Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: The Ri-Shuffle

Episode Date: October 25, 2022

Standing in for Piers, Nadine Dorries and Emily Sheffield look at Rishi Sunak's newly announced cabinet. Nadine and Emily speak to Ann Widdecombe, who thinks the Conservatives will be more popular than Keir Starmer's Labour by the next election despite the recent chaos. Nadine debates with author Patrick Barwise on whether 'Channel 4' should be sold. Just Stop Oil's James Skeet debates recent protests with Nadine and Emily Sheffield. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8pm on TalkTV on Sky 526, Virgin Media 627, 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

Welcome to Pierce Morgan and Censors. Coming up on tonight's program for a change, a man who is going to clear up a woman's mess. That's Rishy's far as he enters number 10. As you were, Sunnixtability extends to the cabinet with the big B-stake and all cages but Fraberman back at home office. Sorry, I'm just completely messed up.

They're in our studio, and we've risked them for a clue. Stick around for just stop oil live. From London, this is Pearce Morgan Uncensored With Nadine Doris and Emily Sheffield Good evening from London I'm Nadine Doryes sitting in for peers For the final time sadly alongside Emily Sheffield While Pierce continues to lounge by the phone in LA

Waiting for his call from Rishi We're here to give you the lowdown On our third Prime Minister in seven weeks Here's what he had to say in his first speech Outside Number 10 earlier today This government will have integrity, professionalism and accountability at every level. Trust is earned and I will earn yours. Rishi, Rishi, no, no.

The Conservative Party is a broad church. It's MPs, members and voters too. appoint your cabinet from across the political spectrum. It's the only way that you can reassure the party that you are serious about unity and integrity. And their two words, you've used a great deal over the past few days. It's in the first act as your role as Prime Minister, and you will be judged on that.

Get it wrong, and it will set the hairs running about what type of Prime Minister you'll be and what you're likely to do before you've even begun to talk about your policy. Two, you have no personal mandate to hold the position you do. No one has voted for you to be Prime Minister. And therefore, you need to take the 2019 manifesto seriously. It is the only legitimacy you have and you have to cleave to it.

When an election comes, you will be judged by which of its promises the Conservative Party kept and which of its objectives it achieved. Push ahead with a gigabit rollout for 100% coverage. It's the biggest single driver to meet the leveling up target. Build the hospitals, get the 20,000 more police on the streets. Because if you don't, at the next election, people will ask why they should trust the Conservative Party to deliver on a new manifesto when it failed on the last. Three, end the psychodrama in the party.

Sadly, I think some of the faceless and unaccountable people inside number 10 who have been behind much of the turbulence within the party, in recent years are still in place and still pulling the strings behind the scenes and I think you're a bit too close to some of those people. End it now. Four, continue with the policies people want and need such as social care reform, which cost one billion, a mere treasury rounding error. Leveling up meant a great deal to many who are left behind in the communities like the one I grow up in. The skills needed for our economy and emerging industries are creative skills,

and critical thinking for our tech sectors. They can be found in any backstreet in any community. Reach out and show exactly what compassionate conservatism means. And five, sort out our NHS. It's an old chestnut, but we employ far too many managers in the NHS and too few frontline doctors, nurses and midwives. Jeremy Hunt didn't manage it in his seven years as health secretary. You sorted out, Prime Minister.

Show us what you made of. Wow. Well, thanks for that, Nadine. We are going to come back to you very, very soon on that because I think there's lots of talking points in there. And we've heard we've now got the cabinet in. Most of his cabinet are in. So we're going to cross first to Westminster to Kate McCann, Talk to Teave's political editor,

who's first with the latest on who's in and out. Kate, any surprises in there for you? Well, I think the surprise for most people today has been the appointment of Suella Braverman to Home Secretary. But the most recent appointments, they are still being made, of course, are people like Mark Harper. He's the Secretary of State for Transport. We've seen Johnny Mercer.

He's now the Victims Minister and Tom Tuggenhurt reappointed as the security minister. There are still questions about Gavin Williamson and Andrew Mitchell, both seen going into number 10. But so far, I don't know what their jobs are. We haven't seen any news on exactly what appointments they have been given yet. But I think when you take a look across the board, Rishy Sinox started the day by saying, he wanted to do was create a cabinet of all of the talents that would promote unity and that

would focus on delivering the 2019 manifesto. And if you look at the types of people that have been appointed, some of them reappointed. They are heavyweights who've been in cabinet before, they've held big jobs before, or they are known for getting things done for delivering. People like Michael Gove and Steve Barkley in two key offices in Department of Health and the Department for Leveling Up and Housing, reappointment of Ben Wallace at Defence and James Cleverly at foreign. Those are heavyweight people who have been sort of doing those jobs for a while, have a good reputation. Interestingly, Michael Gove given the job of looking across all of the government departments and agendas to see what problems might need unblocking. So I think from

