All Episodes
Previous Next
Plain Text
July 5, 2023 - Uncensored - Piers Morgan
47:12
20230705_piers-morgan-uncensored-dale-vince-katherine-birba
Transcriber: nvidia/parakeet-tdt-0.6b-v2, sat-12l-sm, and large-v3-turbo
|

Time Text
Trigger Warnings Need A Warning 00:04:04
I'm Piers Morgan on censored tonight.
Eco Yobs calls more mayhem at the tennis this time on the day the Prime Minister hosts a summit on stopping them wrecking our summer of sport.
Dale Vince bankrolls Joss Duboyle and he's back for round two.
Children identifying as cats, horses and dinosaurs refusing to talk to teachers except with animal noises.
How do we fix this utter nonsense in our schools?
Well Britain's fictitious head teacher Catherine Burblesing has some thoughts and joins me in the studio.
Plus a 90-minute marathon, a 15-metre long jump, swimmers faster than the speedboats.
Yes, a drug-enhanced Olympics has been the subject of public speculation for years, but could it now become a reality?
The entrepreneur behind the so-called dope Olympics joins me to debate his controversial plans.
From the news building in London, this is Piers Morgan uncensored.
Well good evening from London, welcome to Piers Morgan Uncensored.
Now before I begin tonight's show, I want to issue a trigger warning.
The following production contains adults with opinions, some of which you may dislike, as well as discussions of world events, some of which are bad.
You've been warned.
And if you think that disclaimer was unnecessary, we'll take it up with the makers of a new production of A Sound of Music, that heartwarming, romantic musical set against a bucolic alpine backdrop.
Chitchester Festival Theatre saw fit to warn ticket buyers to brace themselves for references to Nazi Germany and war.
Quotes, themes they may find distressing.
Really?
Anybody in the world ever found the sound of music distressing?
It's the very latest in a very long line of books, movies, artworks, stage shows, history lessons and university courses to be slapped with a trigger warning.
They're supposed to alert people of sensitive disposition to harmful content which may trigger their hidden traumas.
There is actually zero evidence that they actually do that.
But at this point, they are very triggering to me.
Yes, the triggers are triggering to me.
The trigger warnings are triggering to me.
All of it is triggering to me.
And here's why.
The University of York added a trigger warning to its archaeology course because students may occasionally see human remains or bones.
I'm triggered by that.
Isn't that the bloody point of an archaeology course?
The Globe Theatre added a trigger warning to Romeo and Juliet for violent language, sexual references, misogyny and suicide.
Oh yes, it was written 400 years ago.
And by the way, you just ruined the ending.
Trainee forensic investigators at the University of Exeter are now warned they'll see pictures of crime scenes.
Hold!
Here's a little warning for you again.
If you see a bag of peanuts, it might contain nuts.
The Royal Academy of Art slapped a trigger warning on a Francis Bacon exhibition over adult content.
Were they expecting many children?
And this week it emerged that Virginia Woolf's novel to the Lighthouse has been given a trigger warning over concerns about past attitudes.
Now readers of the book may have expected past attitudes already since the book was actually written in the past.
Enough of this madness.
Perhaps the reason why everyone's so anxious is that we're telling them they should be every time they open a book or go to a theatre or watch a movie or do anything.
It's patronising, it's infantilising, it's nonsensical and it doesn't work.
Flinders University in Australia actually studied all of the other studies about trigger warnings and they found they don't prevent anybody from being triggered.
In fact, they found anyone with genuine trauma was more likely to be upset by the trigger warning because it made them think of the one thing they didn't want to think about.
Flinders Study On Trigger Warnings 00:15:03
So it's official.
Trigger warnings need a trigger warning.
One more time.
Well, we'll debate that later.
But first two, yes, you've guessed it.
The Just Stop Oil morons take 56.
Prime Minister Rishi Sunak held a summit with event organisers and national sporting bodies today to discuss how to stop these Cretans from wrecking our summer of sport.
He told the Sun newspaper that Johnny Besto, the cricketer, had some bright ideas for fixing this blight.
Here's a reminder of what Besto did.
Besto just waving to the dressing room.
Maybe it's his gear.
Well, that's the way to do it.
And you throw him over the sidelines like a piece of trash, which is what they are, frankly.
Well, play inevitably on Court 18 at Wimbledon was briefly suspended twice today when Just Op Oil protesters scattered orange confetti and jigsaw puzzle pieces over the court.
Once more.
And another disruption.
Well, note the reaction of the crowd.
Did you detect universal support for this movement?
Cheers of, yes, you go.
You go, Just Stop Oil.
We're right behind you.
Or did you hear what I heard?
Which is loud, relentless booing, jeering, and abusive shouts from a public sick and tired of this.
It's another PR owned goal from a protest group who seems determined to become the most hated in modern history.
And elsewhere in annoying protests, anti-monarchist demonstrators targeted King Charles in Edinburgh today.
Here they are with their trademark yellow t-shirts and placards as the king arrived at St Giles Cathedral.
How many people do you think they won over today?
Do you think there were anyone in the crowd going, you know what, I've actually gone off the royals.
I think I'll join the movement.
I doubt it.
Well, I'm joined now by a friend of the show, Riz Pozner from the anti-monarchy group Republic, and also by the Green Tycoon and Just Up Oil backer Dale Vince.
