Latest / Inside Politics / Steel, macho men and the PM’s phone call with Trump

Transcript

Steel, macho men and the PM’s phone call with Trump · Inside Politics

0:00
S1: From the newsrooms of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.
0:03
S1: This is inside politics. I'm Jacqueline Maley. It's Friday, February 14th.
0:09
S1: We bring you this episode of Inside Politics on Valentine's Day.
0:12
S1: But right now, the relationship between Australia and our closest
0:15
S1: ally is at a very delicate juncture. This week, President
0:20
S1: Donald Trump declared his intention to impose tariffs on aluminium
0:24
S1: and steel imports from all countries, with no exceptions. The
0:28
S1: pressure was on Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to negotiate an
0:31
S1: exception for Australian exports, just as his predecessor, Malcolm Turnbull,
0:35
S1: did with Trump in 2017 during Trump's last presidency. Albanese
0:39
S1: had a long and reportedly warm conversation with Trump about
0:42
S1: the tariff issue, with Trump saying he would consider an
0:45
S1: exemption for Australian steel and aluminium, but no promises were made.
0:50
S1: And in the volatile landscape of Trump 2.0, nothing is
0:53
S1: certain except that we will have more uncertainty. So how
0:57
S1: likely is the PM to win an exemption from US tariffs.
1:02
S1: How big of a test is this for Albanese, and
1:04
S1: how much will voters mark him down if he fails it?
1:07
S1: Here to discuss all this with me, we have our
1:09
S1: chief political correspondent, David Crowe, and our senior economics correspondent,
1:13
S1: Shane Wright. Special guest star. Welcome, gentlemen.
1:16
S2: It's nice to be introduced as a star. I'm feeling
1:18
S2: better already.
1:20
S1: It's been a very interesting week, chaps. Following Trump's announcement, David,
1:23
S1: that he would impose aluminium and steel tariffs on all
1:27
S1: US trading partners across the board. Our prime minister, Anthony Albanese,
1:31
S1: was instantly under a lot of pressure, wasn't he, to
1:33
S1: secure an exemption for Australia. So how did he respond
1:37
S1: to that pressure.
1:38
S3: With extreme caution. He he was very careful about what
1:43
S3: he said in response to the message from Donald Trump.
1:46
S4: In the Oval Office with a thick black pen, Donald
1:49
S4: Trump drawing a big red line through global steel with tariffs.
1:54
S5: It's 25% without exceptions or exemptions.
1:58
S3: Uh, but he did have a 40 minute conversation with
2:02
S3: Donald Trump that had been arranged shortly beforehand. So the
2:06
S3: timing actually worked in a reasonably positive way for the
2:10
S3: Prime Minister, because we knew that the tariffs were coming,
2:13
S3: but we also knew that there was a phone call coming.
2:15
S3: And so it was really the response to the phone
2:17
S3: call that was so interesting.
2:19
S4: In Canberra, the prime minister emerging from a presidential phone
2:22
S4: call with a smile.
2:23
S3: The two leaders agreed publicly on the words they would use,
2:27
S3: that Donald Trump would consider an exemption for Australia. And
2:30
S3: that was a provisional win for Anthony Albanese. But it
2:34
S3: was very interesting that he didn't venture anywhere beyond that wording.
2:37
S3: He was so careful to only frame it in the
2:40
S3: wording he had agreed with Donald Trump.
2:42
S6: I presented Australia's case for an exemption.
2:46
S5: I just spoke to him. Very fine man.
2:48
S6: The US president agreed that an exemption was under consideration.
2:52
S5: I told him that that's something that we will give
2:55
S5: great consideration.
2:56
S3: To, and he was also very careful not to um,
3:00
S3: convey what Donald Trump had said. He didn't talk publicly
3:04
S3: about the message from Donald Trump. It sounded like a
3:06
S3: very good conversation. It was quite good spirited. We know
3:10
S3: that there have been conversations in the past where Donald
3:13
S3: Trump has ripped into Australian prime ministers, most famously Malcolm Turnbull.
3:17
S3: There wasn't any sort of condition for that kind of
3:19
S3: rancour this time around, but the understanding at the moment
3:23
S3: is that there might be a exemption, and it's really