those appointments, it's clear that Rishi Sunak is going to carry out what he hopes, you know, to try and deliver that 2019 manifesto. But there are some appointments that are causing a little bit of concern, I think it's fair to say. And the one so far that has got Labor's backs up. Maybe that's what the Tories want, Nadine, maybe you can tell me, is the appointment of Suella Breverman at home secretary? You know, she was sat, she resigned, but essentially she was asked to resign because she broke the ministerial code just a week ago. She sent private documents via email to somebody who wasn't in the cabinet. They needed cabinet approval. She was asked to leave. She handed in a resignation. It was very clear from that letter that she was unhappy about

it. There'd been a row in the background between Liz Trust and her about immigration. And just a short time after that resignation, she's back in cabinet, back at home secretary, and she has some fairly strong views. I think that appointment tonight is the one that is rustling the most feathers. Great. Thank you, Kate. So much to talk about Nadine. First, let's, because she's just talking about Swela Bravaman. Now, this is a prime minister who came in on his speech and his first speech to the nation.

He talks about reinstating integrity. He then reinstates Suela Bravman to the home office. who had just been removed by Liz Trust for breaking the ministerial code. So I just want to get your reaction first, and then I'm going to go to the panel, because I think for many, the return of Swetta Braverman was quite a surprise. Yeah, and I think we're going to hear a lot about that, actually, because I know a lot of my colleagues in the Conservative Party are not overwhelmed.

Overwhelmed by her return, or weren't overwhelmed by her when she was in the home office before? Both. Sorry, underwhelmed. And I think we're going to hear more about that rumbling on over the next few weeks. I think that's probably a big slip-up. The rest of the cabinet, actually, I mean, I've sat in cabinet with most of those people. It's not a lot of change. It's actually the cabinet that's been in place the last year.

Plus, I don't know if you remember, but Boris Johnson put in place a temporary cabinet over the summer. It's kind of a mish-mash of them both. But don't you think you were saying at the beginning in your five points, you've got to build a unity cabinet? I feel that is quite a unity cabinet. that feels like that is bringing a lot of elements from right across the party. And there's not much change, though, to be honest. There's not much change. A lot of those people were in Michael Gove, Steve Barkley.

A lot of those people were in the cabinet before. Well, Steve Barkley had only just moved into health and then was removed by Liz Truss. We've got a new chancellor. That's a big deal. Salma, what's your view? I feel this is a unity cabinet and he's made a lot of former advisor to such a So I think what's interesting is that, yes, you can absolutely say that this is a unity cabinet, but there are also political realities to it. So it's not just about sort of having this

broad brush and saying, I'm really, I'm going to, it's all going to be rainbows and puppies and I'm going to bring this cabinet together. It actually is the fact that Suella Bravman went out early to support Rishi, and she is a vigor head in the very powerful ERG, very messy ERG group that can cause a lot of trouble. And so I don't think Rishi was really in a position where he could move that. And again, I'd love to hear Nadine's view on this. But, you know, a lot of those people, like James Cleverley, were big Boris supporters. And actually, does Rishi really want those people on the backbench is causing trouble. So I think that's also a political move. Nevertheless, it is sensible to bring some stability into cabinet. It is sensible to make that as

wide as possible. The challenge he's going to have is really, is everybody equipped in this short space of time to be able to deliver on the things that you need to deliver? Nadine, you're absolutely right in the list that you gave at the beginning, delivering on the 2019 manifesto commitment. But those hospitals, those extra police officers, all of that is going to require real operational delivery. And this is not a criticism of anyone in the cabinet, but, you know, there are lots of people on the backbench of the Conservative Party that could do a lot more with the delivery. And I think a few of these people are a bit too new to that cabinet post. I just want to bring in here, because we've got the Labour Advisor Richard Parras, Saeed, former Labour advisor, Richard.

what's your feeling on Swela Braverman? Because I feel that she, I absolutely agree with Salma. Immigration was a big, big thing on the doorstep in the last election. Perhaps I think it's going to be a big thing on the doorstep, particularly up in that red wall again. So how's Labor doesn't really have an answer for immigration.

It's one of those ones they keep sort of slithering around. But it is a big issue on people's doorstep. So how are they going to counter? How are they going to counter this? I look at the appointment to Svella Brabva, and I think that looks like an act of political weakness. It looks kind of desperate. Like here's somebody who is recognised as being,

not simply a person on the right, but a person on the right to is unusually superficial in her political presentation, unusually insubstantial in the kinds of things that she wants to talk about when she's going out into the media or when she's at Tory Party conference. There are people on the right who are bigger hitters,

than her. And for some reason, he's gone with her as for home secretary. In the coming weeks and months... Do we think? And, Salma, you might know, she backed Rishi very early on. Was this a deal? Was this a deal done behind closing? I wouldn't surprise. It wouldn't surprise it. I'm very sure it was. And I've got to say, I do agree with Richard that it's kind of, you can read it both ways. Is it an act of political strength to try and unify and stabilize, or is it an acknowledgement of political weakness?