So Dale Vince, well, welcome to both of you, but Dale, let me start with you.
Trevor Nielsen, who is a big supporter of groups like Just Stop Oil, came out in the Sunday Times last week and said it's become disruption for the sake of disruption.
Working people trying to get their job, get to their jobs, dropping kids off at school, or just enjoying themselves.
There's now a case where pink-haired tattooed and pierced protesters stand in front of the cars, so their kid is late, for example.
It's just performative.
It's not accomplishing anything.
I actually believe it's become counterproductive.
And I just feel like that has to be said by someone involved in the beginnings of what it's become.
This is going to require an immensely difficult navigation of the middle.
And the activists are ostracizing the exact people they need to engage.
They're creating an excuse for people to stay on the sidelines.
Blocking bridges, he said, is a lot easier than building bridges.
And that's what we need to do if we're going to succeed.
I think he's right, isn't he?
I mean, I just don't see any upside now to what these just up oil protesters are doing.
They are deliberately wrecking ordinary people's, in many cases, hard-earned enjoyment watching sport that they love.
And for what?
My turn.
Yeah.
I think it is.
So look, I think your language is exaggerating, right?
They haven't wrecked sport.
They aren't wrecking people's lives.
The climate crisis is wrecking people's lives.
It has killed 4 million people already.
And it does make 20 million people every year homeless, right?
I call that disruption.
Cricket was about three minutes.
Today, there was more disruption at Wimbledon from the rain than there was from the protest.
So I think you're making much of it.
I think they are doing a good job because they continue to put this issue on the news agenda.
But everybody hates them.
Again, an exaggeration.
Well, it's not an exaggeration.
Listen to the crowd.
Listen to the crowd.
Here.
Okay, that's not everybody, is it, Pierre?
There's no one cheering.
There's a crowd at Wimbledon.
There's not a single person applauding at Wimbledon.
Right.
That whole crowd at Wimbledon, like the whole crowd at Lourdes, I was there for that.
Like all the crowds, all these events that they're wrecking or trying to wreck with their attention seeking.
The truth is the British public are absolutely sick and tired of this.
It's just not working.
Trevor Nielsen's right.
It's backfiring.
It's seen as performative, seen as attention seeking, and it is destroying bridges rather than building them.
The strategy isn't working.
I disagree with you and with Trevor.
I think performative art has a powerful role in our society actually in shaping how we think about things and what we think.
And I think that these very brave people are putting themselves in harm's way and creating constant media attention for the climate issue, which we have to have because it's doing such great harm and it's driven by fossil fuels.
And our government are intent on drilling for more oil and gas to make the problem worse.
What they're going to do is harm people, actual harm to people, their lives and their livelihoods by drilling the North Sea for more oil and gas.
They're going against the scientific consensus and the political consensus globally to do this foolish thing claiming it will lower our energy bills, which is a lie because they know that they can't do that because fossil fuels are priced by global markets.
We allow that.
So again, like I said to you last time, I have a lot of sympathy with a lot of the arguments.
I think we should do a lot more than we're doing as a globe.
Although my real issue is with countries like China and India, who are by far the worst polluters in the world.
It's not actually the UK.
And I don't see any of these heroic protesters getting on a plane to Beijing or to Moscow or to Mumbai.
There's a moral cowardice about this.
They're targeting a country which actually has been doing more than almost any other to be progressive in this area.
But aside from that, if you're going to have a movement, you've got to bring people with you.
I don't know anybody, literally anyone, who is watching these scenes time and again at all these sporting events and thinking that's going to make me join this movement.
It actively puts people off.
Okay, how about some facts on China?
Because it comes up all of the time.
What about China?
The per capita carbon emissions of the people in China are tiny, right?
Way smaller than they are in Britain.
And just last week, it was announced that China has built more solar panels than the rest of the world put together, right?
Which includes Britain.
And they're at 50% green electricity on their grid now.
And that's for a country of over a billion people.
What percentage?
All right, but what percentage of pollution?
What percentage of the global pollution comes from China?
Bear in mind, it's 1.1 billion people making most of the world's stuff, including the stuff that we have.
Percentage of the world's pollution.
Absolutely.
Tell me.
No, you tell me.
You're the expert.
I'm telling you, per capita, as an individual.
Not per capita, percentage of global pollution.
That's important.
Percentage of global pollution.
There are 8 billion.
No.
You don't want to tell me, do you?
There are 8 billion people on this planet.
I'm telling you, I don't know.
You should tell me.
I'm telling you, I don't care.
Per capita, it's hard.
They built more solar power than the rest of the world put together, Piers, and they're at 50% green on their electricity grid.
I say, those are amazing achievements when you say, what about China?
Yeah, I say they produce more than a quarter of the world's pollution.
And I don't see anyone from Greta Thunberg to you guys getting out there to Beijing and shouting at them or wrecking their sporting events.
And we all know why.
Let's bring in Riz, who's chuckling away because you find all this terribly amusing.
Riz, you've supported Just Stop Oil.
No one at Wimbledon today supports Just Up Oil.
They just think you're a bunch of idiots.
I know you weren't there today.
You were shouting at the Royals up in Scotland.
