All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
Oct. 25, 2022 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
47:10
20221025_piers-morgan-uncensored-the-ri-shuffle
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Clearing Up The Mess 00:03:24
Welcome to Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Coming up on tonight's programme for a change, a man who is going to clear up a woman's mess.
That's Rishi's vow as he enters number 10.
As you were, Sunuk Stability extends to the cabinet with the big beef steak and all their cages but Frademan back at home in the home office.
Sorry, I just couldn't put your mess up.
They're in our studio and we've risked them for a clue.
Stick around for Just Stop Oil live.
Live from London, this is Piers Morgan Uncensored with Nadine Doris and Emily Sheffield.
Good evening from London.
I'm Nadine Dorrie sitting in for Piers for the final time, sadly, alongside Emily Sheffield.
While Piers continues to lounge by the phone in LA, waiting for his call from Rishi, we're here to give you the lowdown on our third Prime Minister in seven weeks.
Here's what he had to say in his first speech outside number 10 earlier today.
This government will have integrity, professionalism, and accountability at every level.
Trust is earned and I will earn yours.
Rishi, Rishi, Rishi, no, no, no.
The Conservative Party is a broad church.
It's MPs, members, and voters too.
Appoint your cabinet from across the political spectrum.
It's the only way that you can reassure the party that you are serious about unity and integrity.
And they're two words you've used a great deal over the past few days.
It's in the first act as your role as Prime Minister, and you will be judged on that.
Get it wrong, and it will set the hairs running about what type of Prime Minister you'll be and what you're likely to do before you've even begun to talk about your policy.
Two, you have no personal mandate to hold the position you do.
No one has voted for you to be Prime Minister and therefore you need to take the 2019 manifesto seriously.
It is the only legitimacy you have and you have to cleave to it.
When an election comes, you will be judged by which of its promises the Conservative Party kept and which of its objectives it achieved.
Push ahead with a gigabit rollout for 100% coverage.
It's the biggest single driver to meet the levelling up target.
Build the hospitals, get the 20,000 more police on the streets because if you don't, at the next election, people will ask why they should trust the Conservative Party to deliver on a new manifesto when it failed on the last.
Three, end the psychodrama in the party.
Sadly, I think some of the faceless and unaccountable people inside number 10 who have been behind much of the turbulence within the party in recent years are still in place and still pulling the strings behind the scenes and I think you're a bit too close to some of those people.
End it now.
Four, continue with the policies people want and need, such as social care reform, which cost 1 billion, a mere treasury rounding error.
Levelling up meant a great deal to many who are left behind in the communities like the one I grew up in.
Ending The Psychodrama 00:15:05
The skills needed for our economy and emerging industries are creative skills and critical thinking for our tech sectors.
They can be found in any backstreet in any community.
Reach out and show exactly what compassionate conservatism means.
And five, sort out our NHS.
It's an old chestnut, but we employ far too many managers in the NHS and too few frontline doctors, nurses and midwives.
Jeremy Hunt didn't manage it in his seven years as Health Secretary.
You sort it out, Prime Minister.
Show us what you're made of.
Wow.
Well, thanks for that, Nadine.
We are going to come back to you very, very soon on that, because I think there's lots of talking points in there.
And we've heard we've now got the cabinet in.
Most of his cabinet are in.
So we're going to cross first to Westminster to Kate McCann, Talk Team's political editor, who's first with the latest on who's in and out.
Kate, any surprises in there for you?
Well, I think the surprise for most people today has been the appointment of Suella Braverman to Home Secretary.
But the most recent appointments, they are still being made, of course, are people like Mark Harper.
He's the Secretary of State for Transport.
We've seen Johnny Mercer.
He's now the Victims Minister and Tom Tugenhart reappointed as the Security Minister.
There are still questions about Gavin Williamson and Andrew Mitchell, both seen going into number 10, but so far, I don't know what their jobs are.
We haven't seen any news on exactly what appointments they have been given yet.
But I think when you take a look across the board, Rishi Sunak started the day by saying what he wanted to do was create a cabinet of all of the talents that would promote unity and that would focus on delivering the 2019 manifesto.
And if you look at the types of people that have been appointed, some of them reappointed, they are heavyweights who've been in cabinet before, they've held big jobs before, or they are known for getting things done, for delivering.
People like Michael Gove and Steve Barclay in two key offices in the Department of Health and the Department for Levelling Up and Housing.
Reappointment of Ben Wallace at Defence and James Cleverly at Foreign.
Those are heavyweight people who have been sort of doing those jobs for a while, have a good reputation.
Interestingly, Michael Gove given the job of looking across all of the government departments and agendas to see what problems might need unblocking.
So I think from those appointments, it's clear that Rishi Sunak is going to carry out what he hopes, you know, to try and deliver that 2019 manifesto.
But there are some appointments that are causing a little bit of concern, I think it's fair to say.
And the one so far that has got Labour's backs up, maybe that's what the Tories want, Nadine.
Maybe you can tell me, is the appointment of Suella Breverman at Home Secretary.
