TRIGGERnometry - 8 Times TRIGGERnometry Predicted the Future

Episode Date: November 14, 2022

SPONSORED by Established Titles: a fun and novel way to preserve the natural woodlands of Scotland whilst helping global reforestation efforts. Established Titles is running a massive Early Black Friday Sale right now, plus if you use the code TRIGGERNOMETRY you get an additional 10% off. Go to EstablishedTitles.com/TRIGGERNOMETRY to get your gifts now! SPONSORED by Emma Sleep, who create wonderful beds and mattresses at an affordable price. Use our link: www.emma-mattress.co.uk/trigger to get an extra 5% off existing discounts, plus free shipping, delivery and returns, and a 10 year warranty. Go to www.emma-mattress.co.uk/trigger now! Here at TRIGGERnometry, we've noticed that our guests are often ahead of the curve. We've put together a compilation of some of these occasions in the hope that you will find it as interesting as we did! Guests and their episodes: Mike Driver: https://youtu.be/tJdTKLhp3Go Jim Rickards and Pippa Malmgren: https://youtu.be/xu4gd_r1tsY Peter Hitchens: https://youtu.be/jERxPhrY_18 Marcus Evans: https://youtu.be/tJ_bD6N1zNw Nigel Farage: https://youtu.be/tMH-jBtgrBs Join our exclusive TRIGGERnometry community on Locals! https://triggernometry.locals.com/ OR Support TRIGGERnometry Here: https://www.subscribestar.com/trigger... https://www.patreon.com/triggerpod Bitcoin: bc1qm6vvhduc6s3rvy8u76sllmrfpynfv94qw8p8d5 Music by: Xentric | [e-mail] | https://www.xentricapc.com/ | Channel ID: UCo_8zzSxKeL3arKWVuP8wdQ Buy Merch Here: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/shop/ Advertise on TRIGGERnometry: [e-mail] Join the Mailing List: https://www.triggerpod.co.uk/sign-up/ Find TRIGGERnometry on Social Media: https://twitter.com/triggerpod​​​/ https://www.facebook.com/triggerpod/ https://www.instagram.com/triggerpod/ About TRIGGERnometry: Stand-up comedians Konstantin Kisin (@konstantinkisin) and Francis Foster (@francisjfoster) make sense of politics, economics, free speech, AI, drug policy and WW3 with the help of presidential advisors, renowned economists, award-winning journalists, controversial writers, leading scientists and notorious comedians. 00:00 Intro 03:30 A Welcome from Konstantin & Francis 04:32 Mike Driver on Civil Liberties 10:58 Jim Rickards & Pippa Malmgren on Inflation 19:35 Peter Hitchens on the Cost of Lockdown 29:22 Marcus Evans on the Tavistock Child Gender Clinic 43:31 Nigel Farage on the Energy Crisis Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I never trust people empowered to give the keys back. They really don't like giving it back. My biggest fear is the civil liberties implication of what will come after this. Down the road, when I say down the road, I mean a year, two years from now, there is a risk of very serious inflation. And I think we will look back on this if we ever have a chance to do so with an impartial inquiry and say, how on earth did we go mad to this percent?

It simply wasn't justified. And I think there will be, when this is examined, a fair number of excess deaths. This is political belief and ideology over rational, scientific argument. I still don't think people understand what's about to happen. I really don't think they understand that we leave ourselves vulnerable

at some point of a not too distant future to blackouts. It's about to blow up this year. It's about a blow up. Scottish Wildlife? Yeah, I love Glasgow on a Friday night. No, you idiot, I mean Scottish birds. Oh, you mean Morad? Nah, we're not seeing each other anymore.

If you do love Scottish natural woodlands and the wildlife, then you have to check out Established Titles. They're selling one square foot of dedicated land with a unique plot number on a private estate in Edelston in Scotland and an official certificate with a crest. Established titles is a fun and novel way to preserve the natural woodlands of Scotland whilst helping global reforestation efforts. It's a project based on a historic Scottish custom where landowners are referred to as lords.

The Scottish call them lords because they can't spell lords. It's the whiskey. I'm going to ignore that. They plant a tree with every order and work with global charities, one tree planted and trees for the future to support global reforestation efforts. You could officially include the title Lord All-Aid on your credit card, plane tickets, dating profiles, etc. It makes a great last-minute gift unless you're a socialist and you want the aristocracy abolished. Established Titles is actually running a massive early Black Friday sale right now.

