on traveling you back on the so i'm, you know, obviously do with a 2nd to say that right. and they're appealing be the 1st is decision by can to, you know, based on extensive a medical evidence that by the way, corresponds exactly to the findings that you know, we can to, with my own medical team visited julian asunder bel, martian bank of may 2019, he's in no position to be expedited to a prison system. 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 place, given that he's not committed any crime was, you know, this is what it's better about. as you know, he's a flight risk because he saw 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 rates are 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

this case. if you look at that 1st instance judgement, that was, that's not a mixture it for the julie, not sanji or you know, candle for during the suns himself or for press freedom on for that matter. it is a try because it, in a legal proceeding, prejudicial always goes through 2 or 3 instance. why 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 extradited than julia sans would have appealed and he would have brought all those questions of press freedom of political offence, political motivation in that prosecution, the attempt of assassination and came having all those things he would have brought to the high court. maria after to switch much stronger independence and expertise, but it was quite smart by the u. s. and the u. k. 2,

it's arranged the other one, so they don't extra ride in the 1st instance they, they basically confirmed a whole narrative about your finance act acquisitions of everything and set the precedent to criminalize investigative journalist for that matter. but they will only bring those questions to the appeals court that they want to have reconsidered, which is dounia sanders state of health and their present condition. and now mind you, their present 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 with regard to the conditions of retention, which makes it very difficult from a high court. now to refuse extradition. 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 in given what you just said is it sends him of a wiki leaks, lawyer edwards. gerald, you see to me in a way, excepting the criminalization of journalism and appealing to the judges,

all royd and burnett that look, he shouldn't be expedited 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 bears to, 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 sounds of the legal proceedings, and yes, it is a scandal that you know the espionage acting, the u. s. in itself is the official secrets act in the you. k in itself is a scandal because both of them criminalized 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 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 that 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. 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 don't know and show me a tv set of reuters journalists being gunned down by and i got to gun ships for both of us could be tortured, we can be subject to a u. s. secretary of state claiming that we were a non state or cell 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,

that clip. we had the evidence that adored for it was actually murdered. and there was no, you know, that was not a medical crisis, it was not a trace of self defense, or it was just no, no justification. and but in back a public protests against santa bullies police brutality which, you know, the authority not being able to avoid prosecuting those official. unfortunately, in the case of collateral murder, there are simply has been a completely different narrative of the u. s. going out parents and you know, fighting terrorism and so on. and 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 a late lay people to actually understand that full picture. and you said, believe what the mainstream press is 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. they lots of support as of june, innocent. 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 t. i cannot speak for them. 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 that on human rights and human dignity on the integrity of our rule of law, institution of our judiciary, independence of our traditional is 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 crops. let's see, has been proven. you know, this whole sectional 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 to even charge them of any offense whatsoever. after 9 years, this was instrumental iced to demonize. you know, this, the thing about him 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 mix as well after they have been made accessible by a password being published by 2 guardian journalists and stayed in the weekly journal fi 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 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 the impunity of 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 a government misconduct, obviously that proliferates and we have only one. we can weeks that we have $15000.00 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 the 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 sat 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 you know, 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, she continued to torture him and that's exactly what they do. they isolate him, they keep him in that limbo and just put his record straight for everybody doing this and he's 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 young. 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 expedition

proceeding as a did image, we have to somehow secure his presence. it can be in house arrest. that's what it is. it was the pin or say he was protected by the u. k. government to put him in a villa. my does. hatcher visited him, the brought embassy. and as soon as he, you know, a doctor, a test that she had some problems to concentrate and had slight forms of amnesia. he was fumbled out. maybe not even facing a dutch do. his son who has a great, you know, medical harm has been close to him in the last decade to that, to a constant, you know, isolation, defamation, and abuse. and up, i come from anxiety that he suffers and he's being isolated absolutely, unnecessarily and therefore unlawful. so she is continuously also arbitrarily detained. 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 a head of the weekends called 26 conference. well, the similar can we have about to have going underground. ah with school is the child begins with which one is a small window, let him go out with water with issue

with getting near more, i need to go put that amount with power store and with talk driven by dreamer shaped bank. concur some of those with chairs sinks. we dare to ask

a ah, welcome back. eyebrows raised the head of tomorrow's cop. 26 summers in glasgow and morris johnson's goldman sachs employee turned you. k. chancellor richie sooner accused his budget to cut taxes on car 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 had gorgeous, 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 involved in this country, but i guess it's called 26. so i got to start by asking you, why is they worth? johnson's chancellor, richie swag, incentivizing airplane travel and car driving. i think that's one of the big