You know, she was sat, she resigned, but essentially she was asked to resign because she broke the ministerial code just a week ago.
She sent private documents via email to somebody who wasn't in the cabinet.
They needed cabinet approval.
She was asked to leave.
She handed in her resignation.
It was very clear from that letter that she was unhappy about it.
There'd been a row in the background between Liz Truss and her about immigration.
And just a short time after that resignation, she's back in cabinet, back at Home Secretary, and she has some fairly strong views.
I think that appointment tonight is the one that is rustling the most feathers.
Great.
Thank you, Kate.
So much to talk about, Nadine.
First, let's because she's just talking about Swela Braverman.
Now, this is a Prime Minister who came in on his speech, in his first speech to the nation.
He talks about reinstating integrity.
He then reinstates Swela Bravo to the Home Office, who had just been removed by Liz Truss for breaking the ministerial code.
So I just want to get your reaction first, and then I'm going to go to the panel, because I think for many, the return of Swela Braverman was quite a surprise.
Yeah, and I think we're going to hear a lot about that, actually, because I know a lot of my colleagues in the Conservative Party are not overwhelmed and are.
Overwhelmed by her return or weren't overwhelmed by her when she was in the home or office before.
Both.
Sorry, underwhelmed.
And I think we're going to hear more about that rumbling on over the next few weeks.
I think that's probably a big slip up.
The rest of the cabinet, actually, I mean, I've sat in cabinet with most of those people.
It's not a lot of change.
It's actually the cabinet that's been in place the last year.
Plus, I don't know if you remember, but Boris Johnson put in place a temporary cabinet over the summer.
It's kind of a mishmash of them both.
But don't you think you were saying at the beginning in your five points, you've got to build a unity cabinet?
I feel that is quite a unity cabinet.
That feels like that is bringing a lot of elements from right across the party.
And there's not much change, though, to be honest.
There's not many people.
A lot of people were in.
Michael Gove, Steve Barclay.
A lot of those people were in the cabinet before.
To be fair, Steve Barclay had only just moved into health and then was removed by Liz Truss.
We've got a new Chancellor.
That's a big deal.
Salma, what's your view?
I feel this is a unity cabinet, and he's made a lot of former advisor to Saja Javit.
So I think what's interesting is that, yes, you can absolutely say that this is a unity cabinet, but there are also political realities to it.
So it's not just about sort of having this broad brush and saying, I really, I'm going to, it's all going to be rainbows and puppies and I'm going to bring this cabinet together.
It actually is the fact that Suella Bravman went out early to support Rishi and she is a bigger head in the very powerful ERG, very messy ERG group that can cause a lot of trouble.
And so I don't think Rishi was really in a position where he could move that.
And again, I'd love to hear Nadine's view on this, but you know, a lot of those people, like James Cleverly, were big Boris reporters.
And actually, does Rishi really want those people on the back benches causing trouble?
So I think that's also a political move.
Nevertheless, it is sensible to bring some stability into cabinet.
It is sensible to make that as wide as possible.
The challenge he's going to have is really, is everybody equipped in this short space of time to be able to deliver on the things that you need to deliver.
Nadine, you're absolutely right in the list that you gave at the beginning, delivering on the 2019 manifesto commitment.
But those hospitals, those extra police officers, all of that is going to require real operational delivery.
And this is not a criticism of anyone in the cabinet, but there are lots of people on the backbenches of the Conservative Party that could do a lot more with the delivery.
And I think a few of these people are a bit too new to that cabinet.
I just want to bring in here because we've got the Labour advisor, Richard Parasaid, former Labour advisor, Richard.
What's your feeling on Suella Braverman?
Because I feel that she, I absolutely agree with Salma.
Immigration was a big, big thing on the doorstep in the last election.
Perhaps.
And I think it's going to be a big thing on the doorstep, particularly up in that red wall again.
So how's late...
Labour doesn't really have an answer for immigration.
It's one of those ones they keep sort of slithering around.
But they are, it is a big issue on people's doorsteps.
So how are they going to counter?
How are they going to counter this?
I look at the appointment of Suella Bravo and I just think that looks like an act of political weakness.
It looks kind of desperate.
Like here's somebody who is recognised as being not simply a person on the right, but a person on the right who is unusually superficial in her political presentation, unusually insubstantial in the kinds of things that she wants to talk about when she's going out into the media or when she's at Tory Party conference.
There are people on the right who are bigger hitters than her.
And for some reason, he's gone with her as for home secretary.
In the coming weeks and months.
Do we think, and Salma, you might notice, she backed Rishi very early on.
Was this a deal?
Was this a deal done?
I'm mine closing.
It wouldn't surprise me.
I'm very sure it would be.
And I've got to say, I do agree with Richard that it's kind of, you can read it both ways.
Is it an act of political strength to try and unify and stabilise, or is it an acknowledgement of political weakness?
And Nadine said it again at the top, you know, that idea of one's mandate, that idea of kind of like what I can get away with and what people will actually wear.