Plus, if you use a code Trigonometry, you get an additional 10% off. Go to Establishedtitles.com slash Trigonometry to get your gifts now. Go to Establishedtitles.com slash Trigonometry and get 10% of this wonderful gift. Hello, Stavros, this is Lord Foster of Croydon, mate. Yes, what I want, kebab, salt and pepper, extra, chili sauce, salt and vinegar on the chips. What do you mean, you're shut?

I'm a lord, you should always be open for me. Hello and welcome to Trigonometry. I'm Francis Foster. I'm Constantine Kissen. And this is a show for you if you want honest conversations with fascinating people. We have a collection of guests for you today, but before that, we should explain why we're sitting in front of a black curtain again.

And the reason is our new studio is being built literally as we speak. So this is what we're doing with it at the moment. But rest assured, it will be back very, very shortly. And as those of you who are locals know, it's going to be absolutely awesome. We've posted a bunch of backstage footage of it so you can see what is going on. But in the meantime, one of the things we've always focused on the show is attempting to give you information about some of the economic trends that are coming and some of the other things that are going on in the world that are likely to happen in the future so what we've done for you today is we've collected a bunch of times when our former guests have predicted what was about to happen in a

way that we think was going to be very useful to you so enjoy our brilliant and returning guests this week is Mike Driver you may remember we did an interview with him some time ago he's a serial entrepreneur all-round good guy and someone who has a lot of very counterintuitive ideas. So Mike Driver, welcome back to Trigonometry. I'm delighted to be back. Thanks for having me again. Mike, what is it that we're not seeing? What is it that we're not talking about? What do you, with a kind of totally different mindset to most people that I know, what is out of our field of vision that's coming? Well, I think one of the consequences, I mean,

I think people are talking about this, but that my biggest fear, and it's not my biggest fear, and it's not my biggest for the economy or the country, maybe the biggest fear for the country, is the civil liberties implication of what will come after this. Rushing a vaccine through, that's a frightening prospect in many ways. Vaccinating many young people who don't necessarily need a vaccine is concerning. Thinking about how you're going to be monitored, how you're going to be monitored, how you're be tagged how how your movements are going to be big brothered I think all of these things I think is it Jeremy Bentham and the concepts of the people's

behavior changed the panopticon if they're watched all the time the behavior changes and I think that's quite dynamic amongst populations as well I think for some people for many people and it kind of goes back to the the Huxley and the the brave new world view of where we are is they may embrace that. They may embrace that sort of monitoring, that herding, to use the phrase in a different way. Well, there's many, many other people,

and they're the people that affect change who are going to find that intolerable. So it took breaking the law to change many of the things that we now take for granted, be it suffragettes or homosexuality or many of those things. It took people who are prepared to step outside the boundaries. And similarly, the way most entrepreneurial people think is to be,

is to be outside of the mainstream. And I think if we limit that, and I think that is perhaps the thing that worries me most, we will limit the ability of those people who affect change to do so. And so where will that where will that leave us in a very homogenous world? That's not a world I particularly want to live in. Mike, well let me push back on that a little bit because as you know, I, you know, if there was anyone who was concerned about the erosion of our civil liberties,

restrictions of free speech, that's me. I've been pretty outspoken about this for a long time. But I've got to be honest with you, I don't, I look around. I mean, yes, in Australia they're talking about some kind of app to track your immunity status. And that would be a hill that I have. I'm prepared to die on. I'm not signing up to any fucking app that tracks me around the country, no way.

But if you can't travel, would you? Right. But this is, yeah, I mean, yeah. This is exactly my point. If someone said to you, your passport is dependent on you carrying your contact tracing app, then most of us would, and it erodes, doesn't it? So it starts with a contract tracing app.

Where does it go after that? Right. But my broader point, I mean, I take your point on that and that is a step way too far in my opinion. But more broadly speaking, I do see the, you know, a lot of the people we've had on the show who we like and respect kind of, in my opinion, going way off the deep end on this stuff and talking about how we're all under house arrest and all this, which I think is a massive exaggeration.

I think a temporary and necessary lockdown is not the same as house arrest. I personally don't feel like Western governments have been overly restrictive about this. in proportion to the threat that we're facing. You know, it is a warlike time. You accept a little bit more imposition on your freedoms during that time, provided their time limited, provided their specific, provided we can go back to, you know, having a free society afterwards. Do you see signs that that's not going to happen?

