Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Return of face masks?

Episode Date: January 4, 2023

Standing in for Piers, guest presenters Richard Tice and Isabel Oakeshott insist the UK shouldn’t return to mandatory mask-wearing. Dr Natalie Rout says it’s damaging for Isabel to claim that masks are ‘sinister’ and ‘ineffective’ in slowing the spread of Covid. Harjap Singh Bhangal joins Isabel and Richard in a debate with Henry Bolton on the migrant crisis. Steven Gervis is in the studio, and has spent £30,000 on surgery and says he won’t stop until he achieves the perfect body. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8 pm on TalkTV on Sky 522, Virgin Media 606, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and the app.  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tonight on Pierce Morgan Uncensored with me, Isabel Oakshot and Richard Tice. Virtue signalling madness or a sensible way to stop the NHS from reaching meltdown. We'll debate whether bringing back masks is really justified. A new year and yes, a new boat crossing already. Rishi Sunak promises new laws to stop the small boats, but with crossings soaring by some 60% on the previous year, is this really actually a promise that he will keep? And surgery obsessed, we're going to meet the hairdresser who's already spent £30,000 and says he won't stop until he achieves what he sees as the perfect body.

Live from London, this is, here's Morgan Unsensored, with Richard Tice and Isabel Oakshot. And a very good evening. Well, there's a dark new threat to our way of life tonight. It's disguised as an innocent looking piece of cloth. Not so long ago, we all had to carry these face masks. Do you remember the fear of forgetting to carry one, finding herself barred from going into the shops or wherever? Remember how hot and dirty and sweaty they were? They got loose, they became, after you'd used them a few times,

to the point that was perfectly obvious. Frankly, they weren't stopping anything. They weren't stopping the spread of germs. But what about those nasty, disapproving looks from people? The bossy signs, the announcements, the pictures absurdly painted on the ground. How often did you actually wish that you'd invested in a business making those face masks? Any colour, pretty patterns, funny logos, but amazingly, turns out size didn't matter at all. Whether it was fitted or unfitted, it was one of those rare items where actually one size truly does fit all.

good God, where they really were awful, weren't they? And what a relief when we were no longer forced to wear them. Do you remember how horrible it was, in particular, seeing children being forced to wear them at school? So what did you do with your masks? Have you thrown them all away? Or have uniquely kept them in a distinct pile still dirty? Or perhaps you've washed them, ironed them,

and kept them as relics for your grandchildren, as a sort of historic symbol of the mad, mad time that we went through. Well, just when you thought that dreadful era couldn't get any worse, you put it all down to a horrible mistake, I'm afraid so, the masks are back. Yep, they're back the ultimate virtue signal, plastering your face with a little bit of cloth that says you're a careful and considerate citizen putting others ahead of your own face. Once again, we're seeing these boxes of them,

at the entrances to public buildings. Once again, ministers are telling us that if we have a sniffle, it's sensible to put one on. And if you look around you on trains and buses, even on the street, in the shops, they are, I'm afraid, definitely on the rise. Now, sure, some people never actually managed

to let theirs go. They became a kind of weird little facial security blanket. But right now, seemingly sensible people who did stop wearing them. when the pandemic was over, are putting them back on again. Well, what to do? Are you going to dig yours out again and reuse it? Are you going to object when you go into the GP surgery and hospital

and someone asks you to mask up? Or will you quietly comply anything for an easy life? Well, I think, and I think you think so too, that people should resist this scourge. They need to be brave and we need to fight back until it goes away forever. We can be quite polite about it. All we need to do is point out that there is not a shred of actual evidence that these things make any difference whatsoever. Now, of course, medical grade masks are a different matter. That's the kind worn by hospital doctors and they are effective.

But there is not a single credible scientific study showing that non-medical masks, i.e. the type that you see on the streets make any significant. difference. Now, by the way, ministers know this full well. They just want to scare people and to be seen to be doing something. I should know because having written his book, I know what Matt Hancock, the former health secretary and his advisers privately said about the utility of masks at the time. And the truth is that we know the messaging around face masks, it was mixed from the very, very big. beginning. Let's just have a look now at what changed during the pandemic. The evidence on face masks has always been quite variable, quite weak, quite difficult to know

exactly, and there's no real trials on it. And we've undertaken a review. We'll give our advice to ministers and they'll make decisions about what to do around that. On face masks, we are guided by the science and the government position hasn't changed. As of Monday the 15th of June, face coverings will become mandatory on public transport. Oh my, that is actually giving me the shodders. Just listening to that again. Me too. Well, joining us now is oncologist Professor Carol Sikora,

a voice of reason on this issue as far as I'm concerned. And GP doctor Natalie Rout, thank you very much for joining us. I want to start with you, actually, Natalie. and perhaps you can tell us whether you are in your GP practice asking all patients now to mask up. Well, throughout the pandemic, I have worn a mask when I see my patients. I have not enforced patients to wear masks in the last year or so because there hasn't been as much of a need.

