All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Oct. 12, 2022 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
47:20
20221012_piers-morgan-uncensored-should-kanye-be-banned-fro
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Piers Morgan Uncensored Intro 00:03:52
Tonight at Piers Morgan Uncensored as President Biden pardons pot users, Britain reportedly considers locking them up.
We'll debate marijuana laws with Happy Monday's Maverick Sean Ryder.
Jewish superstars unite to condemn Kanye West racist tirades.
I'll speak live to comedy actor and friend star Michael Rappaport, who's furious with Kanye.
The ticking dementia, time bomb and an aging population, the husband of the late, great Dame Barbara Windsor will be here live in the studio.
And Liz Truss says she'll cut taxes and the national debt, but she won't cut public spending.
Has she finally lost her marbles?
Live from London, this is Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Good evening from London.
Welcome to Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Prime Minister Liz Truss got about two days in office before the Queen's death and a period of national mourning.
She then had another two days behind the desk before Parliament packed up for party conferences.
And she's had three days at work this week.
So in the seven days of service to this country, she's so far cost the UK markets £300 billion in value, which is roughly £43 billion a day.
You certainly can't say she's not efficient.
Every time Ms. Truss speaks, we seem to get poorer.
And today at Prime Minister's Questions, she reminded us why.
And what we're making sure is that we protect our economy at this very difficult time internationally.
And as a result, as a result of our action, Mr. Speaker, and this has been independently corroborated, we will see higher growth and lower inflation.
Really?
Corroborated by who exactly?
Kwasi Kwateng?
The IMF actually said yesterday that growth will grind to a near halt of 0.3% next year.
Inflation will be higher in the UK than anywhere in the Eurozone, other than the mighty Slovakia.
A report by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, meanwhile, says there's a £60 billion black hole in the mini budget needing massive public spending cuts.
Obviously didn't post a copy to number 10.
During her leadership contest, the Prime Minister said, and I quote her exactly, I'm very clear, I'm not planning public spending reductions.
Is she going to stick to that?
Absolutely.
Absolutely sure, Prime Minister.
Tax cuts, lower national debt, more spending, no government cuts.
Either you're a very secret economic genius or something's not quite adding up here.
Well, to give Ms. Truss her due credit, there was one short moment of absolute crystal clear clarity and brutal honesty from the Prime Minister today.
I'm just, Mr. Speaker, I'm genuinely unclear about what Labour wants to do.
Mr. Speaker, I'm genuinely unclear as to what the Labour Party's policy is on our energy price guarantee.
Well, you could have stopped it after, Mr. Speaker.
I'm genuinely unclear, couldn't you?
We're all unclear.
No one's got a clue what Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwateng are doing.
It makes absolutely no sense to be slashing taxes at this moment in time with the country's finances and the state they're in.
To then try and pretend you're not going to cut public spending to pay for all this is cloud cuckoo land stuff.
Even as I come on air tonight, there's a slew of tweets which I think are very revealing.
This is from Talk TV's Kate McCann, a Trust supporter, post Ms. Truss's appearance in the 22 committee room tonight.
I mean, she's cardboard, isn't she?
Cannabis Laced With Damaging Stuff 00:12:57
We have to accept that.
To which Kate McCann said, but that's not going to win your election, is it?
Of course not, came the reply.
We're going to lose.
Nothing makes any difference now.
We're effed.
And Justin, IT of V's political editor Robert Peston tweeted, a member of Truss's own cabinet, a cabinet minister, tells me Truss and Quarting's governance is so dire that some Tory MPs would vote against it in a confidence vote, preferring even a general election that costs them their seats to the current economic chaos.
Isn't that extraordinary?
In seven working days, this new Prime Minister lost the markets, lost many of her own MPs, lost some of her cabinet, and clearly lost most of the public.
I think the best thing that this trust can do now, and I mean this completely seriously, is call an election or quit.
She has no mandate for the mayhem that she is creating.
Well, more on that later.
But first tonight, President Biden last week pardoned all Americans convicted of possessing marijuana.
It's a stark contrast to the stance of the British Home Secretary, reportedly wants to make cannabis a Class A drug alongside crack, heroin and crystal meth.
UK government's now distanced itself from Sweller Braveman's stars, but it's rehashed a classic debate.
Is cannabis a dangerous gateway drug or a sociable sedative, no worse than alcohol, worth potentially billions in tax revenues.
Well, Joining me now to discuss this, a former newspaper editor, Emily Sheffield, political journalist Ada Santina, talk TV contributor Esther Kraku, but also lead singer of the Happy Mondays and self-proclaimed melon twister Sean Ryder and the Fox News contributor across the pond, Tommy Lehran.
So let me start with Sean.
Hey, great to see you, Sean.
Hi, Pierce.
You're right.
Good to see you.
Now, this is a raging debate, and I spent a lot of time in America where in 19 states now, marijuana is legal for American citizens, it ought to be said, not for non-American citizens.
And, you know, we'll come to Tommy in a moment for her verdict on how that's all been going, but certainly massively more open about legalizing this drug in America than we are here, which seems a little perverse.
Do you think that we should be catching up with the Americans and moving to legalize it?
Well, I'm going to be quite controversial here, Pierce, and call the Home Secretary a knob.
Because draconian rules, you know, turn it to Class A.
I mean, what's that going to achieve?
That's just ridiculous.
It's draconian.
And yeah, you know, I really thought whatever happens in America, whether it's 10 years, 20 years, it happens here.