What's the reason for your concern? I never trust people in power to give the keys back. once once once once once once they get similar to the the MMT conversation that we had earlier once you give people in power power and consider that there their reasons for living or to obtain power they really don't like giving it back so I do I well

I might not be at the further end of the spectrum of the previous guests you've had. We as a country, as a species, have fought and lost millions of lives to maintain freedoms. And I don't think that should be lost. There are consequences. There are serious consequences to giving up, giving up the things that enable us to change. And I think that's that's what scares me most is when you have a contact tracing app that you need to have, you have, you've given the political order a lever in with which to dictate or with which to demand your obedience. And anything that does that, anything that does that more, I think that's, that would be very, very worrying. You say you'd die on a hill for it, but the reality is most people won't.

And then when most people won't, you'll be in the minority. And then your wife will want to take a nice holiday somewhere and your kids will be saying, dad's an idiot. What difference does it make? And compliance will become the norm. And that worries me. And fascinating people we have for you today. Two brilliant returning guests to Trigonometry.

Here they are Jim Rickards and Pipple Malgram, to expert economists, people who understand finance, people who understand what is going to happen, tech as well, all of those things that we're going to get into. Jim, people, welcome back. Thank you. Is there going to be held to pay for the money that we are now using to save people's jobs and protect businesses? No, there's no chance of inflation.

In fact, the real policy concern is and will be deflation. Now, down the road, when I say down the road, when I say down the road, I mean a year or two years from now, there is a risk of very serious inflation bordering on hyperinflation. But not now and not for at least a year. And here's why. Inflation has nothing to do with money supply. This is sort of a I've called a myth or a misunderstanding that's been propagated by everyone from the New Keynesians to the monitors to the Austrians. You know, increase the money supply, too much money chasing too few goods.

inflation is right around the corner. It's not true. Money supply has nothing to do with inflation. What does drive inflation is psychology, which shows up in the form of velocity. So let's say I'm feeling good. I go out to dinner. You know, I tip the waiter. He takes a taxi home and tips the taxi driver, and the taxi driver takes the tip and puts gas in her taxi. Well, in that example, Well, my dollar has velocity of three. There was a tip, a taxi tip, and gasoline. So velocity of three. Instead, imagine I stay home and watch television.

My money has velocity of zero. Right. And I remind people that $5 trillion times zero is zero. If you don't have velocity, you don't have an economy, period. So the task is, and a Pippet touched on this, she's exactly right. The task is to change the psychology, change expectations. You can print all the money you want. The Fed can stick the landing on base money, M0, M1, M2 is a different matter, but M0, they can print that to two decimal places.

Not a problem. But they can't get people to lend it. They can't get people to spend it. They can't get people to dis-save, in other words, what are people doing with the money? They are either going to, well, if you have a high marginal propensity to consume, meaning you're living paycheck to paycheck and you need to pay the rent, yes, you'll pay the rent. Fair enough. But for many people, they will save it for the reason Pippa mentioned, which is they're worried about how long is it going to last, you know, even if you're not laid off. If your neighbor was laid off, you're probably worried about your own job. So you'll save it on a precautionary basis,

or you'll pay off, you know, a credit card paid down a lot of loan, which is economically the same thing. It's just another form of saving. So that's what people are going to do with the money. You won't see the velocity from it. Pippa, before Francis Jumson, let me ask you this, because you're a lot of a former advisor to two years presidents. If you're sitting in the oval office right now and you're looking at the fact, and this, I come back to the issue of globalization here, you're looking at the fact that 97% of your antibiotics are made in China. You know, a huge quantity and percentage of your essential supplies are made in China. A lot of particularly right-leaning

commentators have been banging away at this point. You know, we've become reliant on China for essential supplies in a world where, you know, I mean, we don't know exactly what happened with this virus, but there's some evidence to suggest that, you know, it's not without China's at best incompetence that this has spread the way that it has, right? So if you can't trust them and, you know, when the proverbial hits the fan, countries tend to lock down and go, I need this and you're not having that. Are we, you know, as a president of the United States or the Prime Minister of Britain, I usually going to go, we need to onshore not just manufacturing of widgets and iPhones, we need to onshore manufacturing of medical supplies,

syringes, vent, everything. Yes. And it's not only because, you know, China didn't handle it well. I think probably most countries wouldn't have handled it well. I'm not sure that the British did so much better and they were loaded with a lot more information and they were still slow. But the main thing is what you're talking about is a tradeoff between efficiency and resilience. And for many years, we have gone after efficiency and cheaper prices, ever cheaper

prices, that that was our driver. Now we're faced with this reality that resilience is, is interfered with by that. And I'll come, I'd like to use the example in Formula One racing. It's a constant race between resilience and efficiency. And what you're doing is you rip that car apart every single day and you try to shave one gram of weight off of the thing so that you improve its chances of winning. But that one gram may be the thing that breaks the piece you're working on. So it's either correct or catastrophe, right? You're on the borderline all the time. Well, this is where we are with the economy. We chose efficiency, efficiency, efficiency, and we shaved off that extra gram of cost by outsourcing it to China, and now we see a break.