And Nadine said it again at the top, you know, that idea of one's mandate, that idea of kind of like what I can get away with and what people will actually wear. So even though, and look, you know, I am glad that Rishi's there. It is stabilising, it is stabilising for the markets. We have saw guilt for the dramatically.

So there is a point. But we're not out of the woods with Rishi's premiership and we have to be really alive to that fact. I do think that there are kind of, I mean, I would obviously think this. But I do think there are holes in what Labor is presenting in terms of, you know, you can be angry and obsessed about Suella Braverman. But a lot of people do recognize that she does have a tough stance on immigration and they are looking for a tough stance on immigration.

Yeah, but someone, where are Labor, Richard? They're not anywhere. We've had very little in the way of commentary. I mean, Kirstarmer should be out everywhere and he's nowhere. Where is he? Where is Labour? Right now. You think right now he should be out? No, not at all. This is a moment Well, they usually are. They're usually out criticizing the cabinet appointments. They're usually trying to fight for the airtime and the news waves. And they're not anywhere they're totally silent. Where are they? Labor needs to leave the Tories to have their polling bounce. And then in a month or two, Rishi Sunak is going to get torn apart by the Conservative Party that is currently rallying around him.

It's going to be terrible. It's going to be terrible because it's terrible for the country. They surely can't be relying on that. The Tories are looking at, I mean, if you take the poll, They are looking at electoral wipeout. I can't help feeling a lot of MPs are not going to want to lose their jobs. And this could, we're not going to see unity. I think that's virtually impossible in any electoral.

Any party, Labor will have its own fights if it gets to power. But surely they should be on the attack right now. No, I think you wait for the Tory party to have themselves to pass. So they're waiting for the Tory party to lose rather than Labor to actively try and win. No, I think that in the coming week, and months, it's going to be utterly terrible for anybody who isn't a millionaire tax dodger in this country. If you've got an elderly relative who needs to go into hospital, you're going to be incredibly worried about them. I'm really sorry, I'm not a millionaire tax dodger, and, you know, things

will be hard for people like me as well. So that's unfair. You know, we've... That's what I said. That's what I said. They'll be difficult for middle class people. They'll be difficult for working class people. They won't be difficult for Rishi sooner, will they? But I'm a Tory that supports the Conservative Party. And I'm not going to support... Against your own interest, do I say. No, it's not against my own interest. because ultimately we are looking at a stabilisation. And as much as I am incredibly critical of the mini-budget,

there are trends that are occurring in the economy that would have led to rises in inflation anyway. The rise in inflation was happening as the leadership contest was unfolding in the summer. The rises are inflation are totally external to the economy. They are Ukraine and they are COVID. Exactly. There is no real wage rises.

So it's not the conservative. But the conservatives do bring in a national living wage, right? So there is a recognition, has been a recognition, a long time ago, that wages did need to rise because inflation at some point would go up. But the point that I'm trying to make is categorising Tories as people who just love tax dodgers or whatever, I think is a real false picture that's being presented. I'm categorising the Prime Minister and the people who are supporting it. Particularly when you look at our red wall seats. So, Salma, do you think the party is going to unify? I think it's going to be a really difficult journey to unity.

I do. And I think, on the point of kind of like where is Labor, I think it's a legitimate tactic to say that the conservatives tear themselves apart. I get that. But at this point, and you're quite right, with people feeling where they are with the electorate, it's a feeling as it is.

And I include myself in that. I think the Labour Party would have to show me and people like me that they are really serious about this and hungry for it and really want the win. They're not just going to sit back. So can I say what Labour will do? I still think there is a point to be made that Labor, they are.

They are ahead in the polls because of the Tories failing. They are not ahead in the polls, which was the case in Tony Blair's day, when they were spelling a vision out for the country. I still don't really see that vision from Keir. I'm not looking at his shadow cabinet and think late. Oh, wow, I trust them for the economy. The polling shows. I wonder what Richard's going to say about this.

I want to be convinced, God. So in the coming weeks, Keir Starmers is going to be saying, we need to have another windfall tax on the energy companies that are profiteering out of Ukraine. That's how we can pay, for instance, for doubling the number of doctors that we're training. That's how we can double the number of district nurses that we're training. And Rishi Sunak's going to be saying, oh, yeah, sorry, we're actually going to not do that because we're okay with people dying in ambulances outside of A&Es. And at that point, you're going to see a really, really key political difference between Labor and the Talks.

And that is why already, actually, the polling has been changing such that it's not just that people are going to don't knows from the Tories. People are now saying, yeah, we're going to actively support Labour. That's people, especially in the Red Wall. That is a different kind of polling changes. Thank you so much. Still to come on the show, he's promised to clean up the mess from Liz Truss, shambolic 50 days in charge. But just how many bottles of Mr. Muscle will wish he need to get number 10 looking ship shape? That's next.