And we should be taxing it and we should be making money off it.
Really?
You know, we need to go forward.
You know, going backwards, you know, we need to try something that hasn't been tried before.
In terms of cannabis itself, I mean, you've got a certificate of your doctor.
Well, sure.
Famously, cannabis, no one's ever OD'd on cannabis, right?
It's impossible, pretty much.
It's no recorded case of somebody having a lethal overdose of cannabis.
However, I've been lazy.
Well, I was discussing it though before we came on there with some of my own team and they have family members, some of them, who've had extremely bad experiences by taking too much marijuana.
And you do read a lot of grim stories about people who get addicted to it.
It ruins their lives.
It's a gateway drug to more serious drugs.
What do you say to that argument?
Well, cannabis has got a built-in antidote, right?
And the basic thing about it is you light it up and smoke it.
And if you get paranoid, you know, you stop smoking it.
You know, once you, you know, I mean, I smoked for 15, 17 years.
I got up one morning, lit up a joint, usual thing, wake up, skin up, and I got padder.
And I had another go and I got padder and I didn't smoke it again.
I mean that's the same with all my mates, you know, and everybody I know.
So once you start getting padded, you stop smoking it.
All right, let's bring in Tommy Leonard.
Tommy.
There really isn't any long-term, you know, I'm not having it, you know, about, there's no withdrawal symptoms.
They're not physical withdrawal symptoms.
They're more mental.
You know, I want it.
That lasts for about a week.
So, you know, it's just ridiculous.
It really is draconian.
Okay, let's come to Tommy.
It's ridiculous and draconian that the new British Home Secretary is considering making this a Class A drug and incarcerating people for it.
At the exact moment, President Biden is doing, of course, the opposite with Americans in relation to marijuana.
How do you think this conversion of many American states to places where Americans can legally take this drug, how has that gone, Tommy?
Well, I'll tell you this.
I don't usually believe in freedom infringement of really any kind.
But I'll tell you, the states that have legalized in the United States, if you look at them and you look at their homeless population, their degenerate population, it has expanded wildly.
I mean, just look at Denver, Colorado.
It used to be a city that was very vibrant, very hardworking, and then they legalized pot.
And now they have potheads laying on the side of the street.
They have people that traveled there because pot was legalized.
So I don't think it attracts the best of the best.
You know, here in the United States, we allow the states to decide.
And I'm honestly an advocate for states' rights.
I think if you want to have a class of people that are potheads, that smoke weed, that maybe don't contribute a whole lot to society, your voters need to decide that.
But I would tell you, tread lightly on this whole legalize everything, because we've also got states here in the United States that have said, hey, listen, heroin, all those other illicit drugs, they're not so bad either.
We have shoot-up galleries where you can safely inject.
I mean, we talk about a snowball effect.
That's what you're seeing in the United States.
So be careful what you wish for.
It might seem like it's just all in good fun, just a little weed, until you've got potheads littering your streets.
And then you might think a little differently.
Tommy, do you think it's worse than alcohol, for example?
Well, hey, listen, I'm not here to say if it's worse or better than alcohol.
I do know that there are more studies that are surfacing saying that the long-term effects of cannabis might be a little different than some people think.
But when we talk about alcohol, people usually don't look at an alcoholic and say, yeah, that's safe, that's healthy, that's environmental.
But when you look at people that habitually smoke weed, there's this connotation that comes with it that it's from the earth, it's natural, it's for the hippies.
Well, take a longer look into that, and I think the studies are going to reveal that it might not be so green, wholesome, and wonderful on down the road.
So it's really more the connotation that goes with it.
People have been told it's natural, it's healthy, there's nothing wrong with it.
You can't OD on it.
And I think that's a very dangerous message to be putting out there, especially young people.
I mean, it might be a dangerous message, but it's actually a fact, I believe, that no one's ever medically OD'd on cannabis.
Whereas a lot of people have OD'd on alcohol.
Alcohol seems to kill a lot more people than cannabis does.
I'm not necessarily advocating that we legalize it here.
I'm just saying those are two facts which make it interesting to me that we treat as a society alcohol in a more liberal, tolerant way than we treat cannabis.
And I'm not quite sure why.
Well, I think also you mentioned nobody's OD'd.
Well, that might be the case, but just because you're not overdosing and dying doesn't mean that there are not adverse effects.
And I think we need to know those adverse effects.
For so long, you know, the weed lobbying industry has said, oh, it's clean, it's natural, there's no problem.
You're not going to OD on it.
Again, a dangerous message.
Let's also keep in mind that here in the United States, we're having a big problem with marijuana being laced with fentanyl.
So this message that, oh, it's just weed, well, listen, you got to look a little deeper, got to get a little further under the hood.
And then we also have to understand that because we don't have uniform regulation, a lot of this weed that's being grown, the fertilizers being used are not being regulated the right way.
So there are other health side effects that go along with this beyond just overdose that really need to be looked at.
And we've got to get under the hood a little deeper.
Okay, just final point back to you, Sean.
Does anything Tommy say there make you rethink what you're saying about this?
Well, okay.
So how does turning weed into a Class A drug solve the problem?
You know, we've got a South American country there where the prime minister or the president has basically told, you know, his cops to go out and end people's lives on the street.
Anyone who's doing drugs, shoot him, right?
Kill him.
And that doesn't stop him doing it.
So how does turning it given to Class A solve that problem?