And I think I've left it up to patients to choose whether they want to or not. The concern now is that the NHS is under significant amounts of pressure. You know that. You can't deny the statistics. You've got patients not making it to hospital, bed shortages, staff shortages, even oxygen shortages. But it's important to stress that because the reason... Well, it would be if masks made any difference. But they do, and that's damaging for you to say that masks do not make any difference.

We've actually looked at all the studies. Well, let me bring in Carol Socorah here because he is an expert on this, and we'll tell us whether any of the studies show something different. I think Natalie's more of an expert being achieved. than an oncologist but I think the problem with masks they're worn very badly by people that often their nose is showing that completely the whole thing the whole thing is negated the other thing they get scrumpled up in people's pockets the paper masks are probably fairly useless and the examples Natalie's brought

here are decent masks they're called filtering face pieces FFP and two and three are the ones that we use in hospitals and these are valid but the stuff that you see on the trains and on the tube is not really doing much good to anybody. So what do you say to that? Well, I do agree that masks need to be fitted correctly. There isn't any point wearing one if it's going to be hanging below your nose or on your chin, and we have seen many people wearing them. So, okay, if you're one of those people, then it's not going to work.

But a well-fitted, good quality mask, like an FFP2, does reduce transmission of both aerosol and droplets? So I know there's been some debate about, well, does it help with aerosol? If you've got a cloth mask, which has bigger gaps in it so that things can pass through, perhaps not. But these ones certainly do. And certainly with droplets, even a well-fitted cloth mask will help. But the biggest, I think, most reputable study that was done in 2020 in Denmark, or the Danmask 19 study of about 6,000 people, that showed that actually there was no statistical significant difference between those who wore masks and those who did not wear masks. And that. the Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine at the University of Oxford, Carl Hennigan. He was very clear. He wrote about this at the time. And he wrote about it yesterday again. I think the problem is that there are 28 studies. Most of them are completely useless.

They're sort of almost anecdotal. This was collected by British Health Security Agency in 2021. And there are two that looked good. One is the study you just mentioned, and there's another study which showed the opposite, that the masks were effective. So I think the jury is out. What I really object to is this idea that if you wear a mask,

you're somehow saving the NHS. It's just like you've got cancer. Don't bother going to the GP. Which is exactly what you're suggesting. I'm sorry, you're not saying we're saving it. No, I'm not suggesting that we're saving it. But it's a small step. It's an easy step.

I mean, you're just saying how inconvenient it is. It's just another little thing. Just like all those things incrementally built up during the pandemic. Is it more inconvenient than social distancing? I actually think it's something. There's something very synchronic. about covering your face with something, which we all know doesn't work. How can you say that when several countries and cultures have done that pre-pandemic for years?

But let's look at the evidence of Germany, where actually they were required to wear the FFP3 mask for the whole of 2021. And guess what happened at the end of 2021? They had a huge, huge surge of the new variant. So essentially, it had made no difference whatsoever. And I think just look at the evidence, the scientific evidence, the anecdotal evidence. And I think it's clear, particularly when most people are wearing

pretty grubby, dirty cloth masks. But we're not asking everyone to wear an FFP3. The advice is that if you're unwell and you have a cough or you have got a runny nose, then wear one. Wear one if you're going into a healthcare institution where you're going to come into contact with more vulnerable people

who are more susceptible to these viruses. So we're not going to have sort of a complete closure of all these viruses, but you're going to restrict it enough so that it buys the NHS a little bit more time. So are you actually saying then, instead of the advice being, please wear a mask, actually the advice should be changed to, in these settings, in these circumstances, please wear a medical grade mask.

Yes. I think that's sensible. And that I think we could probably, you know, I'm not going to love it, but I could see the case for that. Can I just ask you how you felt about children being forced to wear masks in schools? I don't think anyone should be forced to do anything. I think at the time when we weren't fully vaccinated and we were. wanted to keep our children in education, wearing a mask was a sensible option that, like I said, is not restrictive. It's safe. It's not harmful. And it's easy to do. So, of course, there are certain children, for example, with learning disabilities, autism, Down syndrome, that they shouldn't have had to wear a mask.

And they were actually exempt from wearing masks. But for the majority of children who are happy to wear them... I don't think any kids are happy to wear them. There are some children happy to wear them. I see that. Carol, you come in here because I can see you burning, burning to jump in. I was amazed. The leader editorial in the Times today talks about masks. It's very much, as you say, Natalie, but at the end, it says, if you feel ify, you should wear a mask. Now, wait a minute, if you feel if you've got a temperature, if you're ill, surely you shouldn't be going into a crowded room with other people. The trouble is, you know, I came on a very early bus because of the train strike this morning.