Welcome back. Well, Rishi Sunak has created Liz Trass's top team and retained leading allies of Boris Johnson in his new cabinet. Let's bring in former Conservative MP Anne. Anne, what do you think of the makeup of the new cabinet? Well, he's obviously going for stability. That's obvious in his choice for the top jobs. Bringing back Suella, who after all has only been gone for about five minutes,

keeping Jeremy Hunt, a foreign secretary, similarly, obviously going for stability, obviously also going for both the right and the left of the party to fulfil his promise of Cabinet of all the talents. The real test now will be the Parliamentary Party because it has been ungovernable and now the big question will be, given the breadth of the Cabinet, whether it will now just get on with it. Because if it doesn't get on with it, Kirstama will. And Anne, how much hope do you hold out for that? Do you think he's going to manage it? Do you think faced with electoral wipeout,

that there might at least be... I mean, I heard other commentators saying today he'll probably be hoping to at least get till January or February without some big row. Well, I mean, the real test will be when the first thing goes wrong, but there's nothing like the prospect of being hanged in a fortnight to concentrate the mind. And, okay, it's not a fortnight,

but it is only two years to the next general election with Labor having an unprecedented lead. which I believe can be cut, actually, quite soon. But it won't be cut if there is a continual factionalism and threat and people putting in letters and all the rest of it. Party's just got to calm down. And on that rests everything. On that rests all the law and the profits, so to speak.

Everything rests on the behaviour of the parliamentary party. Are you happier tonight than you were, say, last week? And what do you think will happen the first time he drops the ball? What do you think the first big issue will be? Well, I mean, that is the big question as to what will happen when he drops the first ball, as he will, as all prime ministers do. And in the past, the Conservative Parliamentary machine

was very, very disciplined, and it just stood behind the Prime Minister. I can remember, however, there is a parallel here. I lived through in Parliament the deposing of Mrs. Satcher. and I can promise you that feelings were running very, very high. Parliamentarians not speaking to each other, absolutely furious. The whole thing had to be settled down by John Major, and it was because there was a prospect of a general election within a couple of years,

exactly where we are now. So I believe that things may calm down for that reason. And also, it's interesting, one of Major's first pronouncements was, I'm going to have a cabinet of all the talents. Rishi Shunak, one of his first pronouncements, he's going to have a cabinet of all the talents. That will calm a lockdown because everybody will feel they're represented somewhere in the cabinet.

And can I ask you, you know, Labour have obviously been calling for a general election. I think they realise that's not going to happen. The Lib Dems were admitting today that they didn't think that was likely. When do you think he should call an election? Do you think he should leave it as late as possible to give time for the economy, give time for the economy to recover? Because it's not in a good place right now. He's got some really tough decisions to take.

No, it's not in a good place right now. Nobody's economy is in a good place right now. And I don't see everybody's economy, including ours, being in a good place within the short space of two years. But it will be in a much better place. That's what he's got to aim for. and if everything has calmed down and we can see where the ship is heading, I don't know where Kirstama's ship is heading, because he simply doesn't have a set of policies.

If we can all see where the ship is heading, I think that will reassure the general public immensely. And I know that people are saying, as they said, after the fall of Thatcher, as exactly they said then, never vote conservative again. But faced with the choice between that and a socialist government, they'll vote conservative even if they hold their noses. So, Anne, in 92, that general election, John Major, that we faced after ousting of Margaret Thatcher, the Conservative is only just held on by their skin of their teeth.

Now, can I ask you, were you disappointed at the weekend with Boris Johnson pulled out? I think it was inevitable for this reason. The parliamentary party, as I said, was ungovernable. And if he'd come back, he'd have come back to exactly the situation which he left. and I don't think the party would have been any more stable and settled. I think what Rishi has done is stabilised the situation. And although I was a trust supporter because I liked the bold vision, I now get behind Rishi,

and I hope that everybody else will do the same, because if they don't, we're going to have Kirstama. Thank you so much, Anne, for joining us this evening. Thank you. In his speech outside Downing Street, the Prime Minister admitted mistakes have been made by Liz Truss and that the government would have to take tough decisions to restore market confidence.

Joining me now is Richard Murphy, Professor of Accountancy Practice at the University of Sheffield. Good evening. Hello. Hello. Just talk us through how big are the economic problems facing the new Prime Minister? We have seen the guilt stabilising. They've dropped.