And really what?
So we're blaming the whole problem of homelessness and no jobs and everything else in America on what?
Weed?
Really?
Come on.
All right, well, let's go with the final word to you, Tommy Laron.
Come on.
Growled in a Mancunian accent.
No, I'm not saying our homeless crisis.
I'm not saying our homeless crisis can entirely be blamed on weed.
It's mostly blamed on Democrats and their policies here in the United States.
But I'll tell you this.
The cities and the states that have legalized, they have seen an influx of degenerates on their streets that come there because weed has been legalized.
It doesn't attract the best of the best.
Go to Denver, Colorado.
Go to Los Angeles.
Go to San Francisco.
Tell me what you see.
And I'd also say this about the whole gateway drug thing.
Not a lot of individuals start out with a needle in their arm.
They start out with something else.
So is it a domino effect?
I have a feeling that there's something to that.
You know what?
It's a fascinating debate.
And I can't think of two more unlikely people to have come together to have it.
And yet you both made great points.
So I think we may have to do this pairing again.
Thank you both very much.
Sean, Tommy, really appreciate it.
Thanks, please.
It's kind of my pack.
It was a great actually pairing there.
You couldn't meet two more unlikely people to duke it out.
But interesting points, Esther.
They both made interesting points.
This is a very complex issue, I think.
I think so.
And I actually, I understand Tommy's point because it's mostly sort of unleashing Pandora's books.
I think the status quo now is fine.
I don't think we should make it a Class A drug because we're dedicating too many resources to something that's not as big of a problem.
We're already tackling the problem.
It shouldn't be decriminalizing.
It is interesting.
I have a house in LA, right?
So I go there a lot.
And it's amazing how quickly it's moved to where you walk down the main part of Beverly Hills and you see these gigantic billboards all for people flogging marijuana.
And you're like, if you come from England, it's like quite shocking.
But there is completely accepted and they're just cracked on.
And I don't think it's as bad as Tommy presented there from my look at it.
But I certainly do get the feeling from a lot of people that it's more dangerous to certain types of people than I think there's no societal benefit for legalizing weed.
And I say this, not including the medicinal uses of cannabis.
I say this as you're not going to get a better society because more people are smoking weed legally.
But I also don't think you should dedicate more state resources to try and tackle it like you would deal with heroin.
I think the problem is with alcohol, for instance, it's Pandora's books.
We've opened it.
We have a very much an alcohol consuming society and that leads to so many illnesses that our NHS has to deal with.
You don't want to add to that now by either legalizing weed or something.
Emily, you're nodding there.
You agree with that?
I do actually.
I think it's Class B at the moment.
I think that's about right.
They did move it down to class A.
They rapidly moved it back up to Class B.
I also think there are certain elements of our multicultural society where smoking cannabis is part of their cultural, part of their culture.
And I think in those situations, it is unfair.
They are being penalized for something that is completely natural to their culture.
But it is also true what Tommy is saying.
And this is where the argument gets a little bit nuanced, is there is a lot of cannabis and weed out there, which is being laced with stuff that is incredibly damaging.
Absolutely, yeah.
And especially if young kids get their hands on it.
But is legalizing going to make that different?
Because you would then, yes, you would have legalized forms of cannabis, which are probably fine for you, and it's regulated.
That isn't going to stop the strongest stuff being on the black market.
Right, Ava.
Yeah, but then you could have tougher laws, couldn't you, for weed that's being sold on the black market?
I mean, to Tommy's point about fentanyl being laced in a legal, regulated product, that's obviously not happening.
And if that is happening, that would be like if we started selling alcohol in our shops that was made from moonshine.
It's just not plausible.
Would you legalize it here?
I don't think I would legalize it.
I would definitely say we should decriminalize it.
I think when you look at America and you think about over half of the people who are in prison for drug offenses are because of weed, which is a really light drug and really can't affect you.
It's just abysmal.
Def Con 3 On Jewish People 00:08:19
I don't know why on earth.
Okay, we're going to recognize that.
Take a little break.
Come back and talk about Kanye West, who's been suspended from social media for anti-Semitic rants.
We're going to talk to the Jewish actor, Michael Ruffaport, about this.
He's livid about this.
And we'll get a reaction from the pack after the break.
Plus, one in three people born this year will get dementia and claim the life of National British Treasure Barbara Windsor and her widower Scott Mitchell will be here with a tough message for the government who he thinks may be about to renege on promises made to commit funding to dementia.
We'll discuss that.
Welcome back to Bears World and our Censor.
Kanye Westland's controversies have sparked a global debate about the line between free speech and hate speech, as well as concerns about his mental health.
Last week he wore a White Lives Matter t-shirt at a Paris fashion show, but it was Twitter posts about going, in his words, DEF CON 3 on Jewish people, the biggest outrage.
He's now been suspended by Twitter and Instagram and condemned by a host of Jewish celebrities.
Comedian and actor, Michael Rupperport, who's previously defended Kanye, is one of his critics this time.
And he joins me now.
Michael, thank you very much.
Indeed, for joining me.
What's up, Pierce?
Well, good to have you.
And I was reading your, or watching your video attack.
We've got a little clip of it here.
Let's just take a look at this first.
Kookie Kanye West.
What are you talking about?
DEF CON 1, DEF CON 2, CC Jews.
We know about DEF CON 3, DEF CON 3.
You're not doing DEF CON anything.
With the Jews, we know about that.
