Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Ballot Result, Tom Bower and Ndaba Mandela

Episode Date: July 18, 2022

On this episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored reveals the results of the Tory leadership ballot with reaction. Also Tom Bower joins about his book that Meghan Markle will be dreading and Nelson Mandela's grandson Ndaba speaks about the similarity between Harry and Meghan's book and his grandfather's, Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8pm on TalkTV on Sky 526, Virgin Media 627, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and app. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I'm Pierce Morgan Unsensored tonight. As Britain roast on possibly the hottest day in history, the race to become Prime Minister is also heating up. Rishi Sunak and Liz Trust put out of further debates, and they're not been on a show either. And if you can't stand in the heated debates, we'll get out of the politics kitchen. Makes a result is due in moments for bringing to you live.

I'll also speak to author Tom Barra, his explosive new book on Megan and Harry's Rick with the World Family. And we'll talk to Nelson Mandela's grandson and Dabber for his reaction on Harry's speech today to the UN on Mandela Day. Well, first, and I end the race to replace Boris Johnson as Prime Minister is heating up. This is the scene at the 1922 Committee. By the result of a third vote in the Conservative Leadership contest is due any moment. Now, one person will be knocked out imminently.

We'll talk to these blue words to Kate McCann. Is it Westminster awaiting the result? And presumably, Kate, you're just slowly frying to death as you wait, are you? I am peers and you'll be pleased to know I'm also being bitten by ants because they are also back Apparently it's not too hot for them today on College Green But I don't think I will be as uncomfortable still as those MPs in that room because there are many of them who just don't know which way this competition is going to go all day long in Westminster Kate just going to interrupt you there we're going to go live to Graham Brady with the result Candles and the number of votes cast in alphabetical order

Badenock 58 Mordant 82 Sunak 115 Trust 71

Tugendat 31 so Tom Tugendat is eliminated from the election The other candidates are able to go forward to a fourth ballot

which will take place tomorrow between 1 and 3pm with the results announced at 4pm Thank you very much We'll go back to Kmi Kahn Not many surprises really there, Kate. Tom Tuganhar out, only getting 31 votes there. What do you think of the other results? Anything we can read into it?

Yes, I think there probably is, actually. Rishu's seeing like getting 115 there up from 101. That's big, because remember, there were only 27 votes in theory in this. So for him to have built 14, that means he's sustaining the progress that he was. so he's keeping the momentum going in his campaign, but he's very close to that 120 mark. And I was speaking to MPs today in the comments who were saying, there is no way that he's going to reach 120. So he'll be very happy with that 115.

I think Penny Morden, now, look, she's gone from 83 to 82 today. Now, that is backwards, but it's not as backwards as potentially things could have gone for her. And interestingly today, I was speaking to a group of MPs who've been voting as some kind of bloc who was saying that in their eyes, They thought it was really important that Rishi Sunak moved forward convincingly and that they may well lend some of the votes that had gone to Penny Mordance to him at this stage of the campaign,

which could then go back to her tomorrow. Sounds complicated, might not do her any favours, but it looks like that potentially might have happened today. And Liz Truss, now she's gone from 64 to 71 votes. Now, that's reasonably pleasing for her. It's potentially not as much as she would have wanted to put on over the weekend, but I think she will still be pleased that she is making some progress, because there had been a suggestion that she may well go backwards.

So reassured perhaps for her and on to the next day to tomorrow. My bet is still that it ends up Sunak, the trust, and Sunak becomes Prime Minister, which is an unusual scenario because normally he who wields the blade rarely wins, but I think he will in this case. I think there's certainly an argument for that. It's definitely easier to see Rishi Sunak's path to power than it is potentially for some of the others. But if it is Rishi Sunak and Liz Trust that go to the membership, then that does become unpredictable in some ways, because Liz Trust does appeal to certain groups of the Tory membership, but not necessarily to others.

And I think Rishu Sunax team have been privately quite pleased with the polling that they have seen, which shows that he is potentially one of the candidates that could beat Kirstama in an election. And remember, that's very, very important to Conservative voters. So that might be the deciding factor if it's those two. I wouldn't necessarily rule out Penny Morden yet. There are some who say that Kenny Badox votes could split in a couple of different directions that may well keep her going. She could try and regain things. But I think for Penny Morden, people have seen her in the debates over the last couple of days.

