIP) system first. PM wins key welfare vote - follow latest 4:31 That in turn has blown a hole in the public finances, as billions of planned welfare savings are shelved. Chancellor Rachel Reeves now faces the prospect of having to find £5bn. As for the politics, the prime minister has - to use a war analogy - spilled an awful lot of blood for little reward. He has faced down his MPs and he has lost. 4:38 They will be emboldened from this and - as some of those close to him admit - will find it even harder to govern. After the vote, in central lobby, MPs were already saying that the government should regard this as a reset moment for relations between No 10 and the party. The prime minister always said during the election that he would put country first and party second - and yet, less than a year into office, he finds himself pinned back by his party and blocked from making what he sees are necessary reforms. I suspect it will only get worse. When I asked two of the rebel MPs how they expected the government to cover off the losses in welfare savings, Rachael Maskell, a leading rebel, suggested the government introduce welfare taxes. Meanwhile, Work and Pensions Select Committee chair Debbie Abrahams told me "fiscal rules are not natural laws" - suggesting the chancellor could perhaps borrow more to fund public spending. 0:45 These of course are both things that Ms Reeves has ruled out. But the lesson MPs will take from this climbdown is that - if they push hard in enough and in big enough numbers - the government will give ground. The fallout for now is that any serious cuts to welfare - something the PM says is absolutely necessary - are stalled for the time being, with the Stephen Timms review into PIP not reporting back until November 2026. 1:10 Had the government done this differently and reviewed the system before trying to impose the cuts - a process only done ahead of the Spring Statement in order to help the chancellor fix her fiscal black hole - they may have had more success. Those close to the PM say he wants to deliver on the mandate the country gave him in last year's election, and point out that Sir Keir Starmer is often underestimated - first as party leader and now as prime minister. But on this occasion, he underestimated his own MPs. His job was already difficult enough - and after this it will be even harder still. If he can't govern his party, he can't deliver change he promised.