DEF CON 5, 6 million.
We know all about that.
I've got to say, Michael, that was my response.
And I'm not Jewish.
I'm an Irish Catholic.
But when I saw what he'd written, I was trying to think, what would I feel if I had been Jewish reading this hugely influential rap superstar talking about going deaf?
He didn't even say D-E-F Con 3.
He said D-E-A-T-H.
It's just almost to ram it home.
When you first saw it, what was your reaction?
I mean, I didn't like it.
I was offended by it.
I didn't like it.
I was offended by it.
You know, I'm offended by that kind of talk.
I'm offended by, you know, when there's any sort of racist or racial anti-Semitic talk.
And, you know, and I just, you know, spoke my mind like I do about a lot of things.
You know, I didn't like it.
You know, I feel like it's an obligation and it's something that I must do as a man, as a Jewish man, and as a celebrity who's Jewish to speak out because, you know, in my opinion, and statistically, anti-Semitism is on the rise in the United States.
I don't know what it is worldwide.
And a lot of times, you know, we will speak on behalf of other people's causes and other situations, but not our own.
And I don't like the stereotypes that are portrayed, you know, in my business sometimes about, you know, men, Jewish men being passive or just, you know, neurotic and, you know, guilt-ridden.
And it's just not something that it's just not something that I'll stand by and not say anything, you know, just like I didn't say anything during the Charlottesville situation when they were saying Jews will not replace us and you will not replace us during the Trump regime.
So my next question is, I completely concur with what you just said, but he's been suspended by various social media firms.
Should he be completely no-platformed?
I mean, people like Donald Trump aren't allowed to be on social media.
I don't think what you can...
No, I think Donald Trump got what he asked for.
I think he pushed the envelope.
I've been suspended on all social media platforms, Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, the big three of, and, you know, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
There's rules and regulations.
I don't think that he should be taken off of it at this point.
You know, who am I to say?
But I get the suspensions.
I've gotten suspensions for language and stuff like that.
And it's part of the forum.
You know, it sucks.
It's frustrating when it happens.
To me, I could say when it happens to me, but it's part of the game.
You know, there's so many benefits, especially for someone in show business, especially for someone like Kanye and all entertainers to be on social media to promote themselves and to promote products and stuff like that.
And, you know, sometimes you need a timeout.
It's happened to me.
Like I said, it sucks, but I don't think he should be removed completely.
No.
Okay.
I mean, very interesting.
Well, Michael, thank you very much indeed for that perspective.
I want to come back to the packet.
So, Esther, you were defending Kanye West, which I was surprised about, because to me, it was a clear-cut breach of any rule you want to say.
If you're blatantly making threats to a whole populace, particularly Jewish people, then I'm sorry, you cross a line, don't you?
That's not free speech.
The thing is, though, I'm very cut and dry what I think social media platforms have the right to regulate because I think they're taking the Mickey, right?
You do not get to say that we are a platform and not a publisher and yet censor things that you don't like.
The only caveat I have to that is you have to explicitly call for violence.
If you said that on this show tonight, you wouldn't be back here tomorrow.
But you're not.
If I said I'm going to go DEF CON 3 on black people, I probably wouldn't work again in this country.
Never mind being banned on social media.
I'm not defending what he said.
I do think it would be a good idea.
But in a way, what you mean is there's no line then.
I do not think that social media platforms have the right to regulate that kind of speech.
Why?
Because the thing is, because that falls into the body.
Well, they have the right, don't they?
Because it's not inciting violence.
It's hate speech.
I'm going DEF CON 3 on Jewish people.
No, it's not inciting violence.
It's hate speech.
That's a difference.
And the reason why the difference is, let's go DEF CON on Jewish people.
That's inciting violence.
I'm going Death Constitution.
He said, when I wake up in the morning, I'm going to go DEF CON 3 on Jewish people.
That's literally why.
That's not him inciting violence.
How do you know?
Because he hasn't said what he's going to do.
Does he need to, Ava?
Well, I don't know.
Is that what they were saying in like 1938?
It's not inciting violence.
And I'm very black and white about this.
I'm very black and white.
I don't think, I do not think social media platforms should regulate hate speech because I think it's very subjective.
Me refusing to use someone's pronouns, for example.
Racism is not.
But inciting violence is the only caveat.
Okay, so anti-Semitism, should it be tolerated by any social media platform?
They obviously have the right, they're private companies, to do what they like.
I think they'd be very inconsistent, actually, in targeting conservative people like Trump and letting Toler of Iran stay on.
But in terms of what Kanye said, to me, it's completely unacceptable.
Yeah, I mean, he's obviously not fit to be on there, is he?
And it is a private company.
They should absolutely take him off.
And also, we should have better regulation.
Like, what happened to that online harms bill that we were supposed to put through last parliament session that didn't go through?
That was supposed to regulate all of this.
I can't believe we're not in a situation yet where you have to put your credit card details in to have a social media account.
Well, this is the, I mean, the problem, isn't it, Emily?
How do you regulate it when a lot of countries, like kids in Egypt and the Arab Spring uprising, kids in Iran now, kids in China, they want to be anonymous on social media in case they get hunted down and potentially put in jail for having their right to free speech.
This is the argument against making everybody have to give their details and say who they are.
I mean, I've got to agree with you.
It is a really tricky subject because, yes, by people being anonymous, it also allows bots.
It's much harder for social media platforms to track down bots.