And they've not necessarily seen a candidate that they thought was really as inspiring potentially as they hoped she would be. Yeah. And finally, the two front runners really were my eyes. Anyway, Rishi and Liz Trussie both pulled out of the Sky News debate due to take place tonight, I think. I mean, to me, they haven't come on this show any of the candidates. Pulling out of a debate you've already agreed with a major network, I just think is pretty gutless, actually. I mean, they should all be held to account as much as they've agreed to be held to account,

which is not very much anyway. Yeah, and I don't think you're going to find a journalist in the land who doesn't agree with you their peers. We would all like to see these candidates put under scrutiny. And there's been an argument from some quarters in the Conservative Party that if a few of them had faced more interviews, more media, more press, then they might have found this competition a little bit easier in some of those stages. It might have clarified their arguments and tested them a little bit,

because that's essentially what happens when someone points questions at you, and you are forced to really come up with an answer. I think I can understand from a Conservative Party perspective why they've chosen not to do that, because you only have to take a look at Secere Starmes go in the Commons today. When he rounded on Boris Johnson, yes, the current Prime Minister, but he'll do exactly the same with the next, and used campaign tactics from each of those contenders

that they made on television last night. That is not a good luck, whichever way you look at it. And I think the morning after the night before, there was a lot of nervous energy around the Conservative Party today, wondering whether it was really all worth it, and whether they ought not to try and avoid any more TV debates. In fact, some reports that last night, Rishie Seneck and Lith Trust were asking one another,

what did we do that for? Well, they did it to be publicly accountable. That's the whole point of it. Final question. How come you're so ice-cool tonight? I mean, you're not sweating, you're not we, you're not collapsing. What's the secret? It's the hottest day in the history of the country. Ladies don't sweat, peers. We don't sweat. Not visibly anyway.

You and Prince Andrew then. I don't think I want to be in that camp necessarily, but I have to admit that we have lots of water here. There's a place you want to find yourself if we can. Our lovely camera crews have brought water and I have a fan, which is just out of reach, but I would show you if I could. Can you use a fan and go over to that idiot who shouts a lot? all the time and just do something with it. I don't think a fan would call him down, to be honest. Nor do I.

Okay, we'll be about tomorrow. It is heating up, thank you. Well, Prince Harry is waded back into politics when nobody wanted him to. They're delivering a, apparently a keynote speech at the United Nations in New York to Mark Nelson Mandela Day, for reasons that completely back on me.

Can't think of anybody less qualified of the eight billion inhabitants of our planet to talk about Nelson Mandela than Harry. Anyway, he decided to do. do that and bang on about stuff like climate change. Let's take a listen. We're living through a pandemic that continues to ravage communities in every corner of the globe. Climate change wreaking havoc on our planet, with the most vulnerable suffering most of all.

The few weaponising lies and disinformation of the expense of the many. And from the horrific war in Ukraine to the rolling back of constitutional rights here in the United States, We are witnessing a global assault on democracy and freedom. We are witnessing a global assault on democracy. And you have all got to take climate change seriously, even if I use private jets like a taxi service. Do you hear me? All of you? Do you? When did he become this miserable guy?

He's so miserable, and pompous and po-faced. Oh, I know. It's when he met Megan. All right, let's a little earlier I spoke to Endaba Mandela. He is Nelson Mandela's grandson. He didn't even know Harry was making the keynote speech to celebrate his grandfather's legacy, let alone lecturing us all about climate change as he uses jets. I had a wonderful 15-minute meeting with your grandfather many years ago, 2003.

I've never forgotten it, like most people who met him. He was an extraordinary life force, one of the most inspiring people I've ever met in my life. What would it like to be his grandson? Of course, it's also quite amazing. And I must say it's very humbling to see the admiration, the love and respect that he carries throughout the world. And whenever people meet me and other family members,

they are very much touched by that we're so close to the man. So it's a great honor for me to be his grandson. So a lot of speculation today about Prince Harry making the speech at the UN in New York on Mandeladay and talking about your grandfather. Do you think he was the right choice to make a keynote speech today, was getting so much attention? Well, you know, our families do share a relationship. We've always been fond of Harry coming over to Johannesburg and so has my grandfather over the years. So for us, I mean, I believe that if there is a platform to communicate something, maybe an initiative perhaps or something that needs to be implemented,

I think anybody should really be able to take the platform and be able to put their money where their mouth is or to lead by example. Did you know that he was making this speech? I didn't know, to be honest, I only found out on, I believe, Friday, when I was actually speaking to one of your predictions. I was quite surprised, I must say. Yeah. But like I said, as long as it's something of substance in relation to our grandfather's values that he would like to implement, I don't see the problem.

Megan and Harry had a book written about them with their sort of tacit approval called finding freedom. And obviously your grandfather was the long walk to freedom. Do you see any obvious parallels between their battles for freedom? Of course not. There are no parallels at all, Pierce, because you'll see one is obviously fighting for the dignity of black people against a vicious tyrant like apartheid, obviously as opposed to one finding their own identity outside a said institution. Obviously, these are very different things, but I guess, you know, how you define freedom for an individual can be different. different and maybe for them it was a real struggle to finally make that decision number one and to also be able to carry out.

