why did you k b, a morris, johnson's x, goldman sachs chancellor, just slashed taxes on fossil fuels and champagne in a country where one in 4 children live in poverty. all the same, all coming up and today's going underground. but 1st, let's go straight to the case of the world's most famous publisher. joining me now from switzerland at this pivotal moment is the un router and torture. neil's meltzer is evidence has been used in julian sanchez defense. thank you so much, niels for coming back on you have been told by british politicians, i understand not to interfere with our court system in this specific case. are we now know that the joe biden administration's, the crown prosecution lawyer here, proxy lawyer here. now james lewis qsc says julian assange, his health is fine, he can be expedited to face a possible 175 years in a, in the united states in jail. like you are traveling you back on the show. i'm, you know, obviously you would expect to say that, right, amber, appealing be the 1st instance decisions i can to, you know,

based on extensive medical evidence that by the way, corresponds exactly to the findings, stats. you know, we can to, with my own medical, cheaper visitor julian asunder bel martian banker of may 2000 my cheese in no position to be extra either to a prison system or, you know, as the one in the us. and, you know, i just like to take a step back here. the actual discussion is that he should not even be in prison. why? why is he being, you know, and neither in the 1st was given that he's not committed any crime was, you know, it's better uh, better as you know, he's a flight risk because he sought to political asylum and gained it in london. and all his journalism, as it were, does not protect him from the u. s. espionage act. that's what judgment as a breakthrough said, that's why it's only his health. that's a consideration. i'm really glad you mentioned that because that's the scandal in the states. if you look at that 1st instance judgement, now snap smart,

a mixture it for the julie massage or, you know, capital for during the suns himself or for press freedom one for that matter. it is a truck because in a legal proceeding for a tradition always goes through 2 or 3 incidents by not extra riding him in the 1st madison court level. what that did legally speaking, is that he puts the us in the position to appeal. otherwise, had he been extroverted than julia found, would have appealed and he would have brought all those questions of press freedom of political offence, political motivation in that prosecution. a tense of assassination and kidnapping. all those things he would have brought to the high court level. maria f judges, which much stronger independence and expertise, but it was quite smart by the u. s. the u. k. 2 to have it arranged the other one, so they don't extroverted. and then the 1st instance they, they basically confirmed a whole narrative about us. you're not actually sessions of everything and set the

precedent criminalizing basic the journalist for that matter, but they will only bring those questions to the appeals court that they want to have to consider. but just to the us under state of health and their prison conditions. and now mind you, their prison conditions is absolutely in their control. they can make diplomatic guarantees at any stage of to any extent to neutralize those concerns. they can offer medical services, they can offer no guarantees when they go to the conditions of attention, which makes it very difficult for the high court. now to refuse extra yes, james, the excuse. he seemed to be saying, we have a psychiatric asylum. we can throw julian sans into if he has mental problems once a extradited it, given what you just said, is it sensible for wiki leaks, lawyer edwards, gerald, you see to me in a way, excepting the criminalization of journalism and appealing to the judges. all right, and burnett that look, you shouldn't be to night because of that early

a judgement. and this is what it is you, you know, the global sales, you know, cases of torture all around the world. isn't it more normal for a defense barrister to be claiming this court isn't even as something that you me should be respected. you already criminalize journalism, your judicial system. we shouldn't accept anything from this court. well, the question is that the moral stance? but the question is, how much is that gonna help julian? the sanction the legal proceedings? and yes, it is a scandal batch. you know, the su madge acting, the u. s. in itself is campbell, the official secrets act, and the u. k. in itself is a scandal because both of them criminalized the disclosure of secret information, irrespective of public interest. the high court cat changed and they can certainly they can certainly, you know, be reasonable and apply the law to the the medical states that you know junior passengers and they know exactly what the prison conditions are like in the us. as