Why do you support this kind of protest that we're seeing at all these sporting events?
Oh, I'm not sure I've completely condoned that.
And to be clear, I'm not speaking on behalf of Republic today.
I speak on behalf of No More Royals.
But absolutely, we are protesting in Scotland.
And Piers, you're going to like, you've just been going on at these guys, at Just Up Oil, about why are you disrupting ordinary people and why don't you target the right thing?
And we've been doing that, shouting at the king.
Why do you support that method of protesting?
Why don't you come out and condemn Just Up Oil like Trevor Nielsen, who was funding some of this stuff before, has suddenly realized the penny's dropped, it doesn't work.
I'd like to talk about coronation because it's f ⁇ ing.
But to respond to that question, we're in a climate crisis.
It's horrifying.
I'm terrified for my future.
And Just Up Oil are one of the only groups of people at the moment who are doing anything about that.
But as I say, I'd like to focus on the issue.
Well, I'm sure you would.
I'd like to focus on what's just happened because it's indicative of a summer of protest by people who think that they can convert people to their cause.
Even if people are inclined to do so, we're now at a point where you can tell from the audience reactions at these events, they literally want to garot them.
And what worries me is it's going to lead, it is going to lead to bad situations if this carries on because people are just going to take the law into their own hands.
Sorry, that's stupid.
Sorry.
You don't have to keep swearing, Riz.
Do you want to talk about the protests?
Riz, you don't have to keep swearing.
Do you want to talk about the protest, or do you want to say that protests shouldn't happen and we should all suck it up and deal with it?
Because that's easy for you, right?
Like, you've been dealt a pretty good hand.
I believe in peaceful protests.
But I actually care.
I believe in peaceful protests.
Do you want to talk about the peaceful protests?
I believe in peaceful protests.
I don't believe in wrecking ordinary people's lives.
Is they going to work?
Is they going to hospital?
As they, on some occasions, going to funerals.
I don't think that when they pay for sporting events that they maybe save money for all year long.
That's fine because neither Republic nor No More Royals did that today.
I'd love to see it.
They shouldn't have it ruined by a bunch of...
Let's talk about it.
There was Republic up at one end who were a massive crowd, far bigger than any of the monarchists.
I mean, the streets are pretty much empty.
I haven't had a chance yet to look at any of the coverage, but I think you'll see that because there is pretty much nothing going on on the monarchist end and the Republic demo is enormous.
And then there's No More Royals who did a banner drop chanting.
Can I swear?
I just did.
The king, feed the hungry, because that's what we want to talk about, right?
You know what?
They've done this.
You know what, Riz, for a bright young woman who's getting a very good, expensive education, you do behave like a complete foul-mouthed idiot.
You don't do yourself any favours.
Why do you think coming on a show like this and just repeatedly using the F word, why do you think that makes you look any better?
Yeah, I did apologise for that.
I did apologize in advance, but that was what we said.
Three times.
Yeah, F the King.
Yeah, I'm happy to censor it.
F the King, feed the hungry.
That's what we were chanting.
Because that's what we should be talking about today.
The first coronation was ridiculous.
It was a slap in the face of the British people.
You asked for a question.
It's this.
Do you really think the best way to persuade people of your argument is to come on a show like this, laugh manically at people who are doing ruinous things to people's enjoyment, and then just keep swearing all the time?
Do you think that really helps you?
Do you think people watch this and go, she's really persuaded me that girl?
Wow, she was so eloquent.
She was effective.
They don't.
They just think it's, again, performative, attention-seeking.
You want to get your little YouTube moment.
And by the way, you'll probably get one.
And good for you, but no one's going to come around to your cause.
That's it.
I can promise you.
Fair enough.
I actually don't want that YouTube movement moment.
I don't want your fans calling me assorted slurs on Twitter.
And to be fair, right, I did say at multiple points, can we talk about the issue?
Can we talk about this outrageous...
By the way, I don't think we've even mentioned, I'm in Edinburgh.
There's been a second coronation and no one showed up.
You know, I can only apologise for swearing, but I think the laughing was more to do with your ridiculous coverage of it.
Well, as always, always a pleasure to have you on.
Thank you very much.
Coming back to you, Darl, let's finish on something on a more positive note.
You've just appointed your football club, which you own, Hannah Dingley, as caretaker manager.
She's the first female manager of a professional men's team in English football.
Quite a groundbreaking moment.
Yeah.
It is.
I just want to say, Riz is right.
The first coronation cost 200 million quid, right, for hard-pushed Britons struggling with a cost of living crisis.
Just want to say that.
Hannah Dingley, football, yeah.
We've pushed another boundary, right?
How can it be that in 2023, no women has led a men's first team in the top four flights of English football?
How can it be?
But there it is, until tonight, when we play our first pre-season friendly game against Melkshram.
I'm looking forward to it.
Why is she only caretaker manager if you believe in her that much?
You're such a twister of words.
Well, she's been appointed caretaker manager.
Hang on, have I misquoted you?
Sorry, you said if I believe in her so much, right?
Is she caretaker manager?
Has she been appointed full-time or caretaker?
Half of what you said was true, the other half was made up.
Yes, she's caretaker manager.
And if you know football, you know that's quite normal.
You've just sacked the previous manager after six months.
So how long will you give her?