Is that going to be a help for him? Not really. Let's be honest, I've just got the chart open to have a quick look at it, because I heard you mentioned that earlier. And guilt's tonight are at the level they were last at in June 2010. They have fallen a bit today, yes, but they could rise tomorrow, and they might, in reaction to the budget on Monday, these things are volatile. The fact is that the volatility is still there. There is nothing that has greatly reassured markets since quasi-Quartang has gone, and that definitely did help, and the reversal of the mini-bubon. of course. But right now, we're all sitting in tent hooks wondering what on earth is going to happen on Monday. I've just heard that Winnicum saying every Prime Minister literally has their first disaster

and budgets are very often those disasters. I have a very strong feeling that Monday is going to be a very comfortable, uncomfortable evening for him and the newspapers might not be happy on Tuesday morning. There will be something in there which is going to upset everyone. So Richard, what do you think the Prime Minister needs to do now, to turn this around, to study the markets, to put the measures in place that would make you happy? What does he need to do? Well, the first thing he has to do is not worry about the markets. The markets will sort themselves out. The reason why the markets will sort themselves out is that by next February, inflation will be declining. That's a simple mathematical fact, because inflation is a measure of one year's prices compared to the previous year's prices. Well, by March next year, certainly, we'll be comparing March 23 prices with March 22 prices, which will have already been inflated by Putin's war. So as far as the markets are concerned, inflation will be down and they'll be much happier.

Prices will, of course, not have fallen one iota, but there will be happiness on their part that inflation will have fallen. So markets are easily satisfied by simple things like that. What people in general aren't happy about is the fact that tonight a plater pastor is costing 60% more than it was only a few months ago because of real underlying inflation. That's the disaster we've actually got. And if he's going to keep not just the markets on side, but business on side. And remember the Tories are the party of business. He's got to deliver growth.

The only way he can deliver growth. And yeah, that's exactly, by the way, what Liz Trust said. But he has to do the same. Because if he doesn't, we are moving into a very rapid recession. And the only way he can deliver growth, because Brexit isn't going to, to help exports. That's just a fact. Let's not discuss the politics of it.

That's what we know. And businesses aren't investing because of high interest rates and because of uncertainty. And consumers are pushed to their limits. The only thing that can now grow our economy is increase government spending. So what he's got to do to actually keep the markets happy is the exact opposite of what most people are saying,

which is spend more, which would deliver the leveling up agenda, which I know you're particularly keen on, Nadine, but it would deliver the security for people's jobs and their futures and keep them in their homes. Because if we don't bring interest rates down, millions of people could literally end up homeless within a year. They won't be able to pay their mortgages.

They won't be able to pay their rents. They won't be able to feed their children. I don't know how Rishi Sunak would deal with that. So Richard, can I ask you, who do you think would be a better Prime Minister for the economy? Rishishanak or Kirstama? Oh, look, marginally, Kirstama. I'm not a great fan of Kirstama in this area either.

So let's be blunt about it. I'm not playing party politics here. I'm talking economics here. Are you sure? Are you not playing bad politics? Why? Why would Kea Stoma? I've been hearing some strong labour arguments going on this evening.

I can see Salma sitting there shaking her head on our family. But no, let's ask Richard. Why Kirstama? Why would Kirstama be better for the economy? Well, look, I said marginally. They have promised a 28 billion pound fund for investment, for example, in sustainability. I actually think it should be 100 billion. Look, hang on, I think it should be 100 billion.

a year and that can be raised. I don't see a problem with raising it. I would change the rules on I say. How is that going to get raised? Increase borrowing? We just saw Liz Trust come in with all these unfunded, a unfunded tax costs,

but a huge level of borrowing to fund those Tutskouts and to help out with people and their energy bills and the markets reacted violently. You seem to be arguing right now that we were sort of... For trustinomics again.

You've even been talking about growth where most economists have said there's nothing we can do about growth for the next two years. We have to deal with inflation. Let me explain why they're wrong. I mean, let's go back to, we have a crisis. Soonak was absolutely right. We have a crisis.

And in a crisis, the only thing a government can do is spend. We're in a crisis so bad there's probably been nothing worse since the beginning of the Second World War. Thankfully, we're not at war ourselves. But the downturn that we face is so catastrophic that we need to follow the rules of that time. We actually borrow from our own population. We encourage people to save with the government.

where I would get the money from to do that leveling up and sustainability program. But let's not get frightened of the national debt. Let me show you what the national debt looks like. That's it. Anybody who's watching who doesn't want their share of the national debt, would they please put it in an envelope and send it to me because it's just money? Well, we just saw the cost of borrowing going up. Makes the world go around.