far as i know, the defense team has also crossed the peel. it's just at the cross appeal, which then brings all those other questions before. but that obviously will only be dealt with if the u. s. is successful in it's. so before we get to that stage, just to be clear as things stand right now in london, if you were about to suddenly, i dunno and show me a tv set of reuters journalists being gunned down by and i got the gun ships for both of us could be tortured, we could be subject to a u. s. secretary of state claiming that we were a non state or sale actors word. he was as nation on the streets of london that, that president has already been said and could be extradited. that, that's all fine. it's just the suicide risk. well, you know, think about the murder of george floyd, which was recorded on video and only because of that video check that that clip. we had the evidence that george floyd was actually murdered and there was no,

you know, that was not a medical crisis. it was not a case of self defense or something. it was just, no, no, just the cache. and, but in back a, a public protests against santa police police brutality which, you know, the authority is not being able to avoid prosecuting those officials. unfortunately, in the case of collateral murder, there are simply has been a completely different narrative of, you know, the u. s. going out there and you know, fighting terrorism and so on, that it's very, very difficult for an average citizen who doesn't have privileged access to, you know, what actually happens behind the curtains of policy making. they actually believe that narrative, very difficult for late lay people to actually understand that full picture. i you said, believe what the mainstream press this tell you that when you started your special united nations investigation into the case of judy and assange you were,

you weren't alone, lots of supporters of judy and such, but there weren't so many groups to day. every major human rights and free speech organization in the world. a backs your allegations arguably have. why then do you think it's not a big a mainstream media story? it is here or not he. i cannot speak for him. i think it's a scandal that it isn't because, i mean this is the absolutely key case on press freedom on freedom of expression, but far beyond on human rights and human dignity on the integrity of our rule of law. institutions of our destroys to independence of our traditional is the, you know, the transparency, right? to know that people have a right to know what their governments are doing with the tax money and the power that we, the people delegates to our government. this is about our rights, you know, it's about your ability to oversee,

to control you know, the integrity of, of, of your government. because if that becomes a crime, we're doing an essentially done, you know, nothing that he has been accused except receiving and publishing evidence for less. you have been proven. you know, this whole section allegations have been dropped by sweden, not because it's, you know, expired or something like this. but because they didn't have enough evidence. even types of any offense whatsoever. after 9 years, this was instrumental iced to demonize. you know, this, the thing about human having blood is, i mean, it's a ridiculous claim because we know that the u. s. government for, you know, what an a decade has not been able to advance a single case individual who may have been put in danger. because of those publications even know now that you know essentially not even the 1st person who

publish those under acted files. but he made them accessible on we can use as well after they have been made accessible by a passer being published by 2 guardian journalists and stayed in the weekly journal for talking in germany. and she did so only after he had taken contact with the white house and tried to do damage control because of the, the leaks by those other actors. but what we know is that the evidence that she has, that's not about people being threatened, that people being portrait, people being great. people being murdered, you know, under front of her running camera at these people have never been trusted. have never been how to account and so this is really what this is about. it's about protecting to impunity. criminals of corrupt politicians. this is what this is about. so we want to intimidate the person who has come up with

a general idea how to use the internet to allow whistleblowers to remain anonymous while transmitting. you know, millions of files that prove government misconduct. obviously if that proliferates and you have only one which weeks that we have 15000, which leaks around the world, then you know, the kind of security establishment with their secrecy, they can pack up and leave with their business model. they really have to start then applying democratic principles being subject to democratic oversights, respect to rule of law, and that's just not today's reality. his finally am, i don't know whether that means the journalist themselves, their minds are arbitrarily detained. but i don't know whether you caught glimpses of julian assange at the trial this week. he doesn't look well. his partner selim, or as his father john shipped and they, they will look worried. what will it mean for whistleblowers and publishers in the

global south on torture? nobody detention what would it mean for, for journalism v if he, if he does, it's probably time. now when we start asking this question, if he dies in london under the jurisdiction of british authorities here. well, if you see a guy in prison, he has effectively been tortured to death. that's the reality of it. i mean, i am not exaggerate. it has been working in areas of war. i have long history of visiting prisoners. i visited during their sons and i have to specialize forensic doctors with me in a psychiatrist evaluating him for hours, and no be all independently from each other kendra's conclusions. at that time his life was in danger, and he sure enough, a few days after we left the prison he entered the downward spiral. during the sound is not mentally ill. yes, he has a slight form of autism, as you know many people do, but he is very resilient, intelligent man. and so he does not belong in a mental institution. right?