And we've seen huge disinformation from Russia because of that and other countries.
But you're absolutely right.
In Iran right now, if there's someone on social media who is saying, you know, death to the eye collar or Russia or anything, you're in really deep trouble.
And a lot of social media is the only way they're getting out the videos that they need to say, what's actually happening in their countries.
I think the biggest problem is we've allowed these social media platforms to become so big, so powerful with such large audiences, it's almost become an impossible thing to regulate.
Free Speech And Bots 00:14:06
Well, that's why in a way, in a way.
But we're all sitting here under publisher rules.
We have rules guiding the publisher's.
Well, there's Ofcom, which is the television regulator, and they'll be watching all these programs.
And if people complain, they invest in...
We can't say we, there are things we can't say.
And also, we wouldn't possibly say we can't.
I just literally put myself into the shoes that if I'd said that on air, what would happen?
I would have been fired immediately.
And quite right.
In my view, quite right.
And you wouldn't work again.
No, whereas it'll be, it's like, well, Canyon, you know, he's a bit weird, isn't he?
So he gets away with it.
What would you all think if I did this to you in an emoji?
You messaged me and I went.
Well, in Afghanistan, that's a swear word.
We're not in Afghanistan, are we?
No, no, but if I sent you a thumbs-up emoji, what would you feel?
If we were having an argument, I would think you're being passive-aggressive.
You would?
Absolutely.
Really?
Yes.
Would you be aggressive?
It's my favourite.
If I said to you, thumbs up?
If we're having an argument.
Oh, in an argument.
Yeah.
God, I sent someone a thumbs up this evening, but we weren't having an argument.
He just said, Shall we have a drink?
And I went, thumbs up.
I mean, that was the argument that's really unaware.
Well, apparently, look, a thread on Reddit.com says that Generation Z, of course, are offended and upset by absolutely everything.
They see the thumb-up emoji as you two.
Are you Generation Z's?
Yeah.
Just about.
You might be.
It seems as rude or passive-aggressive.
Whereas people over 35 are more likely to use it.
I mean, I do it all the time to people.
I'm not being passive-aggressive.
You're not in a row.
Yeah, exactly.
No, no, sometimes in a row.
You and your wife are having a tiff, and she said something to you, and you did that.
Well, we don't have to because she knows how lucky she is.
So just fans are blessed.
But no, my sons, for example, and I'll watch that group.
I'll often do that.
And it'll be like, I suppose he is slightly passive-aggressive sometimes, yeah.
In a row.
Yeah, exactly.
Yeah.
Not in a, shall we go out for a drink?
Yeah, exactly.
That's fine.
No, no, it's not cool, by the way.
Neither's the laughing face.
I realized how uncool I was because I put laughing faces on everything just because I'm laughing.
That is so awful.
Well, David Cameron famously put LOL, doesn't he, at the end of his emails, thinking it meant to laugh out loud.
And if it had to be told, it means lots of love.
No, no, He said lots of love and actually it was laugh out loud.
That's such a dad.
Are you saying that was a dadversary?
Yeah, nice one.
Nice voice.
This isn't why I shouldn't have young panelists on this show.
They only have people my age or more.
Then we can go with the senior moment.
No one cares.
You've got to speak to your sons more.
They do try and they'll all be cringing at that now.
Quickly, before we go to the break, Liz Truss, talking of thumbs down, right?
Actually, let's talk about it after the break.
We'll have a quick break and come back and talk about Liz Truss.
Is she toast?
And if she's not Toast, why isn't she?
And also, we're going to have Scott Mitchell, of course.
Barbara Windsor's widower, a great guy with a very important message.
He fears that one of the many downsides of what is going on with our finances at the moment is that it may impact directly on people with dementia.
He's going to explain why, so it'll be with me a better reply.
Welcome back to Piers Wilker.
I said, Liz Trust says no public spending cuts, only tax cuts and cuts to the national debt.
Well, how's that going to work?
Still with me on my superstar pack.
I mean, look, can any of you work this out?
Am I missing something?
Is Liz Truss an economic genius like in which we've never seen where you can just cut all the taxation you want, massively increase our debt, but not cut any public spending payments?
Efficiencies.
What does that mean?
It's tax cuts, but they're calling them efficiencies.
So they're going to try.
It's not a bad rebranding.
Yeah, it's terrible.
So she's either going to kick the tax cuts down the line or everything's suicidal right now.
Emily, I don't know if you've got any connections to former Conservative British Prime Ministers, but if you did, what do they all think of this?
Is it all nuts?
I don't know personally because I haven't spoken to them about it.
But I would say that you haven't spoken to your brother-in-law about it.
No, I wouldn't.
And what I would say is that the thing about whether her premiership is going to last or not, I think everyone just needs to be looking at the polls.
I mean, it's really, really, really bad.
Right, but they are going to start looking at: are we losing 100% or are we losing it 90%?
Because at the moment, it looks very much like they're going to lose.
I was at an event last night.
It was a lot of politicians, a lot of journalists, and they're all saying, well, it's still two years away.
And I'm like, if those, if those, if Labour keeps moving ahead in the way they are, it's not two years away.
We're talking about straight after Christmas.
I don't really see how they can turn it around now because it doesn't matter what they do.
They've lost their credibility.
She's going to be shouted down by everyone about anything they do.
They are probably going to have to reverse all these tax cuts.
I don't see how.