They were unfunded. It was unfunded. It was unfunded tax cuts and the markets reacted. And the borrowing went up. want us to keep paying huge amounts of interest and just keep borrowing and borrowing. Can we bring salmer in here? We don't need to pay large amounts of interest. We can tell the Bank of England to cut the interest rate. We don't need to actually increase that interest rate. But we don't get to tell the bank of England, by the way. The way of which the government calculates

its interest costs are really totally wrong. The interest cost is nothing higher, nearly as high as the government claims. It's accounting wrong. I'm in correspondence with the Office of National Statistics on that. We can afford to spend. Richard, we're going to move to. to our pack. Thank you so much. You've raised lots of... I've got to take it to our pack because I've seen Salma literally shaking your head about ten times so I'm going to let her have a chance to come back on someone what

you've said. Samma, just pick up because I literally saw you going, oh, what is he saying? So I just want to have a counterbalance because you did work for Sajid Javan. I'm not an economist and so you know, I think we have a better sort of economist in the studio who can talk to some of the most specific

points. But I mean, you just said it there. What he's talking about is trustinomics. And we've just seen that massively fail. He just said the markets can look after themselves. We've just seen what the markets do when they're not happening. I'm like pretty typical conservative, right? And I am, I'm probably not typical for current conservatism or where that is, in that I think that the state should be smaller because I think other people in the markets do it better. Now, that's not because I think that it should be completely free or laissez-faire, it should be properly regulated, but actually private capital and the markets do things better than government.

And the idea that government is responsible for growth is a complete anathema to me as a conservative. I think it is about entrepreneurs. I think it's about small and medium-sized businesses and big businesses. And you think government should be there to help them run their businesses as they feel? But I'm also not one of these people that thinks that it's all about cutting red tape and it's just about deregulation. I think good regulation can deepen and strengthen markets and sectors.

I just think it's so silly to say, we just should tell the Bank of England where they should set their interests, rates. Well, we can't, by the way, because they're independent for a start. And all political parties at the point of that independence agreed that it should be independent and it should not be a political decision. We'll go back to the old days of the ERM. Well, we just saw a nuance. In his defence, there was a nuance to his argument. And yet, the trustinomics, the big failure was that the markets were completely unprepared for what she was about to say. I don't think that's, can I correct you a little bit on that, indeed?

Well, on the 45P tax, they're abolishing that, and they had no idea that was going to happen. Now, they'd already facted in the other stuff, but they had no idea about that. And there is an argument to say that when you go out to stakeholders, when you go out to the OBR, the IMF and others, and you talk through with them what you're about to do and give them the chance to interact with that and to put their point of view over, that when you announce a policy like you're going to increase borrowing, you don't get that violent reaction that we got from the markets. And that was the failure of what happened with Liz Truss and her. mini budget. It was the fact that it was sprung on the markets and they had no idea.

I don't think it was sprung is that so much of it was un-costed. And unfunded. But let's speak of mind. In an inflationary period. Yeah, but you have that discussion beforehand about how it's going to be costed. I think there would have been a lot of pushback on her mini budget anyway. And then she might have changed her position. I think this is not quite right, guys. And just to say, I'm also not an economist, but I do know. It was very nice to be, to pretend to be one for a few minutes. 89% of that borrowing and of those tax cuts in the mini budget were pre-announced.

89% of it. And during that period, when that had been pre-announced, guilt markets did exactly the same thing that international markets were doing. So actually, there was a lot more space for spending or tax cuts. Not that I was a fan of Trussonomics, but there was a lot more space for it in the markets and I think is generally recognized. And we need to think back, we need to think back to 2010, right? At that moment, we had Cameron and Osborne making a political act excuse out of a crisis. And the result was tens of thousands of people died. I do not accept that.

I do not accept that. The IMF themselves said that it has ruined. That was not a political choice. You left the country with no money. That's nonsense. You left the country with no money. Even the IMF said, no, no, I'm going to make this point. Even the IMF said that it ruined growth.

I'm so sorry. I've got to thank you now, both of you. Very lively. Before it comes to blows. Thank you to our panel, Salma and Richard. But coming on next on Pierce Morgan and censored. Is this really public service broadcasting? My thoughts on Channel 4's latest bit of attention seeking?

Welcome back. I'm a former Culture Secretary. I like to say I'm a recovering Secretary of State. And one of the thorns in my side of the department was culture like this. How do you feel about that penis? It's going to heal me. It's either don't go out or someone stares at your . I'm just recovering from all those.

recovering from that clip. Boris Johnson's government was that close to privatising Channel 4. The idea being to sell it off and make some money back for the taxpayer. But the decision is on hold while a new. lot of ministers re-examine the business case. Same goes for the review into the BBC license fee. And clips like this won't change things. We showed you this yesterday, but it's worth a replay.

Well, this is all very exciting, isn't it? Hello and welcome to our look ahead to what the papers will be bringing us tomorrow. Am I allowed to be this gleeful? Well, I am. So, scrap the license fee and sell off Channel 4. Joining us now is Patrick Barwis, Emeritus Professor of Management and Marketing at the London Business School. So you have to pay a licence fee to watch television. No, the BBC.

No other broadcaster. I mean, it's £36 billion a year, if I remember rightly, that they raise from the million... 3.6, do you mean? 3.6, that's exactly what it meant, obviously. So do you think that's fair when other broadcasters don't get a pay? penny of public money? It's not quite true that other broadcasters don't get a penny of public money because the BBC in the UK gets most of the licence fee money. It also funds things like funds the World Service outside the UK. Well, that's funded by the Foreign Office as well.