I thought we were talking about something positive, but you can turn anything into the business.
I'm a pragmatist.
I'm a big football fan.
You've got a lot of good headlines of publicity for appointing the first female manager, but actually she's only caretaker.
You know, and people will be curious.
You've sacked the last guy after six months.
If you were to sack her after a few weeks or months, how's that going to look?
Who knows?
But look, what happened was unexpected for us.
And Hannah has been with us four years leading the academy.
When we made that appointment, that was the first ever.
We didn't know that at the time.
We found out afterwards.
This one we were aware of, but Hannah is the best qualified person at the club to take this role, this interim role.
So she got the job.
We didn't want this media storm.
Really didn't want it at all.
Sacking The First Female Manager 00:02:10
But here it is.
You didn't think by appointing the first female caretaker manager of a professional men's team you would get any attention.
She's the best candidate for the job at the club.
This is what happens.
You look at within the club, you find your best coach and you say, take the team in an interim period while we do a proper recruitment process.
That's all that's happening here.
And look, you guys in the media, you've made much of it.
And I think it's not all bad, actually.
I mean, you have a particular negative way of coming about it.
But for the actual whole country to understand that this is a momentous first, and it really shouldn't be, not in 2023, then I don't think it's such a bad thing.
Well, it is unless you sack her after a few weeks.
Why do you keep coming back to that?
Because she's only a caretaker of appointments.
She's only a caretaker.
Keeping our record of appointments.
So if you believed in her that much, you'd have made a manager.
You've got all the publicity, but actually, she's not got the full job.
And I suspect what's going to happen is you're going to go and you're going to probably go and find a bloke to replace her, and then you're going to have to deal with that.
I thought you understood football, Piers.
I do.
I'm an arsho fan.
I was going to ask you that, but that's cool.
I thought they had a good season last season, actually.
I was rooting for them to win the title.
We choked, but there we are.
That's football.
We've made some good signings.
Declan Rice will take us to the title next season.
Dale, I hope she succeeds.
I hope she's there for a long time.
I hope I'm not interviewing you again in a few weeks' time when you've replaced her with a man, because that would really be awful.
But great to talk to you.
Well, I think at least we weren't talking almonds and avocados, so I'm happy.
We can come back to that next time.
Good to talk to you.
Uncensored next tonight.
Children identifying as cats, dinosaurs, even a moon.
What is going on in our schools and what's the answer?
I'll talk to Britain's strictest head teacher, some would say best head teacher, Catherine Burblesing next.
How much money have you made from kids?
Oh, come on.
Hypocrisy In Gender Identity Debates 00:16:00
Women?
Or the live performer?
Pierce Morrigan.
Sorry, I get choked up when I think about this.
I've read that you're worth $400 million.
Really?
By the way, I look pretty good.
You do.
Yes, I'll be.
I'm all right, you know.
We literally have everything from KISS condoms to kiss caskets.
We'll get you coming and we'll get you going.
There is a KISS toilet scene.
Oh, yeah.
I said I'm my face.
That's all.
But I tell you what, kind of a big deal.
When I was singing and I was chewing gum and I said, Mr. Simmons, please take out your gum because I'm a wise guy.
I said, eBay, how much, Pierce Morrigan?
Let me guess, 5,000 pounds.
£247,000.
Oh, for a piece of gum.
Gene Simmons claim.
That Gene Simmons interview is one to watch.
It'll be tomorrow night for the hour.
One-on-one, uncensored with one of the most charismatic rock stars probably ever.
But welcome back to Piers Morgan Censor.
Catherine Boblesing is the self-styled strictest head teacher in Britain with a stellar reputation for teaching children basic manners and respect and hard work ethic.
I can't think of a better person, frankly, to speak to when I read that children in schools across Britain are now identifying as cats, horses, dinosaurs, and in one case, a moon.
A reminder of the leaked audio recording that brought the bizarre scandal to light featuring a teacher reprimanding children for refusing to accept a class-based decision to identify as a cat.
If they want to identify as a cat or something, then they're like genuinely unless they can find them.
Yeah, going to the bottom.
You're questioning that their identity.
I was just saying about the gender.
I didn't say anything about them.
Where'd you get this idea from?
There's only two genders.
Gender is not linked to do with the... not linked to the garments that you were born with.
Gender is about how you identify.
But you identify with the gender of the sexual organ that you're born with, or you're with.
That's basically with yourself.
Yeah, which is really despicable.
Well, Catherine, what did you make of that when you heard that tape and read the story behind it?
Yeah, well, actually, for some weeks before that, I had been talking about cats in schools because I know of teachers in schools where that's happening.
It's called furries, right?
This is a real thing.
Exactly.
And in some places, you know, they're able to wear ears and tails and things.
And the thing is, I don't blame the schools because...
Don't you?
No, because in fact in some places the parents are coming in and telling the schools, this is how you must treat my child.
Why don't the schools just say no?
You would.
Wouldn't you?
Well, I bet there are no kids at your school dressing up as cats.
Identifying as cats, are there?
That's true.
No, no, there are.
You wouldn't allow it, would you?
Well, no, but I mean, I...
I mean, I'd have a conversation with the parents, and that's the thing.
This isn't just a school problem.
This is a societal problem.