so if he has a mental issue now, it's because of abuse that he has suffer. and you cannot, you cannot get someone to recover from torture by continuing, continuing to torture him. and that's exactly what they do. they isolate him, they keep him in back limbo. busy and just put the record straight for everybody doing this. i'm not serving a sentence. he's not even accused of a any anything that would be criminal. he is being held in extradition detention to, as you said, to prevent his escape in case he should be extra. yes, but he does not need to be in belmar prison for that. even if you, even if we assume for the purpose of the argument that yes back extradition proceeding is the did image, we have to somehow secure his presence. it can be in house arrest. that's what it is, it was the p no say he was protected by the u. k. government to put them in

a villa. my does. hatcher visited him and brought him misty. and as soon as he, you know, a doctor, a test that, that he had some problems to concentrate and had slight forms of amnesia. he was fumbled out, maybe not even facing a judge doing his son who has been great, you know, medical harm has been close to him in the last decade to that, to a constant. you know, i solution defamation and abuse. and i come from anxiety that he suffers and he's being isolated, absolutely unnecessary, and therefore unlawful. so she is continuously also arbitrarily to change. it would be a tragedy if she lost his life in those circumstances. he went special opportunity . thank you. thank you very much. after the break, the queen putin and she may not be going, but why did the budget of the boards, johnson government, just sabotage. net 0 tongue. it's the head of the weekends called 26 conference.

well, the to more can we have about to have going underground prices are just going up and people are hiding in by serving smaller portion at the same prices. we've seen this at the grocery store with packaged good packets, cookie toiletries like out toothpaste and mouth wash, coming in smaller packages, but the same price. people haven't noticed it when things are getting out of control with . mm. welcome back. eyebrows raised the head of tomorrow's cop, 26 summers in glasgow. and boris johnson's goldman sachs employee to and you k. johnson. richey snack, used his budget to cut taxes on color, driving little and dislodged taxes on champagne. joining me that from suffolk in

england is an award winning advisor to governments around the world, the director of primal policy research in macroeconomics and peasant. and thanks so much for coming back on big argument going underground headquarters. i have to say, because when you watch the television, they're saying, you know, not a bad budgets and a lot of slight of hand. some were saying, you know, one and 4 children are in poverty in this country, but i guess it's called 26. so i've got to start by asking you, why is they worth? johnson's chancellor. richie select, incentivizing airplane, travel, and car driving. i think that's one of the big display. is she should. i key seems to think that the financial system and the treasury sits of heart from something called the ecosystem, the environment, and it doesn't, it's very much a part of it. so what the shows you, that the graph, the gravity of the climate breakdown of the crisis that we face of climate breakdown and biodiversity that gravity hasn't yet reached him. and that's

extraordinarily wiring boys. johnson had to sign off on this and his wife certainly is a keen environmentalist. ringback to be fetch the conservative government, they are going quite a lot further than we expected them to you and we have to ruin that that market such it was one of the 1st to raise awareness also climate crisis at the united nation many years ago. so it is possible for them to be aware of this, but yes, not to undertake the policy, a reforms that a needed to actually adapt asked to this threat. well, he did say the minimum wage is going up by means that emblematic of the slides of hand this wage boost ensures we're making work brand. keep us on track to meet our target to win lou pay by the end of this parliament without really figuring out what effect that'll have and say, the lowest wages of attack search insurance. so some of the paper, some people on some of the poorest households will see their income's rising. but

then the total effect of the other reforms, the reforms to the benefit system means that their income is will in fact fall. so it's, it's a really difficult thing to untangle and what he is trying to do, and what i think is interesting is that this conservative government is trying to cover up if you like, the mistakes that have been made over the last 11 years since dark george osborne's a budget in 2010 am and it cuts to the public sector that has been inflicted since then. and del, enormous damage to the economy. then to get in to try and cover up the back that be getting to try and reverse that. and they're doing it in ways that are unfortunately still quite shallow. so for example, expenditure on education is going up, but it's intended to reach the same levels. it was in 201210 level of investment in 2010 by 2024. so and have are,