And it's a mixture now. And S4C, the Welsh Channel and so on. But about 92% of the licence fee money goes to the BBC. I think the question of whether it's I mean, it works. Everybody pays and everybody gets a benefit. That might not have been true sort of in theory, but it's actually what's true in practice. So yes, it works very well. But does it... Let me just finish. We've numerous times had the question of should we replace the license fee with another funding method. I hope we're going to have that again. We're still waiting. It's a bit like waiting for Godo for this independent review.

looking at the alternative methods, if that is a genuinely independent review which looks at the alternatives. And comes up with good ideas? It comes up with good ideas, but also tests against the evidence, then my hunch is we will end up either with the licence fee continuing

or with a universal levy like the German system in which every household pays. We will have to look at the more commercial alternatives, one of which is advertising, and the other is subscription. So I think it's very good that the government has said this is going to happen. It's not so good that it hasn't, it keeps not happening. So hopefully it will finally happen.

So the review was ready to go when I left the day Boris Johnson was ousted. It was ready to go literally the following day, the day after. It's been done. The work's done. It just hasn't left the department doors yet. Yes. But, you know, the review needs because we need that... Do you know who will be leading it?

Is that not revealed it? So I can't reveal it. But you do know, but that's not... But we had gone through that process. But, and it will be thoroughly independent. That was one of the issues. The main issues was that it was truly independent. Yes.

But, you know, there's a number of issues around that we need the debates. The debate needs to happen. It needs to happen in Westminster. It needs to happen with people like you. It needs to happen in the public. Completely agree. And also, I think, one of the reasons why that debate needs to happen is that 75% of the 49,000 prosecutions

that happen a year for non-payment. to the licence fee. 75% of those people who are prosecuted are women. Yes. And, you know, it's a regressive tax, as you know, whether you're on benefits or a multimillionaire, you pay for that license fee. And I think this now needs to be out in the open.

Now, if you could choose a funding model, what funding model would you think should replace the BBC license fee? Because, Nadine, I think to be clear, I think a lot of people became sort of courtesy of the Boris Johnson government that they were very... anti the BBC and there was quite a lot of anti-BBC rhetoric.

And I'm not saying that's always been there. Yes, but it was how it was painted. We're not saying defunds the BBC, to be clear, and that's not what you're saying. You want a more fair funding. So we're not saying we're going to get rid of the BBC because I think a lot of people get an absolute panic that the BBC somehow is going to become

some sort of commercial enterprise. A lot of people really love the BBC. You love the BBC. What we're talking about is new funding models that you would like to see fairer that it's not a aggressive tax. Can we be clear on that? This funding model, which has been in places that you don't remember better than I do,

it goes back many, many years. It is simply no longer fair that people, I froze the license fee for two years now as Culture Secretary. It's no longer fair that people have to continue to pay this escalating amount, this cost every year, particularly cost of everything. Well, it's not escalating. You've frozen it for two years. I froze.

It was escalating. It's not escalated. No, no, no. They've had real cuts in terms of 30%. Please, okay. If... I did freeze it, that is a fact. If...

It's a fact that you froze it, okay? But there are some other very pertinent facts about what's happened since 2010. If the BBC's real inflation-adjusted revenue had kept pace with... If it had kept pace with general inflation since 2010, it would now be over 40% higher than when you froze it.

30% in real terms is my figure. It's 30% cut in the... Yes, cuts. That's the figure I've got actually from the BBC. It was cut by 30% in real terms before the end of last year. You have to overlay that with the fact that the number of people subscribing to the licence fee is dropping. It's not dropping by much. You've got a trivial amount. You've got 260 million people coming into the BBC every day.

I'm trying to bring some relevant facts in the situation before you froze the license fee. Okay. Now, freezing the license fee for two years at a time when inflation is whatever, let's say 9%. It'll average over those two. That's another 17% cut on top of the 30%. And this is in a market with growing competition and increasing real prices for programs and for distribution and technology.

So at some point, the point by defunding the BBC, the Conservative Party has defunded the BBC massively since 2010 in a market with growing costs and growing competition. They were able to deal with this by getting their overheads down by growing commercial revenue, by making BBC for a repeats-only channel and so on. At some point, in the next three years or so, the elastic will break. The Director-General is going to have to announce some real cuts. At that point, I don't think any of us knows what the public backlash will be, but I can give you a clue, because in 2015, the BBC did a study focusing on BBC skeptics,

the 30% who then said the BBC licence fee is not good value for money. Okay. Okay, Richard, I'm being told I've got to jump in on Channel 4 while we've still got time in this segment. So can I ask you? Of the BBC sceptics, 68% changed their mind after nine days with no BBC. When that was repeated earlier this year, it was 70%. Okay, so Richard, I have to ask you about Channel 4. Do you think we should be proud of programmes like My Massive Cock on Channel 4?

