I was supposed to interview the actor Ewan McGregor today.

We’ve met a few times. Once at Soho House in Los Angeles with our families, another time as we disembarked a plane, also in LA, and walked together for 15 minutes to passport control.

On both occasions he was friendly and charming. We talked about life, kids, movies. I liked him a lot.

So I was looking forward to seeing him again.

Unfortunately, it turned out he wasn’t quite so keen on seeing me again.

McGregor arrived with a large Hollywood-style entourage at the ITV studios in London, where I currently co-host Good Morning Britain.

McGregor, seen here today, arrived at my television studios with his large entourage, before arguing in the green room over me

I checked Twitter in the next commercial break, realizing there was a problem, and discovered the ‘issue’

They were all escorted to the green room, where an argument then started with our editorial team because McGregor apparently hadn’t realized I was going to be involved with the interview.

He refused point blank to do it unless I was removed and it was performed by my co-host Susanna Reid.

This demand was denied, as were further demands for the interview to be severely shortened and to be restricted purely to talk about his new movie, T2 Trainspotting.

So, enraged that he couldn’t do the interview on the terms he wanted, McGregor left.

In the studio itself, we were warned there may be a slight ‘issue’ with McGregor appearing on the sofa, five minutes before he was due on.

I checked Twitter in the next commercial break and discovered the ‘issue’:

‘Was going on Good Morning Britain,’ McGregor had tweeted, ‘didn’t realise @piersmorgan was host. Won’t go on with him after his comments about #WomensMarch.’

Wow.

Let that tweet sink in for a few seconds.

An actor who had contractually agreed to appear on a TV show to promote his new film pulls out at the last minute because he doesn’t like the political opinion of one of the presenters.

First, there’s a shockingly unprofessional aspect to this. The hard-working GMB team had spent several days producing the segment. These things just don’t pop up on screen.

The interview had also been extensively trailed since yesterday so our viewers were also let down. They include many of the same people who pay good money to see McGregor’s movies.

He said he'd do it only if my cohost Susanna Reid did it alone, without me - despite the fact it's been teased for days and a lot of people had put a lot of work into producing the segment

Then there’s the political aspect.

Ewan McGregor is a very angry man when it comes to his politics.

A flick through his Twitter feed today revealed a man absolutely enraged by both Donald Trump’s ascent to the presidency, and by Britain’s decision to leave the European Union.

His fury at the latter may strike some as slightly disingenuous given that McGregor himself quit the EU years ago to go and live the life of a pampered millionaire movie star in Hollywood. But I’ll leave others to decide whether that is hypocritical or not.

One thing’s for sure: Ewan McGregor wants you all to know, very very loudly, that he HATES TRUMP AND BREXIT.

What democracy doesn’t entitle him to do is ban or punish others if their political opinions happen to differ from his. That’s the behaviour reserved for dictators like Kim Jong Un in North Korea.

That’s fine. Nearly half of those who voted in the US election and EU referendum didn’t agree either. But both results came after free, fair elections. It’s called democracy.

Of course, that same democracy means Ewan McGregor’s perfectly entitled to have an opinion.

Unfortunately, what democracy doesn’t entitle him to do is ban or punish others if their political opinions happen to differ from his.

That’s the behavior reserved for dictators like Kim Jong Un in North Korea. (Against whom there has been no global march, ironically, despite his disgusting oppression of women.)

My argument against the Women’s March, as I wrote yesterday, was not that women shouldn’t be allowed to march. That is everybody’s right in a democratic society.

It was that it seemed to serve no real purpose other than creating an outlet for women to vent their wrath at the fact Trump beat Hillary Clinton, thus preventing her becoming the first female president.

The speakers reflected this fury. Foul-mouthed Madonna, who had previously offered ‘free blowjobs’ to anyone who voted for her friend Hillary, talked of thinking about blowing up the White House; Ashley Judd read cruel incest jokes against his daughter Ivanka Trump; and many of the signs carried by protestors were as crude and offensive as they deem the new President to be.

This wasn’t a ‘celebration of love’, as the organizers claimed, nor even a cry for gender equality. It was a political rally that wanted to show the world women hate Donald Trump.

Well, I don’t hate him. He’s a good friend of mine. I wouldn’t have voted for him even if I could because I don’t agree with many of his political views from guns to climate change. Nor do I defend his more offensive comments about women or Muslims.