But the thing is, I don't see how as a new prime minister, if you keep now reversing all your policies you've announced in this huge, spectacular, supposedly game-changing mini-budget, if you literally have to go back on most of the big ones, your position becomes untenable, doesn't it?
Well, I think she's kind of got a get-out clause by getting rid of Quasi.
So if she could kind of forget that.
These are a get-out clause.
That's not a get-out clause.
A way of saying, look, all my backbenchers want you gone.
And then she could just blame the whole thing on him and he's gone, start away.
That'll make her crypto mat.
But you know, the thing is, when we're talking about polling, it really worries me because I actually think this is a question of morality now.
I think it's like, look at the country and look at what's happening to the political.
I don't really care about Tory Tory.
I don't care about Tory people losing their taxes.
I agree.
And Rishi, by the way, also said the same thing.
He said it was a moral choice.
I absolutely agree with you.
But I was answering the question, how long she's going to last?
And I'm telling you, it's those Tory Party the only ones that can get rid of her at the moment.
Two candidates.
This is why I backed Rishi Sunak to be the leader when it was him or Liz Trust, because all the stuff she was saying sounded to me completely insane as a lack of understanding of how basic economics works.
At least he understands how the economy works.
But the idea that the Tories have gone with Liz Truss and this has now happened.
And you've got Rishi Sunak who predicted it all.
I think a lot of people, and I had some senior Tories saying this to me, saying, oh, well, no, no, no, she's competent.
She's being very clever.
She's winning over the membership because once you're PM, you're in.
And I was listening, going, no, something really's not right here.
I just had an instinctual thing.
I also hated what she was saying.
But I did see that it was going to get to her.
I said, I think you're wrong.
I don't think she's going to change when she gets here.
Apparently, they all banged the desks in the 22 committee room today when she popped down there.
In Fleet Street, as we know, people do that when you're leaving.
When you're leaving the building permanently, everyone bangs their desk.
And I suspect this might be a problem.
And I think as everyone else is reporting, that as you were reading out earlier from Kate McCann, there is every single political reporter I know is reporting quotes from MPs as they came out of the country.
And cabinet ministers.
And they are saying the mood is sad, terrible, somber.
You know, so that banging, I don't know what that was.
I don't know what that was for.
Sunday Times is Gabriel Poggran, who's been breaking so many stories in the last year.
True to the Conservative MP text me.
Liz Truss took zero responsibility for driving the economy into a war tonight.
This is when she appeared at 22.
No ownership of her catastrophic misjudgment.
Instead, saying the problem was bad communications.
And Jason Groves, a political journalist on Twitter, Tory MP on her appearance, it was like someone trying to light a fire using a magnifying glass using damp wood in the dark.
I mean, this is unbelievable.
These are her own people.
But the thing about the communication is spot on because I said from the beginning her communication is completely off.
I think the bigger issue is, and I think you touched on this, the disconnect between the parliamentary Tories and the actual Tory membership, because that's what really pulled Liz Truss to the best way.
And actually the whole system that we use to choose leaders now.
Yeah.
I mean, this is how we got Jeremy Corbyn, this is how we got Liz Truss.
It's like, eventually, sorry, you don't just leave it to a few tens of thousands of people who normally are not representative of the wider body of even the people that support them.
But I don't think she realized what she was trying to pull off was a coup, right?
And to have this kind of, because it is a coup, right?
To everything she's doing, it's upset everyone.
It's upset the bankers and Bank of England, all of that.
But the point is, you need to have a...
You have to have an amazing team behind you to do this.
The communication has to be spotted.
Yeah, it's all.
You can't keep going back.
Look, when I saw her, I'm sorry.
I don't mean to be mean, but when I saw Theresa Coffey sitting next to Liz Truss today, it was like I stumbled into a very low-rent WI meeting and that these two were fighting to get re-elected after a very mediocre tenure.
And I'm like, they're running the country.
It's the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister.
I saw Coffey on the airwaves yesterday.
Basically saying, well, I've no idea what's happening.
She said, well, you're the deputy prime minister.
Well, I'm looking after health.
Really?
Anyway, all very, vaguely terrifying.
Friday is going to be an interesting day.
Yes, it is, yeah.
So I'm not sure because that's when the Bank of England have said they're not buying up these guilts anymore.
And they've given them warning today.
Now, there's lots of arguments whether the Bank of England was right to do that because they said they were stopping it.
Then there were some rumors that some of the Bank of England staff have been telling.
This was all happening in Washington on Tuesday night.
Were they briefing or not?
I don't know.
Actually, I believe the Bank of England was giving the right message.
It's to do with these LDIs.
It's very complex to explain, so I'm not going to do it here.
They were trying to say they would save some of the more severe LDIs, but the markets are already reacting badly.
Guilts are up at 5%.
That's the highest since 2008.
Terrifyingly high.
Let's quickly talk about Graham Norton and John Cleese.
So John Clees has decided to commit career suicide and join a rival downmarket news network.
Isn't that what we say when these things happen?
Who will remain unmentionable?
But it's interesting.
He talked on Radio 4 about canceled culture and he said this.
The BBC have not come to me and said, would you like to have some one-hour shows?
And if they did, I would say, not on your nilly, because I wouldn't get, I wouldn't get five minutes into the first show before I'd been cancelled or censored.
That's probably true, but Graham Norton said this at the Cheltenham Literary Festival.
John Cleese has been very public recently about complaining about what you've got to say.