And, you know, the people sitting there on a 630 bus where I live, can't afford not to go to work, whether they've got fevers or not. They won't be paid. And maybe the Times readers aren't in that category. But there weren't too many copies on the... We need to come back to this point about children, because I fundamentally disagree. I think all of the evidence shows that actually children's education was dramatically hindered in terms of their development, particularly for younger children.

But not because of masks. No, by the wearing of masks, which held them back. Teachers couldn't properly communicate, and they felt terrified. they'll fail to afraid, particularly young children who literally, for the first couple of years of their lives, they weren't seeing other faces. And I think the evidence shows that actually it held back children's natural development, in particular speech development for younger children. Especially if those from deprived backgrounds as well, there was a greater deprivation difference between the wealthy and the deprived. How do you feel when you saw babies being made to wear masks? I haven't seen a baby being made to wear a mask.

Oh, I have. Well, I see babies day and day out in my practice, and no baby was asked to wear a mask. So at what point do you think it's acceptable for children to be asked to wear masks? Well, if they're school-going and happy to wear one, then it's fine. But let's just remember. You keep coming back to this happy-to-wear one. It's not a normal or natural or in any way kind of acceptable thing to do to ask children to cover up their faces. You're only asking to wear them if you're going out.

This is the thin end of the wedge, isn't it? At the moment, it's just in certain places, certain times. And then a month down the track, another minister will say, just a little bit more. And then Nicholas Sturgeon will get involved. Oh, yes. And everyone's terrified of her. Do you think anyone thought that children would have to live through a pandemic? Did you think you'd have to live through a pandemic?

These are unprecedented times. No one expected this to happen. But you don't impose things on children without evidence that it's not going to harm children's development, and it's not going to actually harm their health. And the clear evidence that we've learned since masks were worn by children for way, way too long, is that actually it has been harmful. No one is asking all children to wear masks. I wouldn't ask any children to wear a mask.

If they're happy to do so, and they are unwell and going out somewhere, then... Do you have children? I don't, I don't, but I am a GP, so I see children day and day out. I mean, I have three children. Not one of them was happy to wear a mask. No normal child is happy to wear a mask. Children just want to be children in a free environment. They don't want bits of cloth stuck to their face

and be made to fear a virus that wasn't even a significant risk to all but the tiniest minority. Do they like wearing fancy dress costumes with masks saying that they're Captain America? Oh, they do. They're very similar. If you sell that to a child, this is how I do my work. How do you think I examine a child?

No one likes to be examined. Fancy dress for one evening is one thing. You know, making them wear it every day. I'm pretty sure my kids would be objecting. No one is asking a child to wear a mask every day. I don't know why we're talking about this. We're talking about it because it harmed children's development and education through this period.

Carol, just finally. But it hasn't happened yet in all fair. You're ganging up a bit on naturally, I'm afraid. It's not happening. I don't think it will happen because of what we're doing tonight and other people doing the same thing. If we make mask mandatory... I just think our guard is up.

That's all. Our guard is up. That's why we're talking about it. But maybe it's a test. to see what would happen if you suggest people or wear masks or if you suggest mandatory mask weight. Not much compliance is not there. Carol Natalie, thank you so much. Fascinating debate. We will come back to it. We will try and stop it next tonight. So the first migrant crossings of 2023 has already been brought to shore yesterday by UK's border force with 44 migrants being brought to Dover. But the Prime Minister, yes, he's pledged it. He's promised it new laws again. But we'll will.

their work debating that up next coming up well he's spent more than 30,000 pounds so far when will he stop we're going to meet the man who is obsessed with plastic surgery but but before anything else we just need to reflect on that discussion about masks i mean natalie what was she talking about the sort of fancy dress and linking that to masks so i thought she was she was doing quite well because obviously we're both quite hostile to her point of view. I was sort of buying into the idea of medical grade masks being effective in certain settings, but she totally lost it to me when she started talking about children being happy to wear masks. And she just keep using that expression, didn't she? And I just kept thinking of my own children.

I'm thinking, of course they're not happy to wear masks and nor is any child normally happy. And then she started talking about this fancy dress analogy. Oh, are they happy to wear a fancy dress? Well, yes, and it's only for one evening. And I think she actually admitted that it didn't help children's education and essentially harmed it. I think that was a key point. Yes. I mean, Carol, Sikora, provided quite a good bit of balance there, didn't he? But, I mean, I wasn't left feeling any less militant on this issue.

No, but this is the thin end of the wedge, and I am seriously worried. Yeah, no, no, definitely. And it's just the creeping nature of it, isn't it? Yeah, absolutely. But first, well, the Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, he's promised, once again, to pass new laws, more laws, to stop the illegal migrants crossing the channel. This is one of the government's five key priorities.