I mean just because you got to that decision it's always easier said than done. So to some extent maybe that's how they felt. Obviously those are definitely two worlds apart. But you can see, yeah, I mean to put it mildly, I mean the grandfather spent 27 years in a six-by-six prison cell. It's a rather different struggle some might argue than the struggle that Harry and Megan have had to leave a palace and go and live in a mansion. Definitely towards a part. They cannot be compared on any level, for sure. But my friend, you yourself have also compared yourself to Nelson Mandela.

You talked about a long walk to the freedom of speech. I wasn't that you, my friend. Well, I think the example I use, and you're right to pick me up on it, but the example I used was I think your father was a great, a proponent of freedom of speech and I think he would absolutely have said that everyone, as you indeed have said in this interview, everyone is

entitled to their opinion. I think he felt very strongly about that and in fact when I met him he expressed himself in very forceful terms of a number of issues and I think he would have been incensed actually about the way that society is moving to try and suppress freedom of speech

no definitely freedom of speech is one of the pinnacles of freedom of of course of one's expression and obviously one's ultimately determination to lead one own nation. The great power of your grandfather was that he always practiced what he preached. He never expected people to do something

he wasn't prepared to do if he said do it. I think the problem people have with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex is they often, for instance, on climate change and carbon footprint and so on, they often practice a rather different thing to what they're preaching. This is true. This is true, Piers. Every year we have the World Economic Forum and you have all these heads of state coming in on their own private jets talking about climate change.

You know, so I think it's time we hold our leaders accountable and really let them put their money where the mouth is and say if they truly believe in climate change, whether it be Prince Harry, whether it be a head of state, people need to be held accountable at the end of the day. Do you think Harry should stop using private jets if he wants to keep lecturing us about climate change? I mean, like anybody who is putting their foot forward about a certain topic, they have to lead by example. And that would have been absolutely the mantra of Nelson Mandela, too. 100%. And it's great to talk to you. You're a chip off the old block. It's like talking to a younger version of your grandfather.

So I've really enjoyed the conversation. Thank you very much. You've even got his laugh. No. Thank you. Thank you very much, Piers. It was really great talking to. Hopefully I'll get to see you in studio one of these days. I would love that. Next time you're in town, come in. We'd love to see you. Thank you very much indeed. Thank you very much, Piers. Have a lovely evening.

Great characters of Mandela's, aren't they? Well, we're joined now by royal biographer Tom Bauer. Tom, great to see you. You've got this blockbuster book. I've been reveling in your extracts. Very juicy stuff. First of all your reaction, Prince Harry popping up at the United Nations of all places. On Nelson Mandela Day, preaching away about climate change again, having apparently got there by private jet again, preaching about politics in America, which no royal supposed to ever do, so that the Constitution has been wound back and so on, whining about sort of the terrible, painful year he's had and all the rest of it. What do you make of this? Why does he do this? What does he think he achieves by it? Well, and also saying all that work to do in Africa, which he dedicated his life to,

but prefers now to paddle in the Pacific in Santa Monica. Well, he does it because he needs a profile. That's the only way they can get money by showing the profile and for Netflix. Everything is built around the future documentary series to promote the Sussexes. When you're as rankly hypocritical as Harry is, preaching about climate change, using private jets all the time, when he doesn't have to, is there not a point where the United Nations should avoid using,

people like it on a Mandela day, for example. Well, it was pretty empty the auditorium, wasn't it? It was quite empty. And the United Nations is quite famous for being a center of hot air. So I think it's the right place on this day. But what was unbelievable was, I mean, Mandela's legacy was really betrayed by the South Africans. And, you know, South Africa could have been a completely different country of Mandela had been able to live for a few more years. Yeah.

And I just thought that he's skitted over all the problems of Africa. and the self-inflicted problems while he just lives in luxury of Montecito. And he made reference to Mandela 20 times in this brief speech, clearly trying to draw some kind of parallel between his own struggle and long walk to freedom as this great inspiring historical figure who literally spent three decades nearly in a tiny cell.

Well, you know, you're the first person to say how limited Prince Harry's, unfortunately, and how his wife trades off her husband's fame and fortune or lots of a great fortune now. I mean, this is a problem, but we're still interested because after a really, he's a great character in our modern day. We can't ignore them if they keep popping up doing stuff like this. We're kind of in a mutually abusive toxic relationship, aren't we?

The media and Harry and Megan, because they keep doing stuff wanting attention. Then they get quite adverse reaction most of the time. Then they react really badly to the reaction, and so it goes on. Well, what it really boils down to is the threat they offer. if the threat was punctured, which I hope my book will do, and if their importance is diminished, which I hope my book will do, show what really... Any lawsuits yet?