And I just think it's, it must be, and it must be very hard to be a man of a certain age who's been able to say whatever he liked for years and now suddenly there's some accountability.
Well, okay, Ava, you're agreeing with this.
But why?
That's true.
That's the embodiment of free speech.
Yes, John Cleese has been able to say what he likes.
Why shouldn't he be able to?
He was also allowed to say that on BBC Radio 4's flagship program.
He hasn't been cancelled off of the BBC.
He's just effectively cancelled off Good Morning Britain because Meghan Markle didn't like me disbelieving it.
Is that free speech?
Is that where we're going?
Yes, because it's the public's free speech to decide they didn't like what you're saying.
It wasn't the public.
It was her ringing up my mind.
Well, it was.
It was, wasn't it?
There were a few people.
Well, really, it was a few little wokies yabbering away on Twitter.
Wasn't the public completely behind it.
I was one of the wokies on Twitter who didn't agree with it.
And I thought that you shouldn't be able to do it.
What didn't you believe?
What did you find so objectionable?
That I wasn't believing her walking.
But if you don't agree with it, that's free speech, isn't it?
Do you now regret your fulsome support for old Princess Pinocchio?
No, no, I'm still a big fan of her speech.
Oh, my God.
Oh, God.
What?
Big fan of her.
Oh, dear God.
Oh, God, yeah.
One of the best looking women we've ever had in public life.
Oh, my God.
Well, I wouldn't agree with that.
Esther.
But look.
This whole debate, because there is an argument on the left, we've just heard it.
There's no such thing as cancelled culture.
What are you all complaining about?
I'm literally, I've been through it.
I know what it's like.
Sharon Osborne got fired for saying I had a right to an opinion.
She got fired.
It does exist.
It does happen.
It ruins people's lives.
Absolutely.
And I think that the whole idea of freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences, that's nonsense.
Because if you're actually, if you're going to, you have, if you're risking your career by saying something, then there's no such thing as freedom of speech.
And it's not because he's an older gentleman.
I'm sorry.
Is it his fault he was born in a certain era?
He should be able to say what he said.
What did he say that he was cancelled from?
Was it not because he just had two series that ran on the BBC that were so abysmal?
I couldn't even tell you.
Well, that's true.
He's become a crashing old boy, don't get me wrong.
I mean, he last made me laugh with 40 Towers 40 odd years ago, right?
A fantastic.
But that really isn't the argument.
Just finding on this, Emily, I mean, this idea there is no such thing as cancelled culture, that all those who talk about it are talking about it on platforms.
I don't think you really watch it because a lot of them have been cancelled from what they loved doing.
There is cancelled culture going on, and some of it, I have to say, I think has been good.
It's almost like we're living in a world now where we're self-policing because a lot of these platforms are not.
But I also think that there is an argument, yes, for free speech.
I think what you're really seeing here are generations crashing into each other in a big way on big, huge platforms.
And that is causing this.
But it's because the young, the young ultra-woke brigade have got it into their heads that only their way of thinking, talking and behaving is acceptable.
They are the new fascists.
No, that's not.
You are the new fascist.
I think a lot of people don't think good in this.
Crusty old bloke, nothing you say is tolerated.
Sorry.
That's not true.
This crusty old bloke is refusing to change his ways and perhaps learn.
Why did he change his ways?
Who wants to say that's so wrong?
We don't want to hear it.
Why did John Cleese say that's so wrong?
Well, I don't know.
That the answer is to say, you don't know.
I was about to give you an example.
Well, you know, that Nazi scene in Faulty Towers probably wouldn't make it on the screen.
But he lampoons the Nazis.
Probably wouldn't make it on Twitter.
So John Cleese cannot lampoon Nazis.
Is that what you've been gone to?
Have you ever watched Monty Python?
I love Monty Python.
Really?
But do I think a lot of people are going to be able to do it?
That wouldn't last TV?
No, I doubt it.
You've got to leave it there.
Which is a shame.
Yeah, this is the problem.
It's people like you, Santina.
It's people like you wanting to cancel one of the great Faulty Towers scenes of all time.
The last time please made me laugh.
Canceling Monty Python Scenes 00:07:26
Well, next tonight, the ticking dementia time bomb on an aging population, husband of the late, great Dame Barbara Windsor.
We'll be here live in the studio.
Start spreading the news.
Piers is taking the show to New York City with big guests in the big apple.
Heavyweight champion Mike Tyson.
The most controversial man in American news, Tucker Carlson.
And the man who tried to kill the president, John Hinkley Jr.
And many more.
Join Piers Morgan uncensored in New York City.
Well, brace yourselves, Big Apple.
We'll be coming next week, all week, live from Manhattan.
Welcome back, though, to tonight's show.
Dame Barbara Windsor was an icon on and off the screen for seven decades.
She was the nation's sweetheart in legendary carry-on movies.
And fling and in, and fling and in, and fling.
Mitch and take them away.
And she became a nation's beloved landlady as Peggy Mitchell in East End.
Is remember this iconic clip?
It's for you, Pat.
Now, you've dirty rotten bitch.
Get out of my pump, my girl.
I'm not going anywhere.
I said, go out!
Hang on till I've had my drink.
Yeah, somebody, somebody get out of my pump or some help me out.
Fantastic stuff.
Well, Barbara was made a dame by the Queen Elizabeth in 2016, but in private, she's already battling the illness that meant she could sometimes no longer remember even her own glittering career.