Yes, the scale of the small boats crisis has soared over recent years. So in 2020, just over 8,000 migrants made the crossing, which is actually a huge number, but that shot up to more than 25,000 the next year. Turned out that was just the tip of the iceberg and a record 45,756 made the journey last year. And with 44 migrants being brought to shore

on the first small boat crossing of the year, the question is how many more are going to succeed in reaching the UK this year? Well, joining us is the former security and border management expert. Well, you're not a former expert, are you? You are a very current expert, Henry Bolton. And immigration lawyer, Hajjap Singh at Bengal. Thank you very much for coming on to talk about this issue.

So Rishi Sunak today pledged to introduce, bring in new legislation to stop the small boats. Slight feeling of deja vu, I have to say. Harjat, what do you think is going to change this year? I don't think much is going to change unless we're going to address fundamentally the root of the problem, and that is the gangs. who are profiting and putting people on the dinghies and on the boats. There's been no sort of announcement as to how to get them. So we know that people trafficking makes more money than drug trafficking.

So it's a big business. You don't stop drug dealing by locking up or punishing drug users in the same way that if you start detaining or putting asylum seekers into detention or pushing them back, hoping that this will stop the people's smugglers, to whom one boat is worth 250,000 pounds. It is a lot of money. So do you actually work then, as a lawyer, do you work helping the cases

of some of the people that are coming over on these boats? I used to do a lot. What happens is they're dealt with at the point where they're actually coming. They don't have a lawyer there. They only need a lawyer once claims being processed or if the claim is refused. And so they don't really get legal aid for that anymore

in relation to that. So if someone's claim gets refused, then when they have a right of appeal, we can ask for a review on that. Or if we feel decisions unfair, it can be challenged. Or if it comes to, we think that human rights been obstructed or anything like that. Do you not have an ethical problem with making money, you know, it's what you do for a living, off the back of giving advice to people who have quite clearly come here illegally and illegitimately? Yeah, but it's not actually illegal to come here, and it's not illegal to claim asylum.

And there is no obligation on anyone to claim asylum in the first place they land. However, it's their claim. It is an obligation for this country to listen to their claim and deal with it fairly, whether they accept it or refuse it. But actually, they have come here illegally. They've come here without papers, and that is quite clear under the UN-51 Convention, they've come here illegally.

Because there's no legal route for them to come in. How do you expect them to come in? OK, we don't have a legal obligation to provide roots to the rest of the billions of people around the world to come and live in the United Kingdom. Henry, let's ask you. So, Harjap doesn't think that much is going to change. At the beginning of last year, the Tory government said that the nationality and borders bill would change everything. That's now been enacted. Yeah.

And it's changed nothing. Correct. And I don't see this as changing anything. I think what we saw, I mean, in general, in terms of Rishi Sunak's five points, his five promises, was a firefighting. response to what he sees as a threat to the Conservative Party in their election in a couple of years, or the next general election, and he's right to see that as a threat,

but he's got no answers. There is nothing new in anything he said, and particularly on the immigration side. Another piece of legislation, all he's saying to us is that the legislation that we put before Parliament before simply wasn't up to the job. But picking up hard, the reality is

there's so much money in the gangs, and by the way, the vested interests here in the UK, frankly, are making a lot more money, a lot more profits than the gangs. But the truth is, until we actually pick up and safely take people back to France, nothing will change. Well, there's a couple of elements to this, Richard, if we're going to be successful. The government talks about breaking the business model. To do that, we have to sort of think of this. We take the analogy of travel agents.

and they're marketing their holiday destinations. This is what the people smugglers are doing. And Albania is a classic case, and the cost of our Albanians and people like that. Classic case, and it's a very good example because it demonstrates very clearly that we've got people coming here, claiming asylum,

to effectively bypass the rules who are economic migrants. There's a very clear case, and that's why the Albanian thing is so important, not just because of the numbers. But if you want to disrupt that, you have to break that business model. and the only way to do it is to go after, as Hagep says,

the organised crime networks. You've got to disrupt them and you've got to hunt them down ruthlessly, not just work with a bit of training and capacity. That's one element, though. The other element, as you would do, if you want to reduce the number of tourists going to a country, is to reduce the attractiveness of that country, the acceptability of it. And we are an incredibly...

We're very attractive. And all you have to do is look at the amount of asylum claims that we accept and that we process and we grant, for nationalities compared to the European Union, for example, the French or the Germans and so on, who absolutely take a great deal, particularly again in the case of economic migrants, they understand the difference between an economic migrant and a refugee,

and France, for example, only grants 2% asylum claims to Albanians. So we've got a massive discrepancy there. Do you understand the difference between an economic migrant and a genuine asylum seeker? Of course. Right. And do you accept that the overwhelming evidence from the government itself is a very significant proportion of those coming over on these votes are actually opportunists? Once again, that's because there's no way for low-skilled migrants to come to this country. Of course there is. There is an extraordinary number of ways to come to this country.