No, too early, too early. It won't be long. It won't be long. Stay there, Tom. I want to come back and talk about your book after the break, where Princessy and Woke and Harry must be nuts were apparently the reactions from Harry's friends after their first meeting with Meg and Markle, and those were the ones we can repeat.

There's some of the revelations in Tom's exploding you, but revenge. We'll talk about that after that. Welcome back to Piers Morgan O'Sense. Tom Bauer is a man in every public figure fears when he puts his literary talents into them. This time it's Harry and Megan. Some great revelations in here. Let's just go through some of them. I mean, the one that really stuck out to me,

because I'd heard this from actually some of the people that you were talking about, is when Meghan Markle goes to meet Harry's friends for the first time. and they're all his old mates for the Royal Days they've all been to eat and most of them and so on and they have a kind of certain banter which Harry used to thoroughly enjoy

pretty sexist and misogynist and so on and so on and they're spraying around all their normal jokes and Megan is picking them up on every single one and it's driving them nuts Yeah well this is at Sandrium a weekend shooting party

which was quite normal for Harry and he just thought they'd all get on together but in fact the opposite I mean Megan is someone who doesn't hold herself back from complaining about people's way of manner, the way they talk, the way they behave and all the rest of it. She has a narrative and she's a very domineering woman and so she asserted herself. And what was a musing was on the way home from Sandringham.

They're all texting each other, oh my God. What a nutter? How on earth can he stay with her? And the same then happened when they went to Tommy Inskipp's wedding in Jamaica, which was a great friend of Paris who in the end was banned from the dinner after their wedding. Yeah, well, I know at least three of the very good friends were apparently... Were banned, all by Megan. And then they saw all these celebrities filing it.

Exactly. Who'd known her about three minutes. If that. And Megan was really, she controls everything. So it was a great cameo. Tell me about the Queen. The Queen, apparently, you report, didn't want Megan at Philip's funeral.

Why? Well, she didn't want to be... The attention diverted from Philip. If Megan had been there, she would have got all the attention. I mean, the Harry walk up the hill with William that just showed how the media was focused

on the reconciliation and everything after Oprah. So when she said to one of her age, thank goodness, Megan isn't coming, she meant it and it was a heartfelt. Was it the Queen that kicked them off the balcony at the Jubilee? Well, I think it was the Queen, but also I'm sure Charles and William had a big saying that. They weren't going to allow Netflix to dominate their big celebration.

When I read quite a few of the anecdotes in the extracts, there's a lot of diva-like behaviour from Meghan Markle, very controlling about her image when she does a Vogue shoot, for example, all over it, exactly how she wants it to be, vanity fair, all these things. There's a constant kind of feeling that she wants to be completely on top of everything, and anyone who gets in her way gets trashed. Well, she thinks she wants to be the great Hollywood celebrity, the star, Merrill Streep or something like that.

she imagines she should do the same. The problem is she gets undone on each occasion. On vanity fair, she doesn't get at all what she wants. On Vogue, she gets much more than can be expected. But, of course, then the palace react because she's behaved appallingly by not telling the palace what she's going to do. And I think the most interesting story is a Reitman's story.

Wrightman's is like Marx and Spencers in Canada. And I got the most enormously exciting story from the people involved in the shoot for the advert, 80 strong cast and crew who tell this story about a woman who is, after what, only paid $15,000 a day, peanuts for a star, to advertise these very cheap clothes,

$100, a pair of clothes. And she behaves appallingly. And they all loathe her at the end. And she walks off in the end with a pair of shoes they thought they'd lent to her. When you got to the end of the book, did you have any sympathy for Meghan Markle? Did you buy into her thing

that she had no idea what she's really getting in? Oh, on the contrary. I think she's a very scheming, very clever woman. No, I think the surprising thing at the end of the book, I realized how successful she'd been. Here was a woman who was nothing. I mean, born, broken family, the whole thing, an unknown actress, all the rest of it, becomes a global star, which is what she wanted. When she was about nine or ten, she said to her father, I want to be famous, I want to walk down the red carpet. And she's now done that. And she's calculated that she could be a great sense. success and by marrying Harry, she did it. Are they in trouble now, though? Is the Sussex brand on the downward? A lot of American friends of mine are completely done with them, which they weren't even a year ago. Sure, sure.

And this point may hasten the downward trend. I wish I wouldn't be sad at all, because they pose a real threat to the Royal family. Well, that's what I've felt from the reason I've been so exercised about them is I think they are destroying a lot of the magic of the monarchy. They're calling the Royals a bunch of Caliphany. racist and so on, without producing any hard evidence to support any of his claims. On the contrary. And it's incredibly damaging.