is they are trying to improve on those cut so that, that austerity, it's a bit really minimal. yeah. but i e is cutting the bank levy surcharge by in effect 660 percent. why do you think he is doing that while getting 2 thirds of those on the welfare universal credit, which he cut money from? no extra benefit from the school. the taper, our international viewers will wonder, wouldn't earth we're talking about. but why? i mean, is he trying to contact his own bank so that they remember him when they joined by british debt? what is it doing it? this is a populist government with an atc majority and they want to maintain that majority in those constituencies where there are an awful lot of poor people and very few goldman sachs bankers. but it's the same time they of course are in hoc to the

city of london and to their donors who are, you know, we're not from the red hall seats. so they've got to bounce this, these, these different challenges. and they finding that difficult. but for me, the really worrying thing action is that actually what they're doing is damaging the economy further. so from the macroeconomic perspective, you can do give, you know, tax breaks to the bankers, but by increasing taxes on average earners essentially by, by building up the level of taxation to 36 percent of g d p. you are in fact taking money out of the economy, you're taking spending money out of the economy. and simultaneously wage is not rising relative to re inflation. so we see a real cut in incomes. this combination of falling and stagnating comes on the one hand and tax revenues being taken out of the economy on the other. while investment

levels of investment remain low and all gain to remain low as long as the threat of interest rate sells. that means that the macroeconomy is not going to expand. there's not going to be increased economic activity over the next period. that for is because the poor as people spend every penny they have and the rich think, keep it in the bank or buy off your property arguably, you know, we talked on this program, sheffield, but that also because breaks it was the ongoing impact. brexton be, she company is gated, it deepen the damage or failure to exploit bricks. if you're a brick, the tier of this, the sheffield is, if it has the you know, said the city of london cost, the british economy $4.00 and a half trillion between 1995201570000 pounds, a personal tune of years of output. i mean, we've set it on this brew instead of reducing taxes on the city of london. oh, would it be better for the economy for it to be burned down?

i have to be honest the you know, that the city of london is a major source of tax revenues for the government. and so yeah, that should it isn't the chevron university. so it was clear that if you add it all in all the hidden subsidies to the city of london, you add in all, obviously there we have the bailouts from january. they are a net loss to this economy. there is no point in them being that's true, but that's also true for the globally can action it. wow. yes. so, but, i mean, i, i, as you know, i'm, i'm, i'm well known as the fact that i think the city of london is unhelpful to the stability of the british economy. but, you know, it's, as it is, and the government is determined to support it. and to defend it, as is indeed the governor of the bank of england and, and at the same time neglecting, if you like the real economy where things are made and grown and expanded. and that

neglect is going to make it harder to keep land as an attractive venue for, for the global financial, for those active in global financial system. what do you think of how the mainstream television media cover budgets in this country? there's been a lot of criticism of the stimulus package in the united states and barrel of politics as they will face trouble over here. i mean, people going, this is a standard laboratory type of budget which, you know, he's showing himself to be a keynesian. and so on and he's, he's a, he's not fatter, right? this is a left wing budget. well, i mean on the one hand that is being fed and it's also the case said, tory back bench is a very unhappy with the level of tax. right. and this is a tax and spend go and by the way i, i resent the implication that it's keynesian kits, kansas is not

a texas bender. but the fact of the matter is that this is a government that is behaving very differently from previous conservative governments. and i think the media don't fully understand how to handle it, but it's definitely, you know, there's definitely a populist government that is trying to appeal to much broadest way of the electric then with thrashing taxes and champagne and beer. i mean, because it was clear that when the minister was asked on television about whether this will raise the standard of living, they didn't want to be drawn on it. and one resolution foundation, things said that everyone is going to be worse off in the next few years. yeah, that's true. i mean, there's a lot of contradictions, analyst. there are a lot of contradictions in what this government is trying to do. but i would argue that it is popular in the sense that it's trying to deal away. and this distance itself from the 2010 to an 2016 torrie government under georgia,