So even though, and look, you know, I am glad that Rishi's there, it is stabilising, it is stabilising for the markets.
We have sore guilts for dramatic.
So there is the point.
But we're not out of the woods with Rishi's premiership and we have to be really alive to that fact.
I do think that there are kind of, I mean, and I would obviously think this, but I do think there are holes in what Labour is presenting in terms of, you know, you can be angry and upset about Suella Braverman, but a lot of people do recognize that she does have a tough stance on immigration and they are looking for a tough stance on immigration.
Yeah, but Salma, where are Labour, Richard?
They're not anywhere.
We've had very little in the way of commentary.
I mean, Keir Starmer should be out everywhere and he's nowhere.
Where is he?
Where are Labour?
Right now, do you think right now he should be out?
No, not at all.
This is a moment of...
Well, they usually are.
They're usually out criticising the cabinet appointments.
They're usually trying to fight for the airtime and the news waves.
And they're not anywhere.
They're totally silent.
Where are they?
Labour needs to leave the Tories to have their polling bounce.
And then in a month or two, Rishi Sunak is going to get torn apart by the Conservative Party that is currently rallying around him.
It's going to be terrible.
It's going to be terrible because it's terrible for the country.
Because they surely can't be relying on that.
The Tories are looking at, I mean, if you take the polls, they are looking at electoral wipeout.
I can't help feeling a lot of MPs are not going to want to lose their jobs.
And this could, we're not going to see unity.
I think that's virtually impossible in any electoral, any party.
Labour will have its own fights if it gets to power.
But surely they should be on the attack right now.
I think you wait for the Labour Party to tell us that.
So they're waiting for the Tory Party to lose rather than Labour to actively try and lose.
No, I think that in the coming weeks and months, it's going to be utterly terrible for anybody who isn't a millionaire tax dodger in this country.
If you've got an elderly relative who needs to go into hospital, you're going to be incredibly worried about them.
I'm really sorry.
I'm not a millionaire tax dodger.
And, you know, things will be hard for people like me as well.
So that's unfair.
You know, as I said, they'll be difficult for middle class people.
They'll be difficult for working class people.
They won't be difficult for Rishi Soon.
I'm a Tory that supports the Conservative Party.
And I'm not going to say that.
But it's against your own interests.
It's not against my own interest because ultimately we are looking at a stabilisation.
And as much as I am incredibly critical of the mini budget, there are trends that are occurring in the economy that would have led to rises in inflation anyway.
The rise in inflation was happening as the leadership contest was unfolding in the summer.
The rises in inflation, I think that's the external to the economy.
They are Ukraine there, COVID.
Exactly.
So it's not a conservative.
But the Conservatives did bring in a national living wage, right?
So there is a recognition, has been a recognition a long time ago that wages did need to rise because inflation at some point would go up.
But the point that I'm trying to make is categorising Tories as people who just love tax dodgers and whatever, I think is a real false picture that's being categorising the Prime Minister and the people.
Particularly when you look at our red wall seats.
So Salma, do you think the party is going to unify?
I think it's going to be a really difficult journey to unity.
I do.
And I think on the point of kind of like, where is Labour?
I think it's a legitimate tactic to say let the Conservatives tear themselves apart.
I get that.
But at this point, and you're quite right, you know, with people feeling where they are with the electorate, it's feeling as it is, and I include myself in that, I think the Labour Party would have to show me and people like me that they are really serious about this and hungry for it and really want the win.
They're not just going to sit there and get it.
I still think there is a point to be made that Labour, they are ahead in the polls because of the Tories failing.
They are not ahead in the polls, which was the case in Tony Blair's day when they were spelling a vision out for the country.
I still don't really see that vision.
So I think I'm not looking at his shadow cabinet policy lights now.
I'm just going to say about this.
I want to be convinced, Cobb.
So in the coming weeks, Kirstama is going to be saying we need to have another windfall tax on the energy companies that are profiteering out of Ukraine.
That's how we can pay, for instance, for doubling the number of doctors that we're training.
That's how we can double the number of district nurses that we're training.
And Rishi Sunak's going to be saying, oh, yeah, sorry, we're actually going to not do that because we're okay with people dying in ambulances outside of AEs.
And at that point, you're going to see a really, really key political difference between Labour and the Tories.
And that is why already, actually, the polling has been changing such that it's not just that people are going to don't know's from the Tories.
People are now saying, yeah, we're going to actively support Labour.
That's people, especially in the Red Horse.
That is a different kind of polling change.
Thank you so much.
Still to come on the show.
He's promised to clean up the mess from Liz Trust.
Shambolic 50 days in charge.
But just how many bottles of Mr. Muscle will Rishi need to get number 10 looking ship shape?
That's next.
Welcome back.
Well, Rishi Sunak has created Liz Trust's top team and retained leading alliser Boris Johnson in his new cabinet.
Let's bring in former Conservative MP Anne Whitticomb.
Anne, what do you think of the make-up of the new cabinet?