Actually telling untruths. And I think that was terrible. That's really why I wrote the book. Because I just thought this woman is really doing something quite dreadful to Britain. And Harry has fallen in love with her in a ludicrous way. And has gone along with her accomplice. What about Thomas Markle in all this? He's had a big stroke.

I'm told he can't even talk about him. He's not heard a word from his daughter. He brought her up for years. his own. Wasn't at the wedding for reasons we all know, but what's your sense about him? Well, I went down to Mexico and spent two days with him and of course you can't have anything other

than sympathy for a man who was terribly reduced by his daughter and quite puzzled. And what the book tells is how that descent into acrimony happened, which I don't think has been told before. And it all really, the genesis is these paparazzi pictures which she can really do with us. No, the genesis is long before, peers. Is it? Oh, much

long before. When she's in Canada, she's already breaking off from him. Oh, you mean between, yeah. Between him and... I meant actually probably between Harry and Megan as a soon-to-be-married couple. It seemed to me it all blew up because Harry has this pathological hatred of paparazzi.

No, no, why did Harry never go to meet Thomas? Why is that? Well, I think because Megan didn't want him to meet a fat old man. I mean, Megan was very worried. That's why she brought her mother across the wedding just two days before the ceremony. What do we know about her mum?

Her mom's a mysterious figure of us. The book tells it all. I mean, the mother really was a very odd woman. disappeared for 10 years effectively during her childhood. That's why Thomas had to bring her up. And in the end, what Thomas says is that it was Dorea who really engineered the split between himself and Megan because she wanted the fame and the glory.

Extraordinary situation where you have Megan completely split from all her family on both sides apart from the mother. And Harry now pretty much split from all his family. The two of them living in this weird place in California, this big house, and pretending or behaving like a renegade royal family. Well, there's that. I mean, they're the Royals of Montecito. But what is interesting is that right at the beginning,

Samantha Markle, Thomas's daughter, warned everybody. She said she's breaking our family and she'll break the royal family too. We all laughed at her. And it was true. Yeah. It's a fascinating book. Revenge by Tom Bar, Megan Harry, and the War Between the Windsors.

It's going to be a bestseller, isn't it? It is already, Pierce. shouting hotter than the weather right now. Good to see you. Thank you very much. Well, after the break, the British breakoff, temperatures across the UK hit historic levels today. Some places are reaching 38 degrees, could go of 40 degrees tomorrow

for the first time ever. Is it climate change? Is it just a hot spell? We're talking, staying cool with the Peers Pack. They're uncensored next. Well, welcome back to Peers, Morgan Unsensing. I'm joined now by tonight's Peers Pack, the leader of Reform UK, Richard Tice,

and author and documentary maker, Jenny Clemen. also joined by Financial Times columnist John Byrne Merle. Well, welcome to all three of you. I want to start by just showing some pictures of Britain's... Well, I think it's going to be the second hottest day of the next two days because tomorrow's going to be an even bigger roast of it. This is Luton Airport with melting tarmac. We also had the Brise Norton Airport.

Apparently was literally melting. So that wrong way to be shut down at Luton for a few hours. We've then got... These are packed beaches down in Brighton, my nearest big hometown. Total lunatics out there. Only mad dogs in whichmen go out and these record-breaking sun. These are scorching farmland in Cambridge.

Look at that. You're made literally burning in Cambridge. This is Greenwich in London, which looks like Greenwich in London normally looks like. I'm not quite sure while we're showing that, other than it looks lovely. So we're now looking at more pigeons and beaches. All right, we've run out of steam. Let's go to... I want to go to John Byrne Murdoch first.

because John, you wrote a fantastically interesting piece, as always, about climate and about weather in this country. I think one of the most striking things to me was that the amount of severe heat weather we're getting is accelerating indisputably. Absolutely. And I think what's shocking is, as you say, it's not only that we're seeing such hot days as we're seeing today,

but that we're actually, if anything, slightly ahead of what the modelers have predicted even a couple of years ago, We've now seen nine of the 10 hottest years on record in the UK in the last decade. We're talking about around 40 degrees, if not today, then certainly tomorrow. And 40 degrees was a number that really wasn't expected in the UK. A very low chance, maybe sort of once in a century chance by this point, and yet we're already there.

And that, again, without anyone actually putting any more carbon into the atmosphere, is already going to increase for the next few decades. So, yeah, really, really shocking numbers. a lot of people on social media who bear a striking resemblance to the ones who kept screaming, stop scaring about COVID, it's only the flu, are now saying,

stop scaring about the weather, it was hotter in 1976, was it? It wasn't. The straightforward answer is no, it wasn't. It's been hotter today, and again, we'll be hotter tomorrow than it ever got to in 76, quite considerably by several degrees.