The work permit scheme is called a tier two skilled worker. Right, so it's called a skilled worker. There's nothing called an unskilled worker. Now, if I'm a waitress, if I'm a lorry driver, I can't come into this country. But that's it. You can't come into this country. You can't. We don't want them. If the government wanted them, they would create that facility. The thing is, where it doesn't exist, where we say,

actually, we don't want the low-skilled workers. That's government policy. It's our sovereign right to enact that policy and not provide a route in for that. So Albanians, again, I use that because they are a great example of economic migrants. They can apply, like anybody else, for a work permit or to come out a work or get rejected Henry a work permit can only be sponsored yeah they're right they will be rejected because the skit because certain categories so like a waiter a security guard it's not true you're a skilled worker

scheme there are 800 different job titles down to a salary just over 16,000 not a waitress not a hairdress not a hairdresser not a hairdresser not a headdresser not a butcher I should we take them hard yeah I'll give you an example right an example is as soon as you building, you see two security guards, who are migrants. Who come here lawfully, who came here lawfully under our resisting lawful schemes. They could not, they came under, probably under free movement or when the visa system was available.

If they want to come over now, they can't do it. Your makeup artist, who did my makeup, she's a migrant. We've got five million people on how to work benefits. We want to get our own people back into work. We've been saying this since 2016. It hasn't worked. You had six years to get the British people back into work. It hasn't done.

But the answer then, if that's what you believe, the answer then is to argue in terms of politics that we need to create that. But it is not, absolutely it is not, to turn around and say, well, because the government policy is such that we are not accepting such applications from abroad, we should accept the fact that they come across on small boats. It's unacceptable. There's no defence of breaking the law. That's hard to respond before we finish. No one's saying that we should accept asylum seekers under, or economic migrants, under the guise of asylum seekers. What we're saying is we should understand

there is a need for migration across the whole board. Do you just have an indefinite number of people? No, of course we don't. So what limit would you put on it? It sounds to me like you just want to import a load of people. Why don't you ask the businesses? Why don't you ask the care industry? Why don't you ask the care sector what they need?

Why don't you ask the trucking industries what they need? Why are we hurting our own businesses and having shortages? I'll tell you why, because I want to get our own 5 million people who are on our work benefits. That's what we need to do. We've had six years. Here we go. Before we finish, you both agreed nothing's going to change.

What hard job is your forecast for the number of elite people who will come here illegally over the channel this year? It won't change. So you're saying at least another... It won't change because the gap. 45,000. Henry, your forecast? Richard, if you'll forgive me, I'm going to look a bit further than a year.

What's your number? Further than a year. I think in five years we're going to be facing the situation that the Americans have got on the south border. Give me a number, Henry. By then? No, now, this year, 2023. Come on. Go on, take 45,000.

40,000. 60,000 to 100,000. That is a pretty wide range, Henry Bolton. It is. Yeah, but I think it's going to grow with the government. It's so much. Nothing. Nothing is going to change.

Rishy Sunat, you better listen in. Coming up next, well, back to the Prime Minister again. He wants all pupils at the time of crisis. To study maths until the age of 18, does the country really need this? We'll put a maths test designed for a 13-year-old to our panel to see how they get on. Still to come tonight, we'll meet the man who has spent a year's salary trying to make himself look perfect, or at least what he thinks is perfect. But first, let's just recap on that debate over the migrant crossings,

and Sunak's pledge to bring in new laws to stop it happening. What was interesting is that neither of them actually thought they were going to make any difference at all. It's utterly ridiculous. Here we are, another year, another bunch of laws from another Tory government with another Tory Prime Minister that talks to talk and never delivers on anything. And they both agree, nothing's going to change. Henry's prediction, 60 to 100,000, even hard Jap. He's got a vested interest. He does have a vested interest. And the other thing is it always seems to get kind of conflated with the debate as to how much migration we need at all. whereas actually how people are coming across

is a sort of a separate issue, isn't it? Well, we could go on about that. We could go on about that for yon. One of your favourite topics. One of my favourite topics, one of my favourite. But some of my favourite panel, of course, delighted to be joined by TV contributor Esther Cracko and the Daily Mirror Associate editor Kevin Maguire.

Very warm welcome to you. We are going to put you straight on your toes team because... Yes, the Prime Minister wants us all to learn maths. So just a quick question for you, too. Here we go. Oh, dear God. So, Esther, listen up.

What could go wrong. What could possibly? An example. So, Maya bought 18 apples. She used 50% of the apples to make apple pie. And mixed a third of the apples with other fruits to make the salad. How many apples did she have left? A third of the remaining apples.