born and distance itself from that kind of policies that were attach right. we've lived well just separate yourself from the david cameron government, which i reduce to expenditure to, i mean, the cuts were more than more than napoleonic was. well, the point is that, i mean, i think it's ridiculous that they, them pretending that there are different, there are different political party, but i've seen political parties change their, their colors in the past. and this is what they're trying to do well with us before labor privatization found them. again, i know you advised those governors or the you to advise mass privatization just to help our viewers here in britain because they'll see the office of budget responsibility. what is, what is that because it's treated with such respect, my journalist and i think you tweet it out as well. danny blanch flora, a friend of the show was on the monetary policy committee. said the officer, budget responsibility is repeatedly got to say group productivity growth, wrong time and time and time again. and yet journalists go,

let's go straight here for more information on every once in the future for everyday life in this country. well, i think in, as i agree with you, the o. b, r is incredibly orthodox in the way it approaches these that the british economy and has made an awful lot of wrong predictions is danny blanche has shown an i think it is beginning to lose credibility with media because it got so much wrong in the spring of this year when it predicted said so things were going to be far worse than they've turned out to be. so i think you're being a bit unfair to the media because they do, they have noticed, i notice this and i think it's quite ha, under its new management for the o, b, r, to uphold its reputation as, as a sound, a sounding board for the government and we've all known all along the u. r is actually just an extension of her majesty's treasury. there's never been there is

a really detailed until 5 year forecast for the economy. the forecast company, the budget, a corporate mm. bye, good tax. the very standard statement. we got really, we are being very kind to journalists, i have to say just finally quickly on the aid and we've covered on this program, our aid has been used to arguably a al qaeda link rebels in syria. it's used as a arm of the foreign office here and even the intelligence services they persuaded him to say, look, we will go back to point 7 percent aid so that a more aid can be used as a foreign policy tool by government as the host of the of of cop trench 6 and this climate conference, the government has to pressure other governors into coming up with a $100000000000.00 a year which has been promised to poor countries to help tackle climate breakdown. and the fact they've cut their own or source their own grants to poor countries

is as proved incredibly embarrassing and tories in the house of lords have objected to this story party has objected to the so they beginning to pull back up me. but you know, this again is just an example of the kind of chaotic and very difficult to understand a politics of this, of this government bird. it's, but it's cost of this package of, on the $1.00 hand, contracting the economy on the other hand, or you know, doing a you turn on age to low income countries. and certainly just ignoring the, the security threat to the bridge, people of climate breakdown. and the extraordinary thing is that in the opinion polls it is still maintaining public support guy. mm hm. thank you. that's over the show. we'll be back on monday when we discuss cop 26 with britain's former climate change minister and 11 years. he was sort of a month when wiki leaks. julie in the science published redacted hundreds of thousands of us diplomatic cables, detailing deceit on

a global scale until then keep in touch by social media and let us know if you think this week's london sons court hearing was a u. k. sponsored show trial. ah, it has to be rash, to be able to afford any time and find the luxury that for sure. despite having the most expensive health care system in the world, we have poor life expectancy. we have higher infant mortality. we have more data from treatable causes. so americans are suffering every day from it. it's as if these people don't count. i saw how they can choose their customers and

dump a sick so also a can satisfy their wall street investors know parents that have to see what i saw. if you're denying payment for someone's care, your make life and death decisions and determine who gets to live and who dies to me, that's best getting away with murder and i drink shaped banks, interesting things with ah dares thinks we dare to ask

in ah, let him a potent cold for mutual recognition of cobra, vaccines pointing out not all countries of essential medicine like that for fighting the pandemic. still, the russian president making the statement this she has g 20 summit in francois the budget cut. so leading to severe stuff, shortage is, as the top scientist claim, national health system, that is on the brink of collapse with a pandemic taking hold once more. but i see that cause it's the government is to blame. the shortage of medical france is the only country in the world that has been cutting funding during the pandemic medical staff, outrageous bibles ready to quit over in warranty. i.