But there's a couple of points here. One is that, you know, just the fact that in the last few years, we've seen nine years where the temperature got hotter than it did in 76. But the other point is that it's not just about the heat. It's about the fact that we as a country, in terms of infrastructure, buildings, we're just not ready for it. You know, you were talking about the melting runway.

We've had train rails being distorted so that speed limits have had to be introduced on the railways. And, you know, there are hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions of houses in the UK that just weren't built for these sorts of temperatures. And we're now very likely to see temperatures in this sort of range, you know, if not every year, then every couple of years. And we're just not ready for it. You know, people say, oh, I go on holiday to Greece or Italy and it's the high 30s and we have a great time. Now, that may be true, but that's because those countries, you know, people have air conditioners. The homes are built in such a way to withstand the heat.

You've got shutters on the windows. We don't have that. And that's why I'm sure a lot of your viewers will have found today a bit of a struggle. You know, you try and just get your head down and get on with it, do some. work, for example, and you can't. It's just too hot. Well, it's actually been hotter than hell, which is a town in Michigan today, but not as hot as Death Valley, which is one's crumb of comfort. Death Valley was apparently 110 degrees last night at 1 a.m. The other fascinating thing, John, in your piece, was this brilliant story about these Arizona University students who parked their car at green lights repeatedly in different weather to see whether the heat had an impact on people honking. and it turned out that the hotter the weather, the more people honked,

which is an indication that people's temper and their mood rises at the same rate as the sunshine. Yeah, I just love that study because of how ingenious a way it is, in terms of it's a very sort of low maintenance study to do as it where you just take your car, you drive up to the lights, when the lights change, you stay put, and just see how many people beep their horns at you. And yeah, you know, it's a fun. study, but it's one of hundreds and hundreds over the years that have shown that extreme heat causes all of these things. It causes you to be more irritable, less patient. It also causes you to be

less able to think clearly. People perform worse on tests. When the temperature is higher, you struggle to remember things. And, you know, we can say, look, you know, it's lovely weather, it's beach weather. But it's, the temperatures we're talking about here, high 30s and into the 40s are completely different to the sort of high 20s, early 30s where you might think it's a nice nice day to get heat. This is real extreme heat. Yeah, you can't even give very. Okay, panel, right. So let me start with you. Let me should I start with, Richard. You're not really a believer in climate change, I am. No, of course I am. I mean, there's no question that the climate has changed since the year dot pits,

and it will always continue to change. And we, quite rightly, as John has just said, we're in a warming phase. We're in a rapidly accelerating warming phase. But what was interesting about the link to 1976 was back then we had 16 consecutive days of over 30 degrees, including five days of over 35 degrees. So we had a longer period of very hot weather almost half a century ago. Now we're getting what looks like essentially short-term spikes. But interestingly back in the 70s, there was more concern about global cooling than global warming. So we're clearly in a cycle, a warming cycle. That's indisputable. My point about climate change. changes, look, it's been here since the year, dot. It will always be here. We should absolutely

affect what we can affect, which is emissions. There are many parts of climate change, of course, that actually we have no, we can have no impact on. For example, solar variability, volcanic activity, sea level oscillation. These are massive things totally out with our control. When you have the vast majority of scientists saying this planet is heating to a dangerous level where we could potentially end up with the extinction of the planet. Do you believe them? I think we all know that we are in a warming phase.

Do you believe them when they see this can be the end, warming phase? I think that that may be overstating it. There's no question we're in warming phase. It's a big maze. Jimmy, we're bringing Jay here. All right, let me ask you, what's your view about this? Well, when I hear views like this and words like warming phase, I feel like, I don't know if you've seen the film

Warly, but I feel like we're in some sort of archive in some future. film where they look back of how people spoke in that. Well, there was a movie came out last year, which was a spoof of all. Yes, I feel like it was kind of in that. It was brilliant, but it did feel a bit like that's what's going on. And I think it's driven a lot by social media, isn't it? It is.

You see the same people that were saying COVID's just a flu. And they're out again with their flags, and they're waving this down as well. I think that worries me. People see what they want to see. And people want to have this illusion that we can control everything. And this feeling like everything is out of control. When I looked at the weather forecast last week for where I live and saw 40 degrees, it really frightened me because we always feel like climate changes something

or the climate emergency is on the horizon. But we're living in it. We have, you know, railways saying, the national rail saying we have to re-engineer the railways, water companies, putting out warnings. This is it now. And I think we can't dress this up in we're in a warming cycle. I mean, this is it. We're living in it now.