What do you think in the makeup of the new cabinet?
Well, he's obviously going for stability.
That's obvious in his choice for the top jobs.
Bringing back Suella, who after all has only been gone for about five minutes, keeping Jeremy Hunt, foreign secretary, similarly.
Obviously, going for stability, obviously also going for both the right and the left of the party to fulfil his promise of cabinet of all the talents.
The real test now will be the parliamentary party, because it has been ungovernable.
And now the big question will be, given the breadth of the cabinet, whether it will now just get on with it.
Because if it doesn't get on with it, Keir Starmer will.
And Anne, how much hope do you hold out for that?
Do you think he's going to manage it?
Do you think, faced with electoral wipeout, there might at least be...
I mean, I heard other commentators saying today they're just, he'll probably be hoping to at least get till January or February without some big row.
Well, I mean, the real test will be when the first thing goes wrong, but there's nothing like the prospect of being hanged in a fortnight to concentrate the mind.
And okay, it's not a fortnight, but it is only two years to the next general election with Labour having an unprecedented lead, which I believe can be cut, actually, quite soon.
But it won't be cut if there is a continual factionalism and threat and people putting in letters and all the rest of it.
Trustonomics And Markets 00:13:56
Party's just got to calm down.
And on that rests everything.
On that rests all the law and the profits, so to speak.
Everything.
And are you happy of the parliamentary party?
Are you happier tonight than you were, say, last week?
And what do you think?
What do you think will happen the first time he drops the ball?
What do you think the first big issue will be?
Well, I mean, that is the big question as to what will happen when he drops the first ball, as he will, as all prime ministers do.
And In the past, the Conservative parliamentary machine was very, very disciplined and it just stood behind the Prime Minister.
I can remember, however, there is a parallel here.
I lived through in Parliament the deposing of Mrs. Thatcher, and I can promise you that feelings were running very, very high.
Parliamentarians not speaking to each other, absolutely furious.
The whole thing had to be settled down by John Major.
And it was because there was a prospect of a general election within a couple of years, exactly where we are now.
So I believe that things may calm down for that reason.
And also, it's interesting, one of Major's first pronouncements was, I'm going to have a cabinet of all the talents.
Rishi Schunak, one of his first pronouncements, he's going to have a cabinet of all the talents.
That will calm the lockdown because everybody will feel they're represented somewhere in the cabinet.
And can I ask you, you know, Labour have obviously been calling for a general election.
I think they realize that's not going to happen.
The Lib Dems were admitting today that they didn't think that was likely.
When do you think he should call an election?
Do you think he should leave it as late as possible to give time for the economy, to give time for the economy to recover?
Because it's not in a good place right now.
He's got some really tough decisions to take.
No, it's not in a good place right now.
Nobody's economy is in a good place right now.
And I don't see everybody's economy, including ours, being in a good place within the short space of two years.
But it will be in a much better place.
That's what he's got to aim for.
And if everything is calmed down and we can see where the ship is heading, I don't know where Keir Starmer's ship is heading because he simply doesn't have a set of policies.
If we can all see where the ship is heading, I think that will reassure the general public immensely.
And I know that people are saying, as they said after the fall of Thatcher, it's exactly they said then, never vote Conservative again.
But faced with the choice between that and a socialist government, they'll vote Conservative, even if they hold their noses.
So Anne, in 92, that general election that John Major that we faced after ousting of Margaret Thatcher, the Conservatives only just held on by their skin of their teeth.
Now, can I ask you, were you disappointed at the weekend with Boris Johnson pulled out?
I think it was inevitable for this reason.
The parliamentary party, as I said, was ungovernable.
And if he'd come back, he'd have come back to exactly the situation which he left.
And I don't think the party would have been any more stable and settled.
I think what Rishi has done is stabilise the situation.
And although I was a Trust supporter because I liked the bold vision, I now get behind Rishi and I hope that everybody else will do the same because if they don't, we're going to have Keir Starmer.
Thank you so much, Anne, for joining us this evening.
Thank you.
In his speech outside Downing Street, the Prime Minister admitted mistakes have been made by Liz Truss and that the government would have to take tough decisions to restore market confidence.
Joining me now is Richard Murphy, Professor of Accountancy Practice at the University of Sheffield.
Good evening.
Hello.
Hello.
Just talk us through how big are the economic problems facing the new Prime Minister.
We have seen the guilts stabilising.
They've dropped.
Is that going to be a help for him?
Not really.
Let's be honest.
I've just got the chart open to have a quick look at it because I heard you mention that earlier.
And guilts tonight are at the level they were last at in June 2010.
They have fallen a bit today, yes, but they could rise tomorrow and they might in reaction to the budget on Monday.
These things are volatile.
The fact is that the volatility is still there.
There is nothing that has greatly reassured markets since Quasi Kwatang has gone, and that definitely did help.
And the reversal of the mini budget, of course.
But right now, we're all sitting in tenths wondering what on earth is going to happen on Monday.
I've just heard Winnicombe saying every prime minister literally has their first disaster and budgets are very often those disasters.