And it's something that we need to talk about and think, well, what is acceptable and what isn't?
And the problem is there's no guidance for schools as well.
So headteachers and ordinary teachers in the classroom, what are they meant to do?
I do feel sorry for them, really, because they're getting it in the neck.
And I get that it's difficult.
Well, I don't think it is that difficult.
If a kid identifies as a horse in the classroom, you're not obliged to tolerate it.
Yeah.
And again, I don't think you would.
No, but I do have secondary school children.
You know, if they're primary, they're young.
If you have children that are finding it difficult to fit in and then they decide to behave in a particularly, it's a slightly strange way.
How much do you support?
At what stage do you feel you're enabling them or you're helping them?
You know, it's difficult.
It's not a straight cut as just saying, well, this is just, you know, silly.
I mean, it is.
This also plays into limitless self-identity, which must be causing all sorts of problems at all sorts of schools.
Yes.
How do you deal with that?
And what's your view of that?
Yeah, well, it is difficult.
I mean, and we need guidance.
It's very hard because it isn't just the schools, it's also the parents.
And the difficulty that any head teacher has is trying to balance what they feel is right for the children at their school and what they're offering.
And then also trying to do what's right by the parents and what the parents work.
But there are now girls' schools marketing themselves as girls' schools, selling fees as girls' schools for their girls to go to a girls' school who now outlaw the use of the word girl because there may be some people identifying as non-binary who may be offended.
I find that absurd.
Yes, but then the rest of society possibly doesn't.
And that's the difficulty.
Well, I think most of society does, actually.
Well, but would they say it out loud?
You know, that's the thing.
But that's where we've got to.
I would, because I think it's nuts.
Yeah.
And also I think it's very hypocritical of a school to market itself as a girls' school and then suppress the use of the word girl.
So I think there's a real hypocrisy there.
But there's also a bit of a moral cowardice.
I really do.
Yes.
I mean, schools, when I was young, schools took a moral lead.
Yes.
I don't remember teachers marching in and having everything changed to acquiesce to what their idea of teaching would be.
Yes, but that, and that's the case with all kinds of things.
Not just with regard to this issue, but with regard to everything.
Schools used to take a moral stance on things and used to lead the way for a society.
You do to a degree.
Yes, we do, but I think we're quite...
And you've become very polarizing a result for reasons that completely baffle me.
Yes.
I mean, you run a school which is run on discipline and hard work ethic and politeness and respect.
Yes.
These used to be things that we thought made our country great.
I know.
I know.
What's going on?
Why are you suddenly a villain?
I don't know.
It's a very good question.
You would think that this would be what all of us want, but society has changed.
That's the thing.
So then when you're saying it's the fault of schools, but you look at this, I stand up for traditional values and I'm hated for it.
So do you really expect all headteachers to do that?
We're asking too much of them.
But the real problem with that whole issue is when schools aren't communicating with parents, where schools are taking children down certain roads and are not letting parents know.
Are parents being too weak or too strong?
I mean, are they having too much power now at schools or are they being too weak with their kids, empowering them to have supposedly too much power?
Yeah, well, both, frankly.
I think teachers and parents, we as adults, have abdicated authority and responsibility.
And children depend on us to push back and to show them the way, to guide them and lead them.
And unfortunately, I'd say over the last 40 to 50 years, we've lost the whole concept of adult authority.
And parents and teachers want to be friends with the kids as opposed to being the adult in authority.
You've had a big spat this week with Jess Phillips from the Labour Party.
And you've actually written to Sagir Starmer, the leader.
In a nutshell, what was it about?
Well, there was no spat.
She just attacked four times to 630,000 followers for no reason.
I don't know Jess Phillips.
She doesn't know me.
And she sent out these tweets to her followers saying that I believed in domestic violence.
This is because when Tina Turner died, you tweeted a picture of her with Ike Turner.
Well, it's a malfunctioning gif.
And for some reason, it ended up on that picture.
And I said, good times.
Now, obviously, anyone normal would look at that and think, well, it was a mistake.
But she chose the opportunity to lash out at me four times, a million views, a whole load of people attacking me.
She's an MP, Minister for Safeguarding, or Shadow Minister.
She called into question the safeguarding policies at my school.
She called into question my ability to do my job.
Why?
I mean, I don't have anything to do with Jess Philip.
Well, is it because you gave a speech to the National Conservatism Conference?
In other words, they view you now as being political on the other side.
You say that.
At every political conference, party political conference, there will be head teachers and teachers who speak at the Labour Conference, at the Conservative Conference.
But what doesn't happen is a black head teacher who goes and speaks at a National Conservative Conference, which had nothing to do with the Conservative Party.
But the fact is there is an unconscious bias on the left where they sort of believe, no, not everybody on the left, but too many think that black people should not lean conservative.
And the fact is, I do lean conservative, generally speaking, but I believe in unconscious bias.
That's quite a leftist idea.
So I'm a bit, you know, I have ideas from both sides.
And the problem with this particular type of unconscious bias is that because it belongs to the left, the left reject it.
The right don't like to recognize racist unconscious bias.
So neither side is recognizing that this is an issue.
I think it's something that Pritty Patel, Suella Bauverman, Kemi Badenot, I think they suffer from it too.