Okay, let's just turn. The reality is we don't know that. We're clearly in a warming cycle. We don't. But what we do know is that the vast, vast, of top scientists are all predicting pretty much the same thing. If we don't as a planet get our act together. But the point is there are many parts of climate change

that the reality is we cannot control at all, as I just touched on. There are parts that we can do, like emissions reduction, and we should be doing that. And actually, I think we're making positive steps towards that. OK, look, let's just turn to Tory leadership. Pretty hot as well. It's pretty hot. I mean, although they're all ducking the hot kitchen of political debate.

So you've got the two leading candidates, in my opinion, soon I can trust, both bailing on Sky News. I'm quite happy. It's one of Sky News is rivals that they're not getting a debate. But on a professional level as a journalist, I don't like people agreeing to debates and then ducking it. None of the candidates have been on Mishlow to be accountable. They prefer slightly easier vehicles, dare I suggest.

And I'm not sure that doesn't make me feel very confident about them being able to, for example, stand up to Vladimir Putin. I'm optimistically holding the view that the last two peers they're going to come onto your show and submit themselves to your gentle probing question. Well, they better. They better, because they're both more... Certainly, Rishi's promised me.

Jenny, I want to show you a video. This is of Boris Johnson, who seems to be literally demob happy. He was out in some fighter plane yesterday and put this video out. Have we got that? I think to be honest, he wants us to think he's maverick with this video. We obviously adapted the video to incorporate a little bit of fun from Top Gun. He wants to think he's maverick.

I see him more as goose. He's crashed and burned and is politically dead, but he's still pretending he's Prime Minister. Richard, it's a bit embarrassing, isn't it? Boris Ding all this stuff. How much taxpayer money got spent on that? The whole thing's embarrassing. We've spoken before about this. Whole process is taking too long.

We're now in a situation where we're into Lino, leadership in name only. We've got a completely stasis situation. Urgent decisions need to be taken about the cost of living, about cutting taxes, about helping people, and nothing's happening. And John Byrne Murdoch is, he's still with us? John, the big claim that Boris supporters make is on COVID, he got all the big calls right. And yet I look at a death toll, which in numbers,

is still one of the worst in the world. I look at a first phase that, frankly, I thought was a complete shambles under deadly shambles. And he got lucky, and you know, generals did a bit of luck. But he got lucky with the COVID vaccine roll up by choosing the right woman to do it. But, I mean, is it fair?

Is there any logical argument to say he got the big calls right on COVID? Look, I think there are very few leaders in the world who we can say have got much right at all on COVID. As you say, the timing of things like the vaccine development and the abilities to roll that out was not really in the control of any of the governments. You know, you certainly couldn't look at the vaccine rollout and say that Johnson and the UK did things badly.

But we didn't necessarily handle that any better than other countries. And there were definitely elements of luck in, for example, choosing to go with a longer interval between two doses, whereas others chose a shorter one, largely based on gut rather than evidence. So, yeah, I wouldn't say it was a shambles, but nor was it a success. And as you say, back in spring 2020, there were certainly many, many, many things that the country. government got very, very clearly wrong, including things like discharging patients back into care homes. So overall, you certainly can score that as a positive card. No, Jenny, your verdict on Boris Johnson. I mean, some people still cling to the fact that he was done in unfairly. He was a great prime minister. He was the next Churchill. A lot of other people think he was genuinely

the worst prime minister we've ever had, certainly in living memory. Where do you sit on the pendulum? I have always, even before he was prime minister, I was terrified of him becoming prime minister. Boris Johnson only cares about himself. These images are all about him wanting the public to remember him as a war prime minister helping out Ukraine. The number of times he invokes the Ukrainian people to try and support his popularity. He doesn't want us to remember Partygate, Pinscher Owen Patterson.

He wants us to think about him as a sort of Churchill figure. But he has only ever cared about himself. I don't think he cares about Brexit. I don't think he cares about the country. He just wants to be someone who is going down in history. but I think he's going down in history in a very different way from how he would have wanted. OK, well, let's take a short break.

We'll be back with more from the Peers Pack. They're just getting started, as you can say, they're heating up like the weather. We'll be frying eggs on his desk in a minute. Well, the transgender woman and competitive swimmer, Leah Thomas, has been nominated for the National Collegiate Athletic Association Woman of the Year Award. The award was meant to honour the academics, achievements,

athletics, excellence and leadership with graduating female college athletes. Well, Thomas caused controversy in March becoming the first transgender NCAA champion in history after winning the women's 500-yard freestyle race. Summer Riley Gaines competed against her in that race and is also nominated for Woman of the Year and joins me now from Nashville.

Well, Riley, thank you for joining me. Your reaction to Leah Thomas being nominated for Woman of the Year? Yeah, it's a slap in the face, that's what it is. It's just completely abysmal. It's wild that, you know, women have fought so hard to get equal opportunity in sports to kind of do a complete 180. And I think that's exactly what this nomination is.