You're so right about the way. You absolutely nailed it, you see? You've identified the first. floor the greyness in the wording so it's a third of the total apples okay I mean we always have to read the question again six or if it's a third of the there you are look at this the the panel absolutely on top form they've made well John I am I am impressed I hate these questions so I've got kids that age and they sometimes do show me their maths homework and ask for help and I'm so embarrassed to say that I think you have to be a bit of a linguist as well exactly and the wording is often so

badly done, but it could be many. I'm sure you're really cocky. Can I suggest if I should do this for 16, 17, 78 in New York, he doesn't do apple pies, but maybe he's pints and shots. Well, yeah, we're more later. Let's come on to the Prime Minister, because the reality is that he's given

a speech today that he rushed forward because I gave a speech in the morning. Oh, of course. It's all about me. Come on. It's all about me. Nothing changes here, does it? It's all about you. It always is. Steady.

But look, he's given five key priorities, and we keep hearing about priorities, but Kevin, what are your thoughts about this? I mean, the big headline that briefed out, maths to 18, really? Which isn't one of his five priorities. Unbelievable. Because three are on the economy. One's on the NHS waiting lists, and the fifth is on boat crossing. Which proved it was rushed. So, of course it was.

Richard, with all due respect to you, I think it's because Keir Stom is making a speech tomorrow. Not. Given your party's nibbling away, you know, part of the Tory vote, you may be a factor, but I think it was really stormer. If you haven't got anything really big to say, don't say anything. And that was the problem, because he came with five rather vague goals. They were vague. So how, what is the likelihood you think of him achieving them? So if we just quickly run through them, there was reducing inflation. By half, which is, which was the only specific thing he said? That will hit this year because all of us, all of us. The Office for Budget Responsibility is saying it'll be 3.8 at the end of the year. Growing to the economy, well, from a pretty low stuff. Banking England says there's going to be a recession this year, so that'll be 2024, not this year, right? He's banking on the Americans not, teaching technically, into a recession.

You can remember the other ones. Reducing NHS waiting lists. Well, they can fiddle that, can't they? That was the biggest of the mall, because he just said, reduce. He didn't actually say by how much. Probably 2024, two. There are more jobs, wasn't it? More and better paid jobs?

unemployment's forecast to go up half a million, and then the boat crossings, in a way you can't cross them. Because even if you have a safe and legal route in, which I think we should have, you may disagree, but I think we should. We've already got one.

It's called a skilled worker visa program. They would still be those who wouldn't be allowed in, who are going to take a chance, which is a backhanded compliment. I think he's doing that on the chance that there's better cooperation with the border force in France. I think that's why he's saying that,

because he's sure that will pan out. On the mat's point, though, I do think it was, I understood what he was saying. I think I might be the only person that kind of understood his trajectory, but he didn't elaborate it very well. But where's the sense that actually the country is in crisis? The country is literally broken.

Nothing works in this place anymore. There's no sense of urgency about any of these priorities. No, because it's on it. It's on their watch, isn't it? And they've been in power 13 years. So you really want to say, we did have the biggest fall. We did have the biggest fall in living standards last year on record. We have got a wave of strikes, the NHS is in crisis.

All have happened on their watch. So he can't say the country's broke. He just can't do it. He's got to pretend things are a bit better than they are, and he will make them even better. One person that's not pretending things are better than they should be is Nadine Doris. You know, the Boris Johnson's outrider,

she issued a furious tweet after that announcement by Rishi Sunat, basically talking about the unraveling of the last three years of progressive, what she called progressive Tory government. did you make Kevin of that intervention by Nadine Doris? And it will, of course, fuel speculation about a possible Boris comeback. Well, it will because she's his outright, isn't it? She's the number one fan girl. He put her in the cabinet.

You should probably get a woman that loves you like me, Maurice. Yeah. Everybody. That is, that is the antidote of divorce. Honestly. But most people will have to get a Labrador to get that amount of her devotion. But because she's also cheesed off, to put it lightly, because they're not going to privatise Channel 4 by the looks of it,

which she said they should, and he sees it not as a priority, there's no real case to do it anyway. No, it was a public service. It's a whole thing's excess. Leak red herring, frankly, given everything else that was going on. And I think it's a bit insulting, actually, to the British public. With all the things going on, you really want to sort of play political Tetris with this pointless privatisation scheme.

I don't think, I mean, I just think it would show the priorities off and it would really not play well. But, Isabelle, but you know, you know there's going to be pushed Johnson forward all the time. And Sunak isn't secure as Prime Minister. He isn't secure. So I think the over, I'd be really interested in your take. on, you know, Sunak's been there for a few months now. The overwhelming sense seems to be,

both within the party and among voters, that he's just incredibly underwhelming. Yeah, well, I'd agree, but I think he's probably the best they've got. And when you're on your third prime minister in a single parliament, I don't think it can change again. What a dismal reflection on 350 Tory MPs that he's the best they got. I describe him as a bureaucratic, boring bean counter. But the thing is, he has to be only slightly better,

than Kirstama, who's also a bureaucratic boring being countered. That's the thing. It's about your opposition, not about you being a standout character. And this is the point. I think if you look at Kirstama and Rishi Sunak right now, their politics are actually very different. A lot of... I think they're both variants of socialism.

