10.3 is the time. Good morning. I hope you had a splendid weekend and you're not still, as I am, reeling from the shock and horror of ITV deciding to postpone the new series of Midsummer Murders for a week in order to make way for an interview with Prince Harry, I think. I don't know. I couldn't quite, I couldn't work out what was happening. I don't know. Did you notice it? I didn't, I mean, be watching the other side? What was on the other side? Happy, Happy Valley. I'm joking, of course. It was traffic stopping. Again, I begin with a little caveat. I appreciate you may not be interested. I think you should be, not least because of what it tells us about the royal family, which is important, whether you like it or not.

In fact, if you don't like it and you don't think we should have it, then arguably you consider it to be even more important than someone who might be ambivalent or mildly pro-royal. But also at the area that perhaps you won't hear much about in coverage from newspapers owned by people in the eye of the storm. What he's what he said

about the media and of course the pending legal actions that he has in place against some of the

most powerful media institutions in the in the world, never mind in this country. Could you imagine

how much coverage there would be in the newspapers if Harry was currently su, oh, I don't know, let's say Manchester United, the BBC, and what else is like a behemoth of Britishness, a behemoth of British culture.

Can you think of something else?

The BBC, Manchester United and the National Trust. If Prince Harry was currently suing Manchester United, the BBC and the National Trust, could you imagine how much coverage that would be garnering in newspapers? But he's not. He's currently suing pretty much every newspaper in the land. We may get on to that a little later. I'm not putting you in Idiots Corner, Martin, because it's too early and I'm at one with the universe, but you can't send me text saying, I'm surprised you're not talking about this on your show today when the show is less than five minutes old. And we will turn our attention to this astonishing piece of work that taught us have done, the slow news organisation, looking at the funding of MPs.

I think they've done it in conjunction with Sky News, and it's a remarkable issue.

It's a fascinating story.

But to accuse me of not talking about it when I've barely drawn breath on the first hour that we will spend together all week,

is a little, let us just say it's a little bit previous, but does

not for now get you put into Idiot's Corner. I'm also more than aware of the fact that we need

to talk about the NHS. The front page of the Sunday Times yesterday contained an interesting

suggestion that the Health Service will buy up beds in private care homes, which again

possibly gets filed under what Kirstama will be increasingly calling sticking plaster

politics, but sticking plaster is better than no sticking plaster at all. So we may have a look

at that a little later as well. And speaking of matters health, Rishi Sunnet's continuing,

misfiring on his own, well, the relationship between his health and his wealth.

I think it would be almost ridiculous to expect a prime minister to be in exactly the same relationship with a GP practice that the rest of us are.

I don't mean by that private versus NHS necessary. I just mean that if he's sick and he can't get an appointment for three weeks, it's a slightly bigger

deal than it would be if I was or you were. But why, when interviewed and asked fairly clearly

about whether or not his family has a private GP arrangement, would he not answer the question?

...