She was cared for by her husband, Scott, until her death in 2020.
Former Prime Minister Boris Johnson launched a national mission to tackle dementia in Dame Barbara's memory.
But tonight, that mission, maybe under threat, and we'll discuss that in a moment.
Well, joining me now is Dame Barbara's widower, husband, Scott.
Great to see you, Scott.
Good to see you.
Even looking at Barbara there, the footage reminds me, A, how brilliantly talented she was, what fun she was on and off camera, but also how much we all miss her.
And for you, of course, it must be unbearable.
Your new book, By Your Side, My Life-Loving Barbara Windsor, just has this dedication to my Barbara, a love like no other, always in my heart, always miss, forever loved your Scott.
Says it all.
And I do, and I do, and I miss her every day.
And we were a very kind of close couple, Piers.
We didn't do the kind of separate holidays and things like that together.
I mean, we were always together.
People always said, you know, this little unit walked in, two little munchkins turned up somewhere.
And of course, you have to get on and you have to live your life and you have to start to try and live again.
But it's different.
You live, but it's different.
And I just miss everything about her.
I just miss our silly little inane chats.
We didn't stop talking for 27 years.
The amazing thing, when you first got together, it was a big age gap of 26 years.
26 years.
And it reminds me in a way of Dame Joan Collins, our other great dame of this country, and her husband, Percy, the 30-year age gap, but they've been together over 20 years now.
Two of the best marriages I've seen, actually, which just said to me, age has got nothing to do with it.
It's about compatibility.
Absolutely.
Finding the right person for you that gives you real love and support.
Absolutely.
And the other thing I think that we had, we liked each other.
And I think that's such an important element of a relationship.
Do I like this person?
Because if you don't, I think a lot of people don't even realise.
So many people I know have spit up since the pandemic because they actually had to spend a lot of time with their other half and discovered they don't even like each other.
That is exactly the point.
They go to work all day and they sort of sleep all night and they work out.
Actually, you've got to live together.
They just like you.
It's easy to say, I love you.
We all say I love you.
We're saying that to people the whole time.
But to actually like someone, to want to be with them in that close proximity all those years, then that's a really big thing.
I had a great pleasure of interviewing Barbara for my life story show.
And there was a wonderful moment right at the end when I asked her how she'd like to be remembered.
And she said this.
You could write your own obituary.
Would you prefer it to say world's most famous giggle dies or world's most famous cleavage?
I don't like those.
I don't like either of them.
No, I'd like she was a good bird.
What's lovely about that is that actually on her tombstone is that phrase, she was a good bird.
And it came from the life stories answer that she gave, which I think was really lovely and touching.
Yeah, there's a plaque up at Golders Green crematorium that I've had put in one of the courtyards, and that is the bottom line.
She was a good bird.
I love that.
Let's get serious.
So you set up this big campaign to try and get people's support and to remember Barbara the right way.
And Boris Johnson was going to commit a lot of money, like £95 million to do this.
You now have information, I think, that's come your way that because of all this economic turmoil that's going on, this may not now happen.
What do you know?
Absolutely.
Now, if I'm wrong about this, fine.
Then I'll apologise.
But I have it on very, very good source of information that two things could possibly happen that have already been put in place that will affect people in a major way.
The first thing is the Dame Barbara Windsor Dementia Mission was brought about a call from Outzimers Research UK, who I'm an ambassador for.
We called for a task force similar based on what the COVID vaccine was.
I did a Zoom conference with Dame Kate Bingham, who headed up the COVID task force.
And we said, if we can put the same premise for dementia, which is now the number one killers.
Why do you think it may not happen?
I've been told that the interviews to start putting people in place for the task force should have started two weeks ago.
They were cancelled at the last minute.
And they were told it's to do with government issues about budget sign-off for the task.
And this is exactly what I feared was going to happen.
In this financial turmoil, they're going to have to make a lot of cuts, despite saying they're not.
And things like this, vitally important campaigns, which you've done such brilliant work on, are going to get screwed in the process.
If that happens, how are you going to feel?
I'm going to feel absolutely disgusted.
What is your message to Liz Truss and Quasi Kwateng tonight?
They cannot do this.
Dementia is costing the economy 26 billion a year.
This task force set up, they are going to start trials and developing new drugs.
It will take two to three years to get those into the system anyway.
You start delaying that now, Piers, and we're talking about another five or six years.
And you also have heard that maybe cuts to social care as well.
Well, the other thing that was put in by the previous Prime Minister was he's the first prime minister in 70 years and 14 prime ministers to have actually put something in place to do something about the social care.
And that may be a threat as well.
That one, there's an £86,000 cap which comes in in October 2023.
I've also heard that that could be significantly delayed or it could be kicked down.
Delaying Social Care Cuts 00:00:36
I think I'm glad you've come on to say this.
I think it'll be an absolute disgrace if either or both of those things happen.
The idea that these things get targeted to save money because these two clowns running the country have screwed our finances would be a completely contemptible thing.
So we'll keep on this, Scott.
I've got to say, it's a wonderful book about a wonderful lady.
I loved your love story.
You proved all the critics and sceptics wrong and we'll all miss her dreadfully, not least you.
But thanks for coming in.
And go and read this by your side.
It's a wonderful book.
Good to see you, Scott.
Thank you.
That's it from me.
Whatever you're up to, keep it uncensored.
That's the way Barbara and Scott would certainly have wanted it.
Good night.
Export Selection