Well, yes, well, democratic socialism. And I think... But you can see that because the more left-wing part of the Labour Party are very unhappy with Kirstama at the moment as well. So you can see that they're really not that different. in terms of their actual policies. I think if Kirstama was to win the general election tomorrow, his sort of political outlook would be just slightly more woke versions of Rishi Sunat,

but the actual substance of it wouldn't be very different, because ideological politics is dead. I think, no, no, no, no. Look, Sunak is a Thatcherite. That's what he is, sound like. But he hasn't been able to deliver, has he? He has the air of a provincial building society manager. You can imagine him in a very small branch and a little down.

you're giving you a tea in biscuits and saying you can't have your mortgage. That's what he's about. He doesn't inspire. I don't think we're going to disagree with you on that. Well, look, before we let you go, the next segment on the program is an extraordinary story about a young man who has spent over 30 grand on surgery trying to create the perfect body. We have to ask, would either of you go down that route potentially at any point? What makes you think I haven't?

It went wrong. Come on, Kevin. No, no, people don't spend their money as their wish, but no way. I'm not against it, to be honest. I wouldn't spend that much, and I just, you know, I don't think anyone needs that much. But I'm not against cosmetic surgery. And I'm just, I'm not going to lie. I don't like cosmetic surgery on men.

I'm just, I'm not here for it. So I don't find it attractive. Oh, okay, so you're drawing a distinction between men and women. Oh, yes. I think it's, oh, okay, it's not a bit. Because most men can't tell the difference when a woman gets cosmetic surgery. This is the thing. So they say, I hate it.

But when you see it, they really can't tell them. the difference. And most of these... These two are laughing. It's true. Unless it's really overdone. You know, you can't tell. But with a man, especially a straight man,

getting cosmetic surgery, I just think, hmm, you're not for me. Oh, okay. What do you think? That's a bit judgmental. Well, I don't know. I think it's interesting that this industry, which started out being very much a female thing,

is moving massively towards that equality. And I just think, in some case, I think it's quite sad because you're seeing younger and younger people. who are already beautiful. They're fit, they're healthy, they don't need it. You know, and you see it on the Love Island and all of that. The beautiful young women with lovely faces and they're adding all sorts of stuff that they don't need. I think it's a symptom of the problem rather than the actual problem.

I think it's generally it's something a lot deeper on a societal level than just trying to look perfect. Social media pressure. Kevin, you're still not. There is. No. No. I mean, you know, but you can tell. But if you had to do something, what would you do? What, if I do... I don't need to do anything. I mean, if you had to, if you had to squint. What you'd like to think?

What do I have? That doesn't work for me. Yeah, you know. Is he the perfect specimen of the socialists? Obviously, do you even need to ask? As an alpha meal. Exactly. You know?

What about hair transplants? Do you... Is that a different category? No, you know, if it goes, it goes. You know? I mean, that's it. I mean, I might be different on that. Yeah.

Yeah, well, you know. If you've got the money and you want to do it. You've got an amazing head of hair. Long may it stay. I'm an advocate for bald men. Just shave it all off. Right. Just go to the Bruce Willis look.

Exactly. That's great. Well, as we've been discussing, we are going to meet Stephen, the young man who's addicted to enhancing his appearance through surgery. But is it one slice too far? That's coming up next. Well, the quest for the perfect body

is on the rise across the UK. I'm pretty happy with mine, but one leading cosmetic doctor claimed that young people have lost the plot by overdoing affordable cosmetic surgery. Well, Stephen Jarvis has spent more than £30,000 in the search for physical perfection. Stephen's first cosmetic procedure was his teeth, which cost a whopping £11,000. They are very beautiful teeth, I have to say. He has had a number of other cosmetic procedures on his face, including Botox and fibres. costing around £4,000. Now, we're not talking an old person here. He's very useful.

And years ago, he used to weigh 19 and a half stone, so that's about 125 kilos. It took drastic action and had a gastric band costing £6,000. Now, that worked pretty well, and he lost nearly eight stone and went right down to 50-kgy. But he still wasn't satisfied. He then had all the excess skin removed. and no fewer than seven very serious procedures in one go,

including a tummy tuck, liposuction on his chest, costing 10,000 pounds, and numerous other things that are really too scary to mention. So this here is what Stephen looked like before all his renovation works. And Stephen joins us now alongside, Jane DeVille Arman from the National Obesity Forum. Well, Stephen, thank you very much for coming in.

Thank you for having me. You have an amazing physique now. Thank you. But we looked at the pictures of you before, and I can't say there was anything that much wrong with them. I dressed very well. Why did you go down this such a drastic route? So I was diagnosed of diabetes,

and then I was put on an array of medication from trial drugs to... normal everyday drugs that diabex can get. With that, my weight was jumping from one side to the other on the scale. So I couldn't get to grips with it. So from that, my weight literally was going up, up, up and up. Then I would just stay at the, what you've got.