And therefore, now we're going to have an emphasis on resilience. Now, what does that mean? That means inflation. That means higher prices. It means you say, I'm willing to pay more for a British sourced product or an American sourced product so that I'm sure to get it. Then I care about its reduced costs. And that's another channel through which higher prices begin to warm their way forward.

Now, this in the light of the current president, Let's just keep in mind who the current president is. The current president of the United States is a property guy. Property guys make all their money on inflation. They love inflation. And so what is his inclination going to be? He's always going to be, we should just have more debt. And the way you deal with the debt is you basically inflate.

And that's okay. And by the way, inflations, they do tend to make asset markets. markets go up, which means stock markets. And I would argue we've had that inflation has shown up in recent years as higher asset prices. And everybody loved that part about it. And they ignored the fact that a consumer had to go from 1% inflation at the time of the financial crisis to say two and a half at the time of the COVID crisis. And that just sounds like nothing.

But to Jim's point, that's a ton of inflation that lets you completely erode the debt you owe the world. And the U.S. is particularly privileged in that because everybody's still willing to buy dollars from the states, even though we behave this way. And by the way, we have behaved this way throughout history because how do we pay for the American Revolution on inflation? How do we pay for the Civil War? Much bigger inflation. How do we pay for Vietnam? Another inflation. And how are we going to pay for this mess on inflation?

And so that's why I said at the opening, I think that we're heading into inflation. So then the question becomes, what's the speed and inflation? magnitude of that thing. And I agree with Jim. Usually great inflations are preceded by a puff of deflation. And whether that lasts a year, 18 months, two years, I don't know, but we have seemingly set the stage for prices to begin creeping up. And for people to say, again, it's a psychological phenomenon, to say, you know, like in my world, I have people, companies who are saying, you know, the Chinese drones may be cheaper, but I'd rather buy British. or the Chinese drones, you know, maybe I can buy them, the supply chains there,

but I'd rather work with someone who's closer and speaks English and can work with me to produce what I really require for my business. That means they're telling me they're willing to pay more for this. And I think they'll pay more for these things now that they go, I need to be digital and I need to not travel. I need to be more localized, not globalized. So in this sense, it all comes together to form a full circle that what Jim and I have written about inflation, which everybody says is a dead duck and never coming back to life, is distinctly quacking in the background. Hello and welcome to Trigonometry.

I'm Francis Foster. I'm Constantine Kishin. And this is... My happy day, Jim. Peter has ruined our introduction. But this is the show for you. if you want honest conversations with fascinating people and our brilliant returning guest is Peter Hitchens, the author and journalist, Peter, welcome back to the show.

Well, so far, it's okay. Yeah, I have to say, we've never had a guest interrupt us mid-intro, but you've managed. So let's get straight into it. One of the reasons that we were really keen to have you back on the show is that you have done a lot of alternative coverage, shall we say, of the lockdown and the coronavirus situation. So for anyone who has not been following your writing and opinions on this issue, just give us a brief overview of what is your opinion of what's happened and the lockdown measures that have been implemented. Okay, right from the start, I said that the response to the government was completely out of proportion to the size of the menace.

I didn't say there was no disease. I didn't say nobody would die and say it wasn't horrible for a lot of people if they got it. But I said that as an event, it simply didn't justify the measures being taken either to suppress liberty or to suppress the economy. I think that the damage to both human liberty and to the economy have been huge and probably permanent. And I think we will look back on this if we ever have a chance to do so with an impartial inquiry and say, how on earth did we go mad to this extent? It simply wasn't justified. How many people have died or otherwise suffered or will die otherwise suffer as a result of these methods? The healthy old, the healthy old,