I have a very strong feeling that Monday is going to be a very comfortable, uncomfortable evening for him.
And the newspapers might not be happy on Tuesday morning.
There will be something in there which is going to upset everyone.
So Richard, what do you think the Prime Minister needs to do now to turn this around, to study the markets, to put the measures in place that would make you happy?
What does he need to do?
Well, the first thing he has to do is not worry about the markets.
The markets will sort themselves out.
The reason why the markets will sort themselves out is that by next February, inflation will be declining.
That's a simple mathematical fact, because inflation is a measure of one year's prices compared to the previous year's prices.
Well, by March next year, certainly we'll be comparing March 23 prices with March 22 prices, which will have already been inflated by Putin's war.
So as far as the markets are concerned, inflation will be down and they'll be much happier.
Prices will, of course, not have fallen one iota, but there will be happiness on their part that inflation will have fallen.
So markets are easily satisfied by simple things like that.
What people in general aren't happy about is the fact that tonight a plate of pasta is costing 60% more than it was only a few months ago because of real underlying inflation.
That's the disaster we've actually got.
And if he's going to keep not just the markets on side, but business on side, and remember the Tories are the party of business, he's got to deliver growth.
The only way he can deliver growth, and yeah, that's exactly by the way, what Liz Truss said, but he has to do the same.
Because if he doesn't, we are moving into a very rapid recession.
And the only way he can deliver growth, because Brexit isn't going to help exports, that's just a fact.
Let's not discuss the politics of it.
That's what we know.
And businesses aren't investing because of high interest rates and because of uncertainty.
And consumers are pushed to their limits.
The only thing that can now grow our economy is increase government spending.
So what he's got to do to actually keep the markets happy is the exact opposite of what most people are saying, which is spend more, which would deliver the leveling up agenda, which I know you're particularly keen on, but it would deliver the security for people's jobs and their futures and keep them in their homes.
Because if we don't bring interest rates down, millions of people could literally end up homeless within a year.
They won't be able to pay their mortgages.
They won't be able to pay their rents.
They won't be able to feed their children.
I don't know how Rishi Sunak would deal with that.
So Richard, can I ask you, who do you think would be a better prime minister for the economy?
Rishi Sunak or Keir Starmer?
Oh, look, marginally, Keir Starmer.
I'm not a great fan of Keir Starmer in this area either.
So let's be blunt about it.
I'm not playing party politics here.
I'm talking economics here.
That's why I'm not sure.
Why are you playing politics?
Why?
Why are we getting some strong labour arguments going on this evening?
I can see Salma sitting there shaking her head on the bank.
But let's ask Richard, why Keir Starmer?
Why would Keir Starmer be better for the economy?
Well, look, I said marginally.
They have promised a £28 billion fund for investment, for example, in sustainability.
I actually think it should be £100 billion.
Look, hang on, I think it should be $100 billion a year, and that can be raised.
I don't see a problem with raising it.
I would change the rules on ISIS.
How is that going to get raised?
Increased borrowing.
We just saw Liz Truss come in with all these unfunded, A, unfunded tax costs, but a huge level of borrowing to fund those tax cuts and to help out with people and their energy bills.
And the markets reacted violently.
You seem to be arguing right now that we risk for trustonomics again.
You've even been talking about growth, where most economists have said there's nothing we can do about growth for the next two years.
We have to deal with that.
Let me explain why they're wrong.
I mean, let's go back to, we have a crisis.
Sunak was absolutely right.
We have a crisis.
And in a crisis, the only thing a government can do is spend.
We're in a crisis so bad, there's probably been nothing worse since the beginning of the Second World War.
Thankfully, we're not at war ourselves.
But the downturn that we face is so catastrophic that we need to follow the rules of that time.
We actually borrow from our own population.
We encourage people to save with the government.
That's where I would get the money from to do that leveling up and sustainability programme.
But let's not get frightened of the national debt.
Let me show you what the national debt looks like.
That's it.
Anybody who's watching who doesn't want their share of the national debt, would they please put it in an envelope and send it to me?
Because it's just money.
Well, we just saw the cost of borrowing going.
It makes the world go round.
They were unfunded.
It was unfunded tax cuts.
And the markets reacted.
And the borrowing went up.
Do you just want us to keep paying huge amounts of interest and keep borrowing and borrowing?
Can we bring Selma in here?
Well, we don't need to pay large amounts of interest.
We can tell the Bank of England to cut the interest rate.
We don't need to actually increase that interest rate.
By the way, the way in which the government calculates its interest costs are really totally wrong.
The interest cost is nothing higher, nearly as high as the government claims.
It's accounting strong.
I'm in correspondence with the Office of National Statistics on this.
Richard we're going to move to our pack.
Thank you so much.
You've raised lots of...
I've got to take it to our pack because I've seen Selma literally shaking her head about 10 times.
So I'm going to let her have a chance to come back on some of what you've said.
Selma, just pick up because I literally saw you going, oh, what is he saying?