And just speaking from a swimming point of view, when you're in the pool against someone like Leah Thomas, do you just feel like you've got your hands tied behind your back in a sense that the physical advantage that Leah Thomas has from her male biological body is just overpowering for women born to female biological bodies? Yeah, for sure. Sure, especially in a sport like swimming where it requires things like speed and power and endurance and your aerobic capacity, your lung capacity.

All these things play a huge factor in it. And when you're going against someone who is clearly and blatantly advantaged in those departments, it does feel a bit defeating before you've even raced. Right. If you were to lose... Not a bit defeating, extremely defeating. Right. I can imagine. If you were to lose the woman of the year title to Leah Thomas, how would it make you feel? Not as much for myself would I be angry. It's not personally like I want the award over Thomas. I want any female to have that award over Thomas, any biological female.

But even just being nominated, it's such a huge honor. This is the pinnacle achievement for female athletics here in the U.S. And so there's about a quarter of a million female athletes in college and only 570 get nominated. So do the percentage there. It's about what, not even 0.2% of female athletes. And so to even receive this nomination is such a high honor. And so to me, the damage is done.

This award is meaningless. It's going to be impossible for the NCAA or UPenn to take back what's happened here. Yeah, I totally agree. Well, listen, best of luck to you. I hope you win. And always good to talk to you. Thank you, Riley.

Thank you. Martina Rattalova tweeted, not enough fabulous biological women athletes, NCCAA? What is wrong with you? Jenny, can you put any defence up for this? I think this says more about Leah Thomas's university who nominated her than it does about Leah Thomas or even the NCAA.

And I think we have to be aware that in America, the situation with trans rights is quite different than it is in the UK. Same principle, though, is it? Well, American trans people... I mean, Leah Thomas knows she has a physical ability. Yeah, I mean, with sports, it's a different thing, but American trans people have less.

less access to healthcare and they are murdered at a much higher rate than trans people from the UK. I think it's a show of solidarity. I agree, but none of that. They're trying to be inclusive. However, I would feel as a woman in a swimming pool with someone who has gone through a male puberty, I would feel like it wasn't fair. Richard, I mean, it seems to me I just find this whole debate. We do a lot on this because I just find it so preposterous

that we're even having these kind of conversations. But we are because that is the way society. has been moving. It's, I mean, it's unbelievable. The simple fact is that Leah Thomas does not qualify for that award. Leah Thomas is not a woman. That is a biological fact. No question at all. And you heard it there, the disappointment, you know, from a woman who is a fantastic athlete. And whether it's her or someone else, you know, women have been fighting for over 100 years for, you know, to remove discrimination for equality. And this is, as she said, it's more than a slap in the face. You see, the problem is... It's just all.

It's degrading. It is. And the problem is, immediately you sort of say something like Richard just said. Most people, I think, would agree, right? I would agree. But you immediately get called transphobic, by this mob online. We see what happens to someone like J.K. Rowling,

abused, shame, to try and cancel every 10 minutes and so on. It's a vicious, toxic reaction to it, which I don't think does anybody any good in this debate. It makes a lot of people afraid of talking about it. And these are women. It makes women terrified of standing up for women. But also, also trans people too, because I think the vast majority of people are somewhere in the middle

that they might say, you know what, I don't mind if a trans person goes to the toilet in the same facility as I do, but I do care about sports. You can't make those little distinctions because you're either a bigot or you're a pervert and there's nowhere in between. And if the NCAA had wanted to do something sensible, in my view, they should have had a personality of the year award. And then all of the candidates would have been completely equal and that would have been a sensible way through it.

I've seen the ways it's all going. It's a bit like the award. awards shows for singers and stuff. Women singers have a cachet in history, right? All the great female singers want to be judged against other female singers. If we go to gender neutral awards or everything, that all goes. All that magic goes. Women stop being able to celebrate being women singers.

Women, sportsmen. Women, so on. And I just think that's such a shame. Well, I think it's slightly different with sport, because the reason why we have a distinction between male of female sport is that men would win everything. if there wasn't that distinction. It's not quite the same with music.

But I think, you know, you need to look at each sport on its merits. There are some sports where going through a male puberty like rugby... Here's the bottom line with it. If they really want to go this way, then let's have the Olympics gender neutral. Right? So everyone can enter and we'll see who wins. I'll tell you who's going to win. 99.9% of the time the men will beat all the women.

Women will stop winning a sport. That's the hard reality of physiology. Anyway, thank you very much for joining me to my pack. to John, to Richard, to Jenny. Much appreciate that's all from me. Whatever you're up to, keep it uncensored.