have suffered hugely in terms of being deprived of normal life. And as a brilliant man, Professor Suturit Bhakti of the University of Mainz and Germany, warned at the beginning of this and I did what I could to publicize this morning, it is precisely those people, healthy, old and active in society who've suffered very, very greatly from this by being cut off from social contact and the amount of misery, which of course brings on death. Then of course is the effect which I think everybody knows it was on the rest of the health service, while the health service is concentrating entirely on COVID, all kinds of other things,

particularly the detection and treatment of major cancers, is put to one side. And I think there will be, when this is examined, a fair number of excess deaths, which have resulted from this policy, which have not been COVID deaths or not even been remotely related to COVID, which are among people who were deprived of treatments and checks they otherwise would have got because of the panic. So, sure, we're all concerned. I completely concede that my opponents in this argument are concerned with saving human life and their motives are good. Well, actually, sir am I. But I think, not really my motive's good, but I think my assessment and situation is better than theirs. And I think if my policy is much more closely aligned to what Sweden has done had been followed,

a fewer people would have died. Do you think the health consequences of the way we've reacted are going to run for years and years? You can't tell exactly how bad the damage is. The enormous load in which Maynard Keynes negotiated for this country from the United States at the end of the Second World War when Len Lees stopped was negotiated, I think, July of 1945 and wasn't paid off until December 2006. My entire childhood was spent in a country which was constantly weighed down by the paying off of and the paying of interest on that enormous level. Our lives were grayer and more pinched and our public services worse.

You look at things like council house building in the early 50s. Look at the low standards of the architecture and the building. The country was poor and it was poor because it was in debt. But that was a debt honorably contracted as a result. of war. This occasion, it's going to be poor because of a debt contracted because of government mistake. Rishi Suna has no choice. It is really a question of how soon he has to announce the emergency budget, the first, I think, of many emergency budgets, which he will have to introduce, which I will be one of the few people who will not be shocked by. And these budgets will be very

serious. And people who think that it can all be loaded on the well of. of very much mistaken. The things VAT, duties on all kinds of things, due to particularly on travel, I wonder how many people who long to go back on holiday are going to feel about how much more expensive it's going to be to go on. Quite possibly there's going to be something

called the capital levy, a raid on the savings, or everybody. That means, amongst other things, quite possibly on the value of houses which people have bought, is unprecedented in a free country such as this,

which people will find And particularly since it's levied on the savings they've made from already taxed money, they'll find very oppressive. But the government will probably call it something like an NHS surcharge. It'll be very hard to resist politically. And I doubt very much whether the Labour opposition will resist it because they will know their own economists to know that there is no choice. The government is going to have to increase tax. The other thing is going to happen is as a country, we are going to be so much in debt that the levels of interest

which we're going to be willing to pay to the pension funds and the insurance companies, which loans so much the money to the government, are going to be fantastically low. That means a raid on the pensions and savings of millions of people whose old ages will be under threat. That also happens. And the other thing is that the world will look at us and see an economy much weaker than most. And it may be less and less willing to lend us money on the terms which we've been willing to do so. And one of the results of this is certainly a declaration. in the international value of the pound sterling.

So again, that has many, many affairs, particularly on the cost of imported goods and on our ability to travel abroad, which people will feel there's going to be a lot of things going on, and all of them are going to hurt. Part of the problem is that people are living in this kind of dream time at the moment, the beautiful weather, the furlowing, which means people get paid for not working,

the huge numbers of professionals in the southeast who were spared from the daily ground of commuting, and so far have continued to be able to work from home, that will come a moment of awakening where many of those people find they don't have any jobs, or if they do, they're much worse pay than they were before, and that an economy based incredibly heavily on services, particularly shops and restaurants and bars,

will have suffered enormously for months and months during which people couldn't actually make a living, and they can't. And a key feature of economics is not just the existence of money, but the speed in which it circulates. And if your salary isn't paid, or if the rent that your owed isn't paid for a quarter of the year, then the damage it does to your personal economy

and to the national economy is huge. And people say it'll be a V-shaped recession, and we'll leap out of it. Well, I hope they're right. But I have a strong feeling that they may be over-optimistic about that. As I say, this is a dream time of it, this long, long period of sunny weather during which the chattering glasses have laced in their gardens,

drinking misted glasses of Waitrose Shably, thinking it's all going to be great. It isn't. They'll be lucky to be able to afford the Shably when this is over in my guess. It's going to be really hot. It can't be anything else. No one, no government's ever spent this much money in peacetime. Horrifying prophecy there from Peter Hitchens. The middle classes will have to go without Shably.