So I just want to have a counterbalance because you did work besides.
I'm not an economist.
And so, you know, I think we have a better sort of economist in the studio who can talk to some of the most specific points.
But, I mean, you just said it there.
What he's talking about is trustonomics.
And we've just seen that massively fail.
He just said the markets can look after themselves.
We believe what the markets do when they're not happy.
I'm like pretty typical conservative, right?
And I'm probably not typical for current conservatism or where that is, in that I think that the state should be smaller because I think other people in the markets do it better.
Now, that's not because I think that it should be completely free or laissez-faire.
It should be properly regulated.
But actually, private capital and the markets do things better than government.
And the idea that government is responsible for growth is a complete anathema to me as a conservative.
I think it is about entrepreneurs.
I think it's about small and medium-sized businesses and big businesses.
And you think government should be there to help them run their businesses as they feel.
But I'm also not one of these people that thinks that it's all about cutting red tape and it's just about deregulation.
I think good regulation can deepen and strengthen markets and sectors.
I just think it's so silly to say, oh, we just should tell the Bank of England where they should set their interest rates.
Well, we can't, by the way, because they're independent.
They are independent for a reason.
And all political parties at the point of that independence agreed that it should be independent and it should not be a political system.
And we just should just the old days of the ERM.
Well, there is a nuance.
In his defense, though, there was a nuance to his argument.
And yeah, the trustonomics, the big failure was that the markets were completely unprepared for what she was about to say.
Can I correct you?
Well, on the push 5p tax, they're abolishing that banana.
They had no idea that was going to happen.
Now, they'd already factored in the other stuff, but they had no idea about that.
And there is an argument to say that when you go out to stakeholders, when you go out to the OBR, the IMF and others, and you talk through with them what you're about to do and give them the chance to interact with that and to put their point of view over, that when you announce a policy like you're going to increase borrowing, you don't get that violent reaction that we got from the markets.
And that was the failure of what happened with Liz Truss and her mini budget.
It was the fact that it was sprung on the markets and they had to do it.
I don't think the idea that it was sprung, is that so much of it was uncosted and unfunded.
Yeah, that's fine.
But in an inflationary period, yeah, but you have that discussion beforehand about how it's going to be costed.
I think there would have been a lot of pushback on her mini budget anyway.
And then she might have changed herself.
I think this is not quite right, guys.
And just to say, I'm also not an economist, but I do know that it was very nice to be pretend to be one for a few minutes.
89% of those borrowing and of those tax cuts in the mini budget were pre-announced.
89% of it.
And during that period, when that had been pre-announced, guilt markets did exactly the same thing that international markets were doing.
So actually, there was a lot more space for spending or tax cuts.
And not that I'm a fan of Truss and Omics, but there was a lot more space for it in the markets than I think is generally recognised.
And we need to think back, we need to think back to 2010, right?
At that moment, we had Cameron and Osborne making a political excuse out of a crisis and the results.
And tens of thousands of people died.
I do not accept that.
Even the IMF.
The IMF themselves.
That was a political choice.
That was not a political choice.
You left the country with no money.
Even the IMF.
Even the IMF said.
Licence Fee Facts 00:09:32
I'm going to make this point.
Even the IMF said that it ruined growth.
I'm sorry.
I've got to thank you now, both of you.
Very lively.
Salma.
Thank you to our panel, Salma and Richard.
But coming on next, on Piers Morgan censored, is this really public service broadcasting?
My thoughts on Channel 4's latest bit of attention seeking?
Welcome back.
I'm a former culture secretary.
I like to say I'm a recovering secretary of state.
And one of the thorns in my side of the department was culture like this.
How do you feel about that, Penis?
It's going to heal me.
It's either don't go out or someone stares at you really.
I'm sorry, I'm just recovering from all this.
Recovering from that clip.
Boris Johnson's government was that close to privatising Channel 4.
The idea being to sell it off and make some money back for the taxpayer.
But the decision is on hold while a new lot of ministers re-examine the business case.
Same goes for the review into the BBC license fee.
And clips like this won't change things.
We showed you this yesterday, but it's worth a replay.
Well, this is all very exciting, isn't it?
Hello, and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow.
Am I allowed to be this gleeful?
Well, I am.
So, scrap a license fee and sell off Channel 4.
Joining us now is Patrick Barwise, Emeritus Professor of Management and Marketing at the London Business School.
So, you have to pay a license fee to watch television.
No, the BBC, no other broadcaster.
I mean, it's £36 billion a year, if I remember rightly, that they raise from the million dollars.
£3.6, you mean?
3.6, I think, exactly, obviously.
So, do you think that's fair when other broadcasters don't get a penny of public money?
It's not quite true that other broadcasters don't get a penny of public money because the BBC in the UK gets most of the licence fee money.
It also funds things like it funds the World Service outside the UK.
Well, that's funded by the Foreign Office as well.
And it's a mixture now, and S4C, the Welsh Channel, and so on.
But about 92% of the licence fee money goes to the BBC.