disappointed me. 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 i want to show 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. but boy johnson had to sign off on this and his wife certainly is a keen environmentalist 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 markets such it was one of the 1st to raise awareness of climate crisis at the united nation many years ago. so it is possible for them to be aware of this, but yes, not 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. i mean, is that emblematic of the flights of hand this wage boost ensures we're making work and keepers on track to meet our target to end low pay by the end of this parliament without really figuring out what effect that'll have on say the lowest wages of attacks actual insurance, so some people, some people on some of the poorest households will see their incomes rising. but then the total effect of the other reforms, the reforms to the benefit system means that their incomes will in fact fall. so it's a really difficult thing to untangle and what he is trying to you 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 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 again, 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, it's really minimal. yeah. but i mean, e is cutting the bank levy surcharge buy in effect 660 percent. why do you think he's doing that? we're getting 2 thirds of those on the welfare universal credit, which he cut money from. no extra benefit from the gold taper. our international

viewers will wonder, wouldn't earth we're talking about. but why? i mean, is he trying to contact his own banks or that they remember him when they drive by british debt? what does that, this is a populist government with an atc majority and they want to maintain that majority in those constituencies where there are no for a 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 balance this, these, these different challenges. and they finding that difficult. but i'm, 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 owners,

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 are 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. and that will rule because the poor as we will spend everybody, they are in the rich think keep it in the bank or by offshore property arguably, you know, we talked on this program, sheffield, but also because of brick set, at course the ongoing impact of breakfast on the british economy is going to deepen

the damage or failure to exploit bricks that of your brakes. a tier of history, jeffrey elizabeth esvito said the city of london cost the british economy 4 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, 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 chevy 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'm, 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. so as they will face trouble over here. i mean, people going, this is a,

sounded 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 voucher, right? this is a left wing budget. well, i mean on the one hand that is being fed and it's also the case that tory back bench is a very unhappy with the level of tax. right? and this is a tax and spend government 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 doesn'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 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, that 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 way. and this distance itself from the 2010 to an 2016 torrie government under georgia, osborne and distance itself from that kind of policies that were attach right? we really difficult to separate yourself from the david cameron government, which is reduced expenditure to, i mean, the cuts were more than one of the napoleonic wars. well, the point is that, i mean, i think it's ridiculous that they, them pretending that there is different government. there are different political party that i 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 time. again, i know you advise those government 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 treated that as well. danny blanch flora, a friend of the show was on the military 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 as shown. and 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 noticed 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. we've all known all along the seattle or is actually just an extension of her majesty's treasury. there's never believe they say they really tell until 5 year for god, for the economy, the folk as a company, the budget, the corporate, via by good tax, the very standard statement we got from we, 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 is being used to arguably a al qaeda link rebels in syria. it's used as an 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 the mora aid can be used as a foreign policy tool by government as the host of the of of cop trench 6 and it's 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 of the objection to the 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. but it's, but it's cost of this package of, on the one hand, contracting the economy on the other hand, or, you know, doing a you turn on aid to low income countries. and certainly just ignoring the,

the security threat to the british people of climate breakdown. and the extraordinary thing is that in the opinion polls it is still maintaining public support. i'm heather. thank you. that said for one of your favorite shows of last season, we'll be back on wednesday, the 12th of january, but until then stay safe. and you can watch all our interviews by subscribing to our youtube channel and falling us on all our social media. and it has to be rash to be able to afford anytime. and find the luxury that for sure. despite having the most expensive outcast system in the world, we have poor life expectancy. we have higher infant mortality. we have

more deaths from treatable causes. so americans are suffering every day from it. it's as if these people don't count as how, how they can choose your customers and dump the sick so also satisfy their wall street investors. no parents should have to see what i saw. so if you're denying payment for someone's care, your make life and death decision and determine to get to live and who dies to me, that's best getting away with murder. mm mm. mm mm. mm

. the writings sweep catholic stone over storing fuel prices. it's comforting the government to resign. the president, his vowing the harsh responds, calling the protest, a threat to national security. well then one that catholic town protested the film trying to the top of the statue of the former president. not that a buyer or 2 in the headline to not see the french president emanuel macro and results, so rather bad language to take a swipe, but unvaccinated citizens. these remarks come amid a heated debate of the national assembly on whether or not to bring in the passes the.