I think I suffer from it regularly where people say, how dare you go and speak at that conference?
And I think, well, why shouldn't I speak at that conference?
Well, some of the things you said, I was cheering, you know, and I don't identify as right wing, but you said at the conference that the audience should act as if they felt their children's schools did not reflect the small C Conservative values.
What I'm asking you said, how much do you love your country?
How much do you love the values that you claim to defend?
Do you love them enough to tweet under your own name?
Do you love them enough to change your child's school to one that's less woke?
Ignore the impact on your social status.
Do you love them enough to do more than simply chat to your friends who already agree with you at dinner parties?
For heaven's sake, man, you said, stand up and be counted.
As Russell Crowe says in the film Gladiator, a clip you regularly play to your staff, hold the line, stay with me.
What we do in life echoes in eternity.
That's right.
I wanted to cheer that.
Not because I think you're conservative, but because actually these used to be values which most British people held.
And I suspect a lot more still do than people think.
Well, and what I was trying to say to them is if you think these things, then get up and say it.
For goodness sakes.
And you know, after I spoke to them, a woman stopped me on her bike on the street and she said, I'm going to speak out more.
I'm going to say what I think.
And I thought, great, that's what we need to do.
Because too many people are quiet about.
I totally agree.
There is a silent majority.
They're getting a little noisier, but they're all kowtowed by cancel culture.
Exactly.
Because the woke left have been basically terrorizing people.
That's right.
And they've come for you hard.
And I'm very glad to see that you've continued to put your head over the parapet.
Have you heard that from Keir Starmer?
No, but it hasn't been that long.
I'm hoping.
Fingers crossed.
We'll nudge him.
I'm sure he'll respond.
Great to see you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
So it's the next.
A major ice cream company gets political.
Of course it does, urging the United States to hand back Indigenous land, but attacking the founding fathers, the Mount Rushmore, attacking that on July the 4th.
my stellar pack will join me to unravel that debate and others all right two peers and i'm joined by the journalist also the new book the power code caddy k talk tv contributor esther crackley on the daily mirrors associate editor kevin mcguire want to play a clip
This is from Australian Morning Television today.
The Australian Prime Minister just started to have a little pop at me.
Take a look at this.
Let's talk about the ashes.
Rishi Sunak, who looks like he could blow over in a stiff breeze.
He's fired up about the ashes.
Is it time to revoke the visas of English elites like Piers Morgan?
Just get rid of it.
Just don't let them come in.
That's it.
Well, I think that would be a very harsh measure, Carl.
What it might be better to do is to allow people like Piers Morgan to come in and to come on your show and remind him of Australia's massive ashes victory.
Both the men's and the women's team are nailing it over there in the UK.
Yeah, Prime Minister, just for the record, you've won nothing yet.
The Ashes are alive.
And the headingly tomorrow is going to be the Coliseum, the Yorkshire version.
A new lot are going down.
So I will be on that breakfast show in three or four weeks talking about a thrilling comeback by England to win the Ashes 3-2.
And the women are going to win too.
So I would just put a cork in it, Cobber.
Right.
Let's move to our pack.
So there's a...
I love this story.
Transport for London bosses have banned an advert for a new play in the West End because it features a Victoria Sponge Cake.
And the ad apparently promotes the consumption of high-fat, salt, and sugar foods and didn't comply with the organisation's advertising policy.
So they've now had to rip it down.
This is for a Broadway show, Tony and Tina's Wedding, which has this cake in it.
I don't know where we start with this.
Kevin, when did we say you couldn't have a big cake as a promo?
I know, look, there's an obesity problem in London as there is in the UK and much of the world, certainly the developed world.
So the ban is on advertising.
That's pushers, unhealthy foods.
I think this is coarse.
I think they just in the production.
Look, I think it's daft.
I think they need to tweak the ban so you can't say buy kicks.
Oh, please.
So you don't want to do it.
I did my monologue today on these trigger warnings, right?
How it's been established that trigger warnings actually trigger people who the warnings are supposed to protect because it reminds them of what they're supposed to be not thinking about.
Right.
I mean, Esther, we are literally going nuts here.
I do think, I'm very curious whether actually there's a link between banning ads of unhealthy foods and whether people stop consuming them.
Do you think anybody looks at the production for a Broadway show which has a poster with two characters on a sponge cake and they think, I must go and eat a sponge cake.
But makers of very sugary and fatty, unhealthy foods would not spend a fortune on advertising if they didn't think it was getting too easy.
This is a show.
I mean, if anything, it will make me want to see a cake.
Let me bring in Caddy, who's a welcome visitor to Piers Morgana Center.
So you've done this book, The Power.
Power.
Well, ER code, what is that?
The Power Code.
The Power Code.
Oh, the Power Code.
Oh, it runs around, okay.
More joy, less ego, maximum impact for women.
Is the problem with all these things?
Are too many women not in charge or are too many women in charge of these mad decisions?
No, I mean we've stalled at the top of women.
We've got only 10% of CEOs are women.
30 out of the world's 300 countries have women leaders.
Women improve the bottom lines of the companies they work for.
And so we were trying to look at why are women not progressing?
Why have they not got to the top?
And one of the things we found is that actually there was a study out of Harvard showing that women don't really want power.
They look at power and they think the cost of getting it too high.