I think the question of whether it's fair, I mean, it works.
Everybody pays, and everybody gets a benefit.
That might not have been true sort of in theory, but it's actually what's true in practice.
So, yes, it works very well.
But numerous times, let me just finish.
We've numerous times had the question of should we replace the licence fee with another funding method.
I hope we're going to have that again.
We're still waiting.
It's a bit like waiting for Godot for this independent review, looking at the alternative methods.
If that is a genuinely independent review, which looks at the alternatives and comes up with good ideas, comes up with good ideas, but also tests against the evidence, then my hunch is we will end up either with the licence fee continuing or with a universal levy like the German system in which every household pays.
We will have to look at the more commercial alternatives, one of which is advertising and the other is subscriptions.
So, I think it's very good that the government has said this is going to happen.
It's not so good that it hasn't, it keeps not happening.
So, I'm hoping it will finally happen.
So, the review was ready to go when I left the day Boris Johnson was housed.
It was ready to go literally the following day, the day after.
It's been done, the work's done.
It just hasn't left the department doors yet.
But, you know, the review needs because we need to.
Do you know who will be leading it?
Is that not required?
So, I can't reveal that.
But you do know, but that's not.
But we had gone through that process.
And it will be thoroughly independent.
That was one of the issues.
The main issues was that it was truly independent.
But, you know, there are a number of issues around that.
We need the debate.
The debate needs to happen, it needs to happen in Westminster.
It needs to happen with people like you.
It needs to happen in the public.
Completely open.
And also, I think one of the reasons why that debate needs to happen is that 75% of the 49,000 prosecutions that happen a year for non-payment of the licence fee, 75% of those people who are prosecuted are women.
And, you know, it's a regressive tax, as you know, whether you're on benefits or a multi-millionaire, you pay for that licence fee.
And I think this now needs to be out in the open.
Now, if you could choose a funding model, what funding model would you think should replace the BBC licence fee?
Because Nadine, I think to be clear, I think a lot of people became sort of courtesy of the Boris Johnson government that they were very anti-the BBC.
And there was quite a lot of anti-BBC rhetoric.
And I'm not saying anything from you.
Yes, but it was how it was painted.
We're not saying defunds the BBC, to be clear, and that's not what you're saying.
You want a more fair funding.
So we're not saying we're going to get rid of the BBC because I think a lot of people get in an absolute panic that the BBC somehow is going to become some sort of commercial enterprise.
A lot of people really love the BBC.
You love the BBC.
What we're talking about is new funding models that you would like to see fairer, that it's not a regressive tax.
Can we be clear on that?
This funding model, which has been in place, as you remember better than I do, goes back many, many years.
It is simply no longer fair that people like I froze the licence fee for two years now as Culture Secretary.
It's no longer fair that people have to continue to pay this escalating amount, this cost every year, particularly when it's not escalating.
You've frozen it for two years.
It was escalating.
That's why I'm not escalating.
They've had real facts.
Can we bring some facts in, please?
Okay.
If...
I did freeze it.
That is a fact.
It's a fact that you froze it, okay?
But there are some other very pertinent facts about what's happened since 2010.
If the BBC's real inflation-adjusted revenue had kept pace with, if it had kept pace with general inflation since 2010, it would now be over 40% higher than when you froze it.
30% in real terms is my figure.
30% cut in reality.
Yes, cut.
That's the figure I've got.
Well, cut by 30% in real terms before.
But you have to overlay, you have to overlay that with the fact that the number of people subscribing to the licence fee is dropping.
It's not dropping by much.
It's 260 million people coming into the BBC every day.
I'm trying to bring some relevant facts in the situation before you froze the licence fee.
Now, freezing the licence fee for two years at a time when inflation is whatever, let's say 9%, it'll average over those two years.
That's another 17% cut on top of the 30%.
And this is in a market with growing competition and increasing real prices for programmes and for distribution and technology.
So at some point, the point about defunding the BBC, the Conservative Party has defunded the BBC massively since 2010 in a market with growing costs and growing competition.
They were able to deal with this by getting their overheads down, by growing commercial revenue, by making BBC4 a repeats-only channel and so on.
At some point in the next three years or so, the elastic will break.
The Director General is going to have to announce some real cuts.
At that point, I don't think any of us knows what the public backlash will be.
But I can give you a clue because in 2015, the BBC did a study focusing on BBC sceptics, the 30% who then said the BBC license fee is not good value for money.
Okay, Richard, I'm being told I've got to jump in on Channel 4 while we've still got time in this segment.
So can I...
I'm going to say that of the BBC sceptics, 68% changed their minds after nine days with no BBC.
When that was repeated earlier this year, it was 70%.
Okay, so Richard, I have to ask you about Channel 4.
Do you think we should be proud?
Patrick, sorry.
Do you think we should be proud of programmes like My Massive Cock on Channel 4?
Did I just say that?
I'm not interested in that question.
Why is that irrelevant?
So do you think Channel 4 is value for money?
Do you think Channel 4 should be sold?