Indeed, it's just a terrifying prospect, as it not, but they are. It may go home in a way that other warnings don't. Hey KK, do you like mattresses? Of course. In Russia, we make mattress out of skins of dead bears. We wrestle bear for pleasure and then skin and eat it. After that, we say prayer to glorious leader Vladimir Lenin, God of hunting. What if the bear kills you? That's how you know you're not Russian.

Only when a man fights bear, do you realize he's from weak country, like Venezuela? Always an education, mate. But if you are looking for mattresses, then you have to check out. Emma Sleep. Emma's sleep create wonderful beds and mattresses at an affordable price. If you go on their website they always have incredible discounts and by using our link www.m.m.m.matress. Dot.com.com.u.com. you get an incredible 5% off? That is incredible deal. I replaced my bare skin with Emma Sleep mattress. If only we had that in USSR we would have

Defeated the evil capitalist pig dogs. Insomnia destroyed the Soviet Union. You already get up to 50% off from Emma Sleep Mattress, plus an extra 5% off when you use R code. And that's not all. You also get free shipping and returns. Up to 200 nights trial sleeps, a 10-year warranty with free shipping, delivery and returns,

and washable covers to boot. You get all of this when you use the link www. Emma dash metrus.com. uk slash trigger for an additional 5% off on top of whatever discount is on the website. So, if there's deal for 50%

off, Trigonometry fans get 55% off. I will never look at Yogi Bear's skin that generations of Kissens have slept on in the same way again. I'm delighted to say that our brilliant guest today is a psychoanalyst and a Tavistock whistleblower.

Marcus Evans, welcome to Trigonometry. Thanks for having me. Okay, so I'm a psychoanalyst, originally trained as a psychiatric nurse, worked in psychiatry for over 40 years. And for the last 20 of those in the NHS, I worked in the Tabastok as a senior member of staff, part of the management. And then I retired from the NHS about 18 months ago,

and I took up a post as a governor, which is a voluntary post on the Tabastock Board of Governors. and I resigned over one of the issues that was being discussed at the time. And it has been embroiled in a, well, a scandal is probably the one wrong word to put it, but it is a scandal of sorts around the gender transitioning, change of transitioning of young children. Did you dive into that and explain to us what is happening at the moment? Yeah, so if you can picture, the sort of history of the Tabistock is in,

psychological work. It's not in medication or genetics. That all goes on at the Institute of Psychiatry and the Maudsley. So this is the sort of, you know, it's psychotherapeutics looking into the psychological functioning of the mind. But about 20 years ago, a service was set up called Jids, which was an experimental service. It's basically seeing kids who are gender dysphoric. And the thing that set it apart from the rest of the trust was that there was a sort of recourse to sort of treating their problems hormonally. And this was a sort of experimental and controversial treatment at the time. So in a way, it sort of moved away from the Tavostock's traditions, if you like. I've been part of the management for about 20 years.

I was called the head of nursing. And then I was in charge of the adult and adolescent department for about five years. years. But my wife worked in the Jid service in that 2005 and she went into the surface because she was interested in working at the Tavistock. She got another bit of her job was doing training. And she quickly came quite uncomfortable with the fact that a lot of kids were sort of, they come very determined, they're very fixing their view, that they're in the wrong gender and that they want to transition and they want to be given pills to transition and the Tabistock was the sort of psychological goatkeeper.

So you go to the Tabistock, you're seen by the Sabastat, you're assessed there, and then you're moved on to UCL where the hormones are given. My wife became very unhappy with what was going on back then. Marcus, sorry to interrupt it. You keep interrupting because I'll carry on. No, no, but it's all great. I just want to clarify for the viewers and listeners, when you say kids, how old are these children?

Well, this whole area has changed exponentially. So if we went back to the first 30 years in my time in psychiatry, there were small numbers of people that were transition, post-18, mainly male to female, sort of 85%. In the last 15, 20 years, it's been this exponential rise and a completely different cohort, and these are 85% female to male, and they're getting younger and younger. So I think in her day, there were a lot of 15, 14, 15, 16 year olds. Now you're getting kids of 10, 11, 12.

So the age at which kids are wanting to transition is getting pushed lower and the age at which people are prepared to give hormones has got lower and lower. That's the time has gone on. And you mentioned that your wife was becoming increasingly unhappy at this trend. What was it that she was concerned about? Well, basically, our usual approach would be to do a thorough psychological investigation of what was going on with the kid, what's going on with the family, lots of these kids are on the autistic spectrum.