Power itself seems unappealing.
I've met some power craze women that we've got.
Yeah, of course.
Of course there are going to be people, women in power, who love to wield power the old way.
What we were looking at is why aren't they progressing and what could you do about power itself to change it to get more women?
I mean, if the world was in a wonderful state, we wouldn't have thought you need to change things.
Are you of the belief that if the world was run by women world leaders, we would have less turmoil and war?
We haven't got any evidence on that because there haven't been enough women leaders.
So all of this is, you know, we look at data and research.
I'm not going to tell you that if women were running every single country, we wouldn't have wars.
But we do know that women, when they run companies, for example, those more women in senior positions at companies improve the bottom line of those companies.
They make more profits, which most companies would think is a good thing.
So we want more women at the top.
You spent 20 years in the States reporting a lot for the BBC, obviously.
Every week now, it seems to be a story of a corporate, a kind of woke corporate campaign, spectacularly backfiring.
It started with Gillette after the Me Too campaign, where they suddenly went all every man's a Harvey Weinstein until they prove otherwise.
Nine billion came off the bottom line.
They had to reverse and go back to alpha male advertising.
We saw the Budweiser thing with Dylan Mulvaney, the transgender influencer.
Corporate Campaigns Backfiring Spectacularly 00:03:08
Madeleo now the biggest selling beer in America because of that.
Right.
And we've seen it with Target, who did a lot of stuff during Pride Month and got attacked by it by its consumer base.
And now we've seen Ben and Jerry's, the ice cream champions in America, always doing politically motivated stuff.
But they chose July the 4th to launch this campaign to basically guilt trip America about indigenous rights, which is a perfectly legitimate thing.
But on July 4th, they actually targeted Mount Rushmore.
Obviously, the four faces, they said, making them out to be a bunch of brazen thieves, when in fact they're the four of the great presidents of the United States.
I suspect this will backfire.
I suspect there'll be a run of campaign against Ben and Jerry's.
Where is all this going to go?
I don't know.
I don't know if the Ben and Jerry's case will backfire because Ben and Jerry's have long been known and associated with liberal causes.
So I think that people expect it of Ben and Jerry's to some extent.
I think CEOs in America, I'm sure you've spoken to them, Piers, are increasingly being put in a position, perhaps because of failure of politicians to get things done where they're having to take positions on social issues that they don't want to, whether it's immigration, gun control.
You've seen companies take positions on that too.
I think it's incredibly awkward for CEOs.
I don't think they can because they're partly because they're client-based, but also mostly because they're employee-based.
Because younger employees in particular are pushing CEOs to take these things.
So this reminds me, Esther, of the conversation I just had with Catherine Burblesing, which is parents and students now driving the power.
We're seeing this now with young employees, I quite agree with you, of these companies driving them to take very woke positions.
Disney had just had this huge bust up with Ron DeSantis in Florida.
I don't think they should be doing any of this stuff.
Well, it's a case of the inmates are running the asylum.
Because actually back in the day, as arrogant as I think my generation is, previous generations, you knew that you have to keep your mouth shut when someone with 20 plus years of experience is speaking, at the very least.
But now we have these young people that think they know best.
They have access to the internet.
They know more than everyone else.
And I think that's the bigger problem.
I don't think it has to do with the consumer base actually for these companies because you tend to divide them.
I like it when young people, the new generations, challenge the older generations.
I actually think that's good.
Yes, you've got to get the decisions right.
Now, Ben and Jerry, I think their marketing is fantastic.
They're getting talked about again.
The people who will go and spend their dollars or pounds, wherever you are, Euros, on Ben and Jerry's, probably like all this.
It's worse now, but what if they go down the Budweiser route and why would you stir up division on July the 4th, the day of unity?
I mean, look, as a Brit, I don't obviously celebrate July the 4th.
I think we dropped the ball under old Mad King George, but that's another matter.
But the idea of an American company that's been very successful in America launching this attack on the very idea of July the 4th on July the 4th.
But it's an invented myth idea of July the 4th.
It's not the true story of the world.
They just celebrate independence from the Brits.
Yeah, but you know how it was achieved and what went on.
It's like the oldest.
It's the old Mayflower story, isn't it?
Doping And Dangerous Enhancements 00:06:43
Which is all I've been.
All right, Katie, before I let you go, who's going to win the election 2024 in America?
I think Joe Biden probably wins, but if something happens to him or to the economy a month before the election, I think Donald Trump's the nominee.
What a choice.
Country of 330 million.
How can it be this?
And we're going to have a rerun.
Yes.
And I was exhausted at the end of the last time.
I'm exhausted just thinking about it.
A power code.
Terrific book.
Caddy Kay and Claire Sherman.
I'm going to really enjoy showing this to people to see what they think.
Good to see you.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Pat.
I'll send some next.
It's been the subject of pub debates and Twitter speculation for years.
An Olympics, where all the athletes are allowed to take as many performance-enhancing drugs as they want.
The founder of the controversial Enhanced Games, or the doping Olympics, as they're calling it, is here next.
Walking back to Pierce Organisation, what might be possible in sport if performance-enhancing drugs were all allowed?
A 90-minute marathon, a 15-meter-long jump, some as far as the speedboats.
Well, we might soon find out.
