It's all about the access to the vegetarian and vegan foods to those who want it, and it happens to become more popular, so market adapts.
But you present it like someone tries to take your food.
By the way, "the government deciding" sounds like it's totally detached from public wish. But in democratic countries public has a lot of influence on the government, way more than popular meme says (speaking as an emigrant from autocratic regime), it just public is not exercising their right (or really trust the government). So it's actually "people are going to decide".
This last year I am really decreasing how much meat I eat (ill never give it up although I am excited about ground cricket meat and trying that). I am doing it for my health, costs, and because its good for the planet long term.
Cashew cheese really is not better for the planet the local organic milk cheese.
In north of Holland there huge patches of land only cow can grace the land and nothing else grows, and there is an abundance of the water. Yet everyone complains about milk and meat taking too much wayer, and that growing plants would be more efficient.
It all depends, you cant just say "data".
Same with health. You really can't claim fried soya or pea protein is healthier then ground beef from a cow that spends his summers outside.
I don't think cashew cheese grows in nature, i would never consider it vegetables and I am not advocating for processed foods. Merely stating that cutting down on how much meat you eat and eating more veg is better for your health and the planet. Well backed by data.
For instance, it's multiple times less co2 impact for me eating an avocado here in Norway that's been shipped half the globe around from south america, compared to eating meat from the local farm. The scales are just so incredibly different in production (vs transportation) that it's not to "gotcha" many believe to claim that something imported is automatically bad.
Next to that it's not always Plants vs meats. In many places only cattle can graze but not much of value can grow.
The CO2 issue is really a terrible comparison. Everything cows put out has been put in from the air. The airplanes are excreting new/old CO2 taken from fossil fuels. Some claim cows are still worse because of methane, but they forget to mention methane only had 12 years lifespan in the atmosphere.
The produce to feed the cattle is often detrimental to the environment too. They're not cutting down rain forests in Brazil to produce soy for meat substitutes but rather for produce to feed animals.
But it's absolutely important to eat local and if you're gonna eat meat ensure that the animal was fed local produce too.
The vast majority of soy production, particularly the environmentally destructive production that’s converting rainforests in South America into farmland, is for animal feed, not human consumption: https://ourworldindata.org/soy
I've got a few friends who are vegan but it's mostly me doing the questioning as I'm curious about developments in that field (and agtech)
Active people will (and should) win, that's the law of nature.
That timeline is long enough to also include the serious possibility of basically any weird currently-just-Sci-Fi option: https://youtu.be/Z_ZGq8Tah0k
The upside for the politicians and suppliers seems too astronomical not to be at least thinking about it.