They have all sorts of secondary comorbid issues. They're sort of socially phobic. They've got eating disorders. They may be depressed. And what she felt, there should be a thorough psychological investigation, as was the Tavostock's tradition, into family dynamics, individual psychology. And she felt that there was too much of a willingness

to sort of go along with the kid in terms of the kid's idea, they've got, there's one problem with one solution, and they basically want to get through, past the gatekeepers onto UCL. That's a generalised picture, but it was a sort of predominant picture that was being presented. So I'd say, I was a part of the senior management, and I said, well, what we would usually do,

it's very multidisciplinary. It's not like a traditionally medically hierarchical service. You've got lots of different disciplines. And you're used to sort of discussing and debating approaches. And I said, well, you've got to go back and challenge the culture. And she felt, and she was quite a senior person by the time she'd arrived in this service, this was not welcome. It was a sort of shutting down of any dissent or wish to examine.

what was going on beneath the surface for the kid, et cetera, et cetera, and she felt she got nowhere. It rapidly became apparent. There was a politicisation of this whole area. So again, unusually, there was a very close relationship with mermaids and with gender intelligence, the trap charities, and they had an unusual sort of influence over the sort of culture. Now, when I was in charge of the adult and adolescent department, I would have relationships with mind and some of the charities.

But they wouldn't sort of insist on the culture or ask me to run them by the protocols for treatment, etc, etc. There's been a sort of enormous policy capture into this area where you've got the affirmation model which was adopted with virtually no evidence. and jettison in what used to be in place was what's called watchful waiting, which is that gender dysphoric kids, you know, most of them would desist if supported and left of their own devices. There's a sort of huge capture of the clinical environment. I think that once your sort of your decision making is based on a sort of belief, a pre-existing belief structure may be embedded within the clinicians,

may be met by the parents and some of the parents and some of the kids, you're not in a clinical environment. You see, lots of people, you know, will come into psychiatry and when people are in a sort of chaotic state of mind and they feel that their minds are falling apart, they often focus down narrowly on there's one problem with one solution. Now, psychological health is usually based on the opposite. It's based on sort of opening things out thinking that we're complicated.

We've got many different moving parts as a personality and that usually our problems are made up of all sorts of things coming together. So we're trying to sort of open things out for kids, for example, you're saying, okay, that's what you believe. Let's have a look at who you are, what's going on beneath the same. surface, what might be troubling you, let's open this dialogue out. So we think about things in the round. And you're not going along with fixed beliefs. There's one problem and one solution. So just one more thing.

So one thing that's often talked about is that the kids completely certain. Well, for me, that's a red flag. you know, that if you're making very serious decisions, you would expect to have doubts, questions, anxieties, conflicts. The absence of those is a problem. You know, and we believe, and we know, as psychoanalyst, you know, that beliefs can be driven by all sorts of forces, not all of them healthy or rational.

You know, so a person comes to me and says, I'm absolutely sure I'm X. And my job isn't to butt heads with them. them, but it is to say, well, hang on, I wonder why you're so fixated on this belief and why you have to drum that into me that I can't challenge it. Because sort of tyrannical states of mind, again, as psychoanalyst, you're sort of wary of, you sort of think, well, hang on a minute, what's driving this and why can't you, why can't we examine this area? Because, you know, most Most of the time we know that sort of when we're in a healthy state, you know, you're not so

defensive. You can have things examined and looked at from different points of view. But when you become fanatical, it's usually being driven by something else. And that's my job as a psychoanalyst, is trying to understand what that is. What happened was when I took up this voluntary position as governor, two things landed on the governor's desk. And as a governor, my job was to sort of oversee. Is the trust doing what it's supposed to be doing?

We're not part of management. We're just a sort of watchdog, if you like. And two things came on the desk. One was a letter written by 10 parents whose kids were being treated by Jids. Basically what they said. It was a very detailed letter saying we had hoped our kids all got comorbital problems. We'd hope there'd be a thorough psychological investigation, etc., etc. That didn't happen.

we're not happy. We feel like our kids have been fast-tracked through to the medication. So that was one thing. Then a colleague of mine, Dave Bell, who's probably the best-known clinician in Tavistock, who was the staff governor previously. And we didn't overlap. I started as governor.

He'd left. And basically, he'd been approached by 10 members of staff. from Jids with very similar concerns to the parents. So he'd done a report. The trust knew about it. And then the report was presented to the trust board, I think. That's right. I think that's right.