Did I just say that? I'm not interested in that question. Why is that a relevant question? So do you think Channel 4 is value for money? Do you think Channel 4 should be sold? No. Why don't you think it should be sold? Do you think that it's right that a publicly owned asset produces programs like Channel 4 do?

Well, I think that like the BBC, as we were saying about the review of the BBC, I think it should be given editorial independence. I'm not a Mary White House cancel culture person. I didn't think you were, but I'm interested. No, I'm not. Okay, but you're sort of saying maybe you think it should be stopped from changing. No, actually, my personal point on Channel 4 is that it has a business model which depends on one sole form of income, which is linear advertising,

which is unsustainable. Right. So now let's cut to the chase. So now you're talking what I think is the important issue, which is every time, and I think we're fourth time round that there's been talk of privatising Channel 4, that message has been it's not sustainable. And do you know, Channel 4 keeps getting... They've just recorded record, revenue and service.

Well, there are underlying reasons for that, but UKGI would not agree with you. I personally don't think... I think the government has plenty on its plate without... Patrick, thank you, sir. I've got to cut in because we've got to keep going with the show. Thank you, Patrick, so much for your views. Thank you. Some of my views.

Still, I'm sorry we didn't have enough time to cover everything. Those are both big topics. So still to come. They're at it again. Isn't it about time we stick it to these vandals? We talk to a protester next. Welcome back. Another day, another just stop oil protest. This morning it was the turn of 55 Tufton Street in central London, a favourite hangout of Liz Truss, actually, home to right-wing think tax targeted for their work lobbying for fossil fuel companies.

So I've got a question for you at home. Why would this change anything? With us now is just up, oil protester James Skeet. So James, what are you hoping to achieve by all this? Well, thanks, Nadine. Well, as you're well aware, our dependence on fossil fuels has landed in this cost of living crisis and this climate crisis. So what just a boil calling for is an immediate transition

to renewable energy. It's nine times cheaper. By the way, they do understand you can't do it immediately. Absolutely. You can't just click a switch. Absolutely. Well, what we're calling for is no new licensing on consent. So we actually have eight years in supply.

I think that's a difference. And what we're calling for is an immediate roll out of insulation of people's homes, which would help with people's bills this winter, free public transport. James, that's not going to keep people warm. That's not going to stop elderly people's getting pneumonia. It's not going to keep babies warm in their cots at night. I think it will. I think that's the purpose of insulation.

Right. And do you not think you're turning people. Actually, funny enough, Paul came out yesterday. Paul came out yesterday saying the 66% national support for direct action to protect the climate. Who did that poll? Who did that poll? I don't know. But I tell you what, it sounds a lot better than that.

No, it was a, we didn't even, we didn't have to. But it sounds a lot better than the Tory party's approval ratings at the moment. And nothing to do with us, James. Honestly, I think you're turning people off what you're trying to, what you're trying to achieve. You're stopping kids getting to school. You're stopping ambulances, getting to hospitals. We have a blue-like policy. We always let ambulances through.

I'm not sympathetic that so many young people feel terrified. And they might look and think that nothing's really changed. I also would like to point out that with a recession coming hard down at us, you are right, there are going to be eco-climate objectives, which are going to be put to one side. I do believe that. It happens. It's positively positive.

Do you support this? No, I'm saying that I don't agree with it. I'm saying that I sympathize with the panic that the young people. in the best of millions of people. But I am genuinely worried that... Are you happy? I'm genuinely worried your message. You've both got children.

The way you're doing it, your message is getting obliterate. You're turning people off. And you're allowing policies which will save the planet, James. Well, it's got me on your program, hasn't it? But, I mean, both of you've got children. Can you honestly look them in the eye and say... Because you're annoying, not because of what you're doing. I know, I know I'm annoying, but I'm a man of many talents.

But look, I know, like, can you honestly say, and look in your children's eyes when they ask you, what did you do to avert this crisis? Can you honestly say that you did everything that you could? We do lots. And so do lots of households, lots of people. I've seen your voting record, Dean. That's not true. Lots.

So I'm an absolutely massive supporter of COP 26. It was the best environmental conference to be held in this country this year. No, James, it hasn't it? You know, it's put us on the part. This year was the first time that they were discussing fossil fuels. What the hell were they discussing the other 25 times? You're deflecting. You're deflecting from the fact that what you're doing is actually not achieving your objective.

You should be trying to bring people into your own side to your course. You have ended up in this position because very admirable women took civil resistance and therefore changed history and you're now in that position. You see? And the fact is... But they weren't annoying, James. They were fighting for a lot more annoying than us and they were a lot more destructive. James, thank you for coming on and fighting your cause today.

That's it from me. I'm off to take... Sorry, Nadine is off to take a seat on the cat bench. Whatever you're up to, make sure it's uncensored. Good night.