I don't hate Trump - he’s a good friend of mine, though I wouldn’t have voted for him. I don't defend his more offensive comments about women or Muslims. But I do think he might turn out to be an effective president. How weird it must be to only speak to people who agree with you?

But I do think he might turn out to be a surprisingly effective president, and as NFL superstar Tom Brady, another friend of Trump’s who has also been criticized for not disowning him, said yesterday: ‘It’s just a friendship. Why the big deal? He’s been very good to me for a long time. If you know someone (as a friend) it doesn’t mean you agree with everything they say or do.’

Exactly.

I have many friends and family members with whom I disagree about politics.

How weird it must be to only speak to people who agree with you?

As soon as McGregor posted his tweet this morning, social media erupted. The luvvie lemmings, naturally, all raced to offer him their support. But many other people didn’t, and questioned why if he felt this strongly he didn’t argue the issue with me on air rather than running away?

Sadly, that’s not the way many entertainers behave any more.

They control everything they do through small armies of sycophantic managers, lawyers and publicists, and prefer to make political statements that remain unchallenged.

This was typified by Meryl Streep’s extraordinarily pompous and elitist anti-Trump speech at the recent Golden Globes.

Today’s announcement of the Oscars nominations merely served to remind us of last year’s Academy Awards, when virtually every winner turned their acceptance speech into some kind of political tirade.

I dread to think what will happen this year now that Donald Trump is President. But I’d stake a large bet Hollywood stars will compete to see who can savage Trump in the worst possible manner.

My argument against the Women’s March was that it seemed to serve no real purpose other than creating an outlet for women like foul-mouthed Madonna to vent their wrath. Celebrities prefer to make political statements that remain unchallenged - typified by Meryl Streep’s speech at the Golden Globes. I hate to think how Oscar speeches will go

They think that by doing this they make themselves hugely popular, just as British stars think they do by attacking Brexit and those who campaigned and voted for it.

Yet in reality, all they do is anger and upset half their audience who don’t agree with them.

I hesitate to give these celebrities any advice because most of them are too pampered, cossetted and arrogant to want to hear it.

But it’s worth remembering the words of Elvis Presley, who was a bigger superstar than all of them put together.

‘I want to remain apolitical,’ he said, ‘because I don’t think it’s right for me to use my celebrity and fame to persuade other people to think like me. I think everybody should make their own decisions about how they vote.’

There’s a reason he was called The King.

His subjects loved him for his music and performing, not for his ability to force fans to share his politics too.

Ewan McGregor had his fun with me today and gained plenty of publicity for his movie in the process, which may well have been his main motivation all along.

He’ll be feted for the furore in Hollywood, where to criticize something like the Women’s March is deemed a crime punishable by public stoning. (Talking of which, when’s the march against Saudi Arabia’s treatment of women, which is 1000 times worse than Donald Trump’s?)

But by refusing to be interviewed by me simply because I have a different opinion about a political march, McGregor revealed himself to be a narrow-minded, stupendously self-aggrandising, anti-democratic little twerp.

Perhaps everyone who voted Trump or Brexit should now boycott his movies?

After all, judging by the way he boycotted me this morning, that’s exactly what vainglorious Ewan would do to them if he were in their shoes.

Finally, Ewan McGregor will be the toast of every woman who marched on Saturday, for standing up for women’s rights.

Buddies: Had we done the interview, I might have asked the father of four girls how his heroic support for women justified him working for Roman Polanski, a self-confessed and convicted child abuser, on the film, The Ghostwriter

Had we done the interview, I might have asked him how his heroic support for women justified him working for director Roman Polanski, a self-confessed and convicted child abuser, on the film, The Ghostwriter.

Polanksi pleaded guilty to the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl, then fled America to escape a lengthy prison sentence.

‘He’s a legendary filmmaker, one of the best,’ gushed McGregor in a 2010 interview about the pedophile, for whom Meryl Streep once gave a standing ovation at the Oscars.

A new warrant was issued for Polanski’s arrest during the movie’s post-production stage.

McGregor, who has four young daughters, was asked about it and said: ‘I felt sad for Roman because he’s an old man who I’m incredibly fond of. I like him as a man.’