And that obviously made you very unhappy. Yeah, like I didn't like what I saw, because I was never that big before. So I was like, why should I stay like this? OK, so you've got the gastric band on. And that tackled the weight but left you with a load of extra skin. And is that where it all started in terms?

of right I need to get rid of that and yes it's like what can I take away and what can I do to look the way I want to look and can you just exercise and you know find no I I I'd had a lot of consultations I've been to see like personal trainers and I've been to see like surgeons and I was like let's see what is best I've take both opinions and even the personal trainers you did your research two years worth of research so that's your body yeah but why have you done all this stuff to your face you've got a lovely face really young So when you do lose weight, you do lose weight within your face. And obviously, I'm too young now to do a facelift. So by doing fillers, Botox and other things aesthetically to my face, that replenishes and rejuvenates my skin. So let's bring in Jane here. Jane, a very good evening. Thanks for being with us.

So you've heard what Stephen has said. What are your thoughts? I mean, it's Stephen's body. It's his choice. He's got the money to do it. Surely that's fine, isn't it? Well, first of all, can I just say, I'm from the British Obesity Society,

not the National Obesity Forum, and that's fine. Thank you very much for clarifying that. Yeah, I don't want them phoning me up, saying you don't belong to us. I think in Stephen's case, I think because he's had gastric band, and obviously lots of people who need to lose excessive amounts of weight

when they have a band or a bypass, they very often do feel very unhappy with the skin that's left on their body. And I can absolutely understand why anyone who's had massive weight loss will then decide to have their body, their skin removed. Because it is unsightly, isn't it, Stephen?

It's, you know, when you lose a lot of weight. It's very, very unsightly. People are very unhappy. However, I have to say, you look fantastic. Thank you. But I think, you know, there are clinical reasons why people need to have cosmetic surgery,

such as gastric bands and gastric bypasses, people who've got, you know, growths on their face maybe or somebody who's got something that needs removing and they need to rebuild phases. But I find it really sad that young people, like you, Stephen, and like lots of young people today, feel unhappy with how they look because actually... It's not always just unhappiness

because I'm happy, like, I say like, what I said, God carved my face with one set of chisels and threw them away. I'm just amending what he's made. Like, I'm not saying that I wasn't happy how I looked. My body I was unhappy with. My face, I'm just, I'm altering it to my judgment of perfection. Where will you stop? So you've already done all these things.

You actually went to Turkey for the most radical surgery, didn't you? And you paid for it all up front? Yep, so I saved, like over that two years period, I was saving, just kept putting money aside. like I would do extra work. I worked seven days a week. And how long were you in hospital for all those procedures? I was there. It's like thigh narrowing and something else.

Yes, I had inner thigh tightening. I had chest lipo, chest sculpting, chest tightening of the skin, full-tummy tuck, abdomen repair, outer thigh. And this is dangerous, right? Were you not frightened? No, because I'd done my research. I was totally happy with... You'd done your research, but how? Jane, to what extent is this increase the product of pressure on social media, the various different platforms, for the perfect body.

Well, I mean, you know, I look at social media now, and I'm not being rude or cruel, but, you know, everyone looks the same to me. Everyone's got the same teeth and the same face. Yeah, everyone looks, I can't tell the difference between people anymore. Stephen says no one looks like him. Come on, Stephen, respond to that. There isn't anyone else that looks like me.

I'm a mixed race person of so many different ethnicities. Like, in my family, yeah, we look alike, but I've never seen another person that you could say I look like. Very quickly, tell us what else you want to do. You would think this is the finished product, but no, I have heard you say you are thinking of leg lengthening. Yeah, I did look at that. I'd love to be taller.

Like, I'd love to be six foot. And that does involve breaking your legs, right? Yeah. But then I won't be able to work for quite a while, so that's off the cards. Okay, never? Yeah, never for that. Hands, I think you've mentioned that before. Well, yeah, you can replenish your hands.

Apparently you can have a... If I can replenish it, I'll do. So many more things to work on. Your hands are fantastic. But you can have... When you lose weight, that's what age is doing. Jane, you're shaking your head. What are your thoughts on this?

Honestly, I think you've already alluded to it. Every single time we go under a medical procedure, you might have done all your research. I've been nursing for 49 years. And trust me, things go wrong. They don't mean to go wrong. And it might be the most amazing surgeon. But things do go wrong.

Every time you go under an anesthetic, You're putting your life at risk. Well, yeah, obviously that is true. But that's why I will do my research. And if I was told by the surgeon, this is really not for you. I'm not just going to go and do it. Thank you very much. Thank you, Stephen.

Well done. You're very brave, I have to say. That's it from us. And thank you, Jane. And whatever you're up to, make sure you keep it uncensored. A very good night.