Why don't you think it should be sold?
Do you think that it's right that a publicly owned asset produces programmes like Channel 4 do?
Well, I think that, like the BBC, as we were saying about the review of the BBC, I think it should be given editorial independence.
I'm not a Mary White House cancel culture person.
I didn't think you were, but I'm interested.
Channel 4 Business Model 00:05:09
But you're sort of saying maybe you think it should be stopped.
Well, actually, my personal point on Channel 4 is that it has a business model which depends on one sole form of income, which is linear advertising, which is unsustainable.
Right, so now let's cut to the chase.
So now you're talking what I think is the important issue, which is every time, and I think we're fourth time round, that there's been talk of privatising Channel 4, the message has been, it's not sustainable.
And do you know, Channel 4 keeps getting, they've just recorded record revenue and sustainability.
Well, there are underlying reasons for that.
But UKGI would not agree with you.
I personally don't think that I think the government has plenty on its own.
I've got it.
I've got it.
Patrick, thank you.
I've got to cut in because we've got to keep going with the show.
Thank you, Patrick, so much for your views.
Thank you.
Some of my views.
I'm sorry we didn't have enough time to cover everything.
Those are both big topics, so still to come.
They're at it again.
Isn't it about time we stick it to these vandals?
We talk to a protester next.
Welcome back.
Another day, another just stop oil protest.
This morning it was the turn of 55 Tufton Street in central London, a favourite hangout of Liz Truss, actually, home to right-wing think tags targeted for their work lobbying for fossil fuel companies.
So I've got a question for you at home.
Why would this change anything?
With us now is Just Stuff oil protester James Skeet.
So James, what are you hoping to achieve by all this?
Well, thanks, Nathan.
Well, as you're well aware, our dependence on fossil fuels has landed us in this cost of living crisis and this climate crisis.
So what Justup Oil are calling for is an immediate transition to renewable energy.
It's nine times cheaper.
And by the way, they do understand you can't do it immediately.
Absolutely.
Quicker switch.
Absolutely.
Well, what we're calling for is no new licensing on consent.
So we have no new licenses.
I think that's a difference.
And what we're calling for is an immediate rollout of insulation of people's homes, which would help with people's bills this winter.
Free points.
James, that's not going to keep people warm.
That's not going to stop people.
Well, it'll do a dance like that.
I'm going to keep the pneumonia.
It's not going to keep babies warm in their cots.
I think it will.
I think that's a good question.
Do you not think you're turning people off what your objective and what you're trying to do?
Actually, actually, Paul came out yesterday saying there's 66% national support for direct action to protect the country.
Who did that?
Who did that?
I don't know, but I tell you what, it sounds a lot better than that Paul.
No, it's a...
We didn't even, we didn't have to.
But it sounds a lot better than the Tory Party's approval ratings at the moment.
Nothing to do with us, James.
Honestly, I think you're turning people off what you're trying to achieve.
You're stopping kids getting to school, you're stopping ambulances getting to hospitals, you're stopping.
We have a movement policy.
We always let ambulances change.
I'm actually sympathetic that so many young people feel terrified and they might look and think that nothing's really changed.
I also would like to point out that with a recession coming hard down at us, you are right.
There are going to be eco-climate objectives which are going to be put to one side.
I do believe that.
It happens in the middle of the positively.
And it's no support.
No support.
I'm saying that I don't agree with it.
I'm saying that I sympathise with the panic that's going to be a lot of millions of people.
But I am genuinely worried that...
Are you happy?
I'm genuinely worried.
Your message.
The way you're doing it, your message is getting obliterated.
You're turning people off.
And you're introducing policies to save the planet, James.
Well, it's got me on your program, hasn't it?
But I mean, both of you have got children.
Can you honestly look them up?
So you're here because you're annoying, not because you're not afraid of the people.
I know I'm annoying, but I'm a man of many talents.
But look, can you honestly say, and look in your children's eyes when they ask you, what did you do to avert this crisis?
Can you honestly say that you did everything that you could?
We do lots and so to lots of households, lots of people.
I've seen your voting requisite, Adean.
That's not true.
I'm an absolutely massive supporter of COP26.
It was the best environmental conference to get to the next step.
It's achieved absolutely nothing this year.
No, James, it hasn't got us net zero.
You know, it's put us on the bottom of the body.
This year was the first time that they were discussing fossil fuels.
What the hell were they discussing the other day?
You're deflecting.
You're deflecting from the fact that what you're doing is actually not achieving your objective.
You have been trying to bring people into your own side.
Both of you are strong, powerful women.
You have ended up in this position because very admirable women took civil resistance and therefore you're and changed history and you're now in that position.
You see?
And the fact is...
But they weren't annoying, James.
They were fighting an answer.
They were a lot more annoying than us, and they were a lot more distracted.
James, thank you for coming on and fighting your cause today.
That's it from me.
I'm off to take...
Sorry, Nadine's off to take a seat on the back.
Then, James, whatever you're up to, make sure it's uncensored.
Export Selection