The inaugural Enhanced Games, or the Doping Olympics, as it's been dubbed, aims to rival professional athletics with a twist.
You can basically take whatever you like.
I'm joined by the president of these Enhanced Games, Aaron D'Souza, and five-time Olympian, Mark Foster.
All right, Aaron, sell it to me.
Why on earth should we want or have a doping Olympics where everyone just dopes themselves up?
Because science is real, Pierce.
Medicine is real.
Technology is here.
So is cheating.
It's not cheating at all.
We're creating a level open playing field.
Cheating is happening at the Olympic Games because they have a highly constrained environment with an artificial rule set.
And in the enhanced games, we want to do everything out in the open to create a much safer, fairer, true.
Are you deadly serious about this?
Absolutely.
You think you can genuinely put on an event where everyone's doped up?
Absolutely.
So like the cycling with Lance Armstrong was doing it, where they're all on drugs.
And it's much safer, Pierce, when it's done out in the open.
Well, when they're taking legally prescribed, clinically supervised performance enhancement regimes.
All right.
Mark, this might sound completely nuts, but is the existing system being so discredited with so many cheats?
Is there some method to this madness?
No, well, I was wondering if it was a serious...
The reason why I came in is to see whether it was a serious thing and whether these things are going to happen and how far it's gone.
My head tells me that it's completely unsafe and I think people will abuse it and people die from taking drugs on a daily basis anyway.
I don't just, I'm in performance enhancing drugs.
And I just think, where does it go?
We've seen to have safeguards in place.
Yes, some people slip through the net.
There is a Wild of the World Anti-Doping Association do have things in place and there still are people out there that do cheat if they choose to, but it's a very small minority.
I just think looking at this from the outside, it's just got death all over it.
I mean, it has.
I mean, what are you going to do if people start dying?
Because they're all trying to out-dope each other.
They're all taking whatever they want.
I mean, it's a completely insane idea, isn't it?
You're a lawyer.
I mean...
Yes, I am a lawyer, but...
Aren't you just going to be on the receiving end of massive amounts of losses?
Well, in fact, there are quite a number of international sporting competitions that do not have drug testing.
The X-Games, for example, which is probably the most prevalent challenger at the Olympic Games, does not have drug testing.
The NFL, the NBA, Major League Baseball have drug testing regimes that are not compliant with water.
The Olympic Games is much, much lighter because the power has all the limits off, and you're saying anyone can take anything.
So if people want to win and think there's money at the end of it or a big prize or whatever it may be, they're going to take a lot of stuff.
And that is going to be very dangerous.
Well, we must believe that athletes who are adults with free and informed consent should be able to make choices about their own bodies.
My body, my choice, your body, your choice.
Enhancements are present in our society.
I see you have a coffee cup right there.
Caffeine is the most used enhancement probably in the world, right?
And should the government or should some paternalistic sports organization be telling you peers how much caffeine you should be able to drink?
All right, Mark, again, this, I mean, I think the idea of this is insane, but it's a coherent argument if you want to go to that insane way.
My issue, I think a concern like yours, is it just seems incredibly dangerous.
I represented Britain for 23 years at Senior Level and went to five Olympics and I abided by the rules.
I think people always twist the rules.
I'd always be amazed by how fast somebody could go if they took something.
But the bottom line is, I don't think that's got any place in sport at the moment.
I just don't see.
Would people watch it?
Probably, possibly.
I don't know a lot about the X Games.
I think the thing is, if there wants to be competition towards IOC, because IOC is a monopoly of the Olympics and there's another sporting body, that's one thing.
But I don't see this.
The Olympic Games has had a monopoly on power.
They've run the international sporting world for 120 years.
And you want a piece of that action.
I want to show the world that there's a better way not to waste hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money every four years by building dozens of stadiums, throwing them away, and waste and corruption upon corruption.
There is a better way to do sports, and most importantly, to people like Mark, a way to pay the athletes.
And your argument is if they're all doping, none of them are cheats.
That's right.
Absolutely.
It's fair.
How do you stop them dying?
How do you stop them dying?
Clinical supervision, right?
So how do people not die from taking pharmaceutical medications?
When you go to your doctor, you talk to your doctor openly and honestly about what you're intending to do, the conditions that you're suffering from.
Does that mean they're still sort of compete under rules then?
Because there are, as you say, they can't overdose themselves.
You're saying there's still rules and regulations where they go and get their drugs from.
Yeah, absolutely.
We would never encourage anyone to order steroids online from a sketchy pharmacy in Mexico and inject themselves.
That's really unspeakable.
That's what athletes want.
When are you hoping to get, Mr. Venthar?
December of 2024 is when we anticipate to run.
Are any top athletes going to do it?
They told you.
I am pleased to report that we have over 400 athletes who have registered on our website.
We have athletes like Christina Smith, Brett Fraser, Roland Schumann, Olympians all around who are on our athletes' advisory board.
And it's time to shake up the system.
It's time to have a conversation about how fast we can get.
The doping Olympics coming to a TV screen near you.
I'll believe it when I see it.
But thank you for coming in.
Mark, thank you for coming in.
That's it from me.
What are you up to?
Keep it uncensored and, in my estimation, if you're an athlete, undoped.
Good night.
Export Selection