And, of course, it was saying a lot of similar things. Staff felt the relationship with mermaids was too close. A lot of these kids that were being transitioned had got secondary, and so comorbid problems. that there wasn't enough interest in sort of debate and discussion within the culture of the service, etc, etc. What the trust did was, they were very unhappy about the report. They wouldn't let me see the report.

Despite the fact I said, look, I want to see this report. If I'm going to adjudicate whether the trust is doing his job, I've got to see all the materials. That was withheld. So I thought, that's odd. why would you withhold that report from a governor and there are other governors that requested it as well the second thing was that's right so then they set up the medical director

was going to do the trust report so several of us said that that's fine but we'd like Dave Bell to be at the final hearing of the report so he can hear whether the medical directors report is addressing the concerns raising by the staff. No, you can't. So a sort of, I don't know, there was quite a few emails, went backwards and forwards over a sort of six-month period contesting this, and it was contested when we met.

and it appeared to me that the trust wanted to use the medical directors report to bury the concerns about the service. And I could see then the extent to which the trust and its management of this service was politicised. It's quite extraordinary what's gone on. And sometimes when you talk to people, they go, it can't be as bad as you say it is. You must be, I don't know, you've lost the plot. You've hit a midlife crisis. You're angry with the Tavistar. No, it really is quite extraordinary.

You know, as a mental health practitioner, someone who's proud to be in the business that I'm in, I'm really quite ashamed by, you know, the lack of... This is political belief and ideology over rational, scientific argument. Our brilliant and returning guest needs very little introduction. Nigel Farage, welcome back to Triginald. It's good to be here and not doing it via blamming zoom.

I couldn't agree with you more. It's a real pleasure. On the fuel bill, side of things, which is just, I still don't think people understand what's about to happen. I really don't think they understand the first week of April when those bills hit the mat for their Q1, gas and electricity bills. There's going to be absolute shock and outrage. Number one, massive mistake the Conservatives adopted price caps. Can you believe it? Can you believe that a conservative government?

I mean, why not set a price for a loaf of bread? I miss what the Marxist did in general. Nuts policy. It never works. It's nearly always counterproductive. But it leads to a much bigger question. Net zero is in economic terms. I think the most self-destructive policy

that has ever been put forward by a British government in the history of the nation. That doesn't mean that I'm against finding ways of producing energy that emit less CO2 and cause less environmental damage. But I'm a pragmatist. You know, we still burn four and a half million tons of coal a year

in this country. We have to to make steel. Do you know what? We import it all. We're importing 50% of our natural gas when we've got vast reserves, possibly as much as a trillion pounds worth of natural gas in Lancashire and Cumbria alone. Hey, that's half the national debt.

It's quite interesting when you look at somebody's... And a lot of jobs, too. Tens of thousands of well-paid jobs. And if you're going to use the blooming stuff anyway, you might as well make it here. The Americans rethought their energy policy five, six years ago. and the price of natural gas in America is half the price that it is here.

We then have walked onto people's bills. Incredibly, 25% of your electricity bill is green subsidies. Money that goes to rich landowners. Money that goes to large foreign companies building wind farms. We've put so much faith in wind energy, or if truth be told, so much money has been made out of wind energy. by those in the elites, that we leave ourselves vulnerable, at some point in a not too distant future, to blackouts.

So, yes, commodity prices globally have gone up, but we've left ourselves absolutely exposed, not just to world markets, but left ourselves exposed. 9% of our electricity comes from France through an interconnector. So I think we should be self-sufficient in energy. We should be aiming with areas like gas to get people's bills down. I don't think a penny piece should go

to massive global industries in the form of green subsidy. So I think this, I've got a feeling actually that the energy debate, a net zero debate, is going to be huge. And Boris stands up and says,

isn't it marvellous? We've cut our CO2 output by 44% since 1990. Well, if you close down, nearly all of your chemical plants, your aluminium smelters, you refiners, and you move steel plants from Red Cardo, India, and then import the products back, you yourself may be producing less CO2,

but globally, the net games is even more CO2's being produced. So I think we've got this hopelessly, catastrophically wrong, and I think it's a function of, and by the way, Labor are just as bad on this, if not worse. and I think it's a function of career politicians, a function of people living inside metropolitan bubbles in London, prey to the lobbying influences of some people who are rather good at this, and utterly disconnected from the real world.

And it's about to blow up this year. It's about a blow up.