3:27
S3: not much of a commitment from the American side. So
3:31
S3: Anthony Albanese is quite exposed. If there is no exemption,
3:35
S3: because I think it's pretty hard dealing with Donald Trump
3:38
S3: and Donald Trump is the culprit here in terms of
3:40
S3: imposing tariffs. But Australian voters would expect the prime minister
3:43
S3: to stick up and get a good deal.
3:45
S1: Yeah, I mean, it's interesting you mentioned Turnbull there because
3:48
S1: he is remembered and he's very, very keen on making
3:51
S1: people remember this legacy, but that he famously did stand
3:54
S1: up to Trump on tariffs and also the immigrant swap issue.
3:58
S1: And he got what he wanted. So it doesn't really
4:00
S1: matter if Trump talked him down because he was able
4:03
S1: to face up to him and show that strength. Shane,
4:06
S1: I want to ask you briefly for non economics correspondents
4:09
S1: such as myself and dare I say it, many of
4:11
S1: our listeners. What is Trump's view of tariffs? Why does
4:14
S1: he have such an aversion to free trade? Or why
4:17
S1: does he believe that free trade basically equals America being
4:21
S1: ripped off?
4:22
S2: According to Trump, tariff is the most beautiful word in
4:24
S2: the English language. Better than love, apparently. Well, almost. This
4:29
S2: was an element of Trump, the original in that. And
4:33
S2: I don't want to go into the economic history, but
4:36
S2: it's a mercantilist approach. That is, if you trade with
4:41
S2: a country, you have to trade import more to them
4:45
S2: than you take input from yourselves. That's his been his
4:48
S2: mindset forever, and it's a really unusual approach. He also
4:54
S2: couches it in. And Peter Navarro has his trade adviser
4:58
S2: has been couching it in supply chain security. But there's
5:02
S2: also working class manliness tied into this, as in and
5:06
S2: I give the example here like because he's focused on
5:08
S2: steel and aluminium. They steel and aluminium in the US
5:12
S2: employs about 140,000 people, a tiny amount, mostly white males,
5:20
S2: mostly in the northeast Midwest. There are actually more manicurists
5:25
S2: and pedicurists employed across the United States, about 180,000. Then
5:29
S2: there are steel workers. But his focus is on those
5:33
S2: men and the concerns that they've had, because over time,
5:39
S2: they're highly paid. They're just not as efficient, productive.
5:42
S1: And.
5:43
S2: Cheap. Cheap as, say, Canadian steel and aluminium is cheaper,
5:48
S2: partly because of all the hydropower that comes out of Canada.
5:52
S2: It's not as cheap as what's coming out of China,
5:55
S2: and in some cases, it's not as cheap as it
5:56
S2: comes out of Australia. So he can't face up to
6:00
S2: the fact that element, and that the benefit that flows
6:04
S2: from cheaper inputs to the entire economy, as opposed to
6:08
S2: the special vested interest, that is American steel and aluminium.
6:11
S1: Yeah. There it is really interesting you say that there
6:13
S1: is something really sort of macho and masculinist about, you know,
6:16
S1: we've got to we've got to win. We've got to
6:18
S1: we've got to make sure they buy more from us
6:20
S1: than we buy from them. We've got to be besting
6:23
S1: them in that sense.
6:24
S2: That's right. And you, you almost get this feeling that
6:27
S2: they want to put a whole barrier around the United States.
6:30
S2: This this is tied up with the political isolationism and
6:34
S2: the foreign policy isolationism that we can do everything. Yeah.
6:38
S2: The problem is, economists have worked out. That's bollocks. Yeah.
6:42
S2: It doesn't work. You are better off trading stuff that
6:45
S2: you do really well with, with a country that's not
6:47
S2: quite so good at doing it.
6:49
S1: Yeah. Okay. So, I mean, there's this sort of economic rationale,
6:52
S1: but there's also a very transactional and a sort of
6:55
S1: deals based approach here. We know that Trump and members
6:57
S1: of his team have admitted very openly that they want
6:59
S1: to use the threat of imposing tariffs as a negotiating tool. And,
7:03
S1: you know, some people might call it more like a
7:05
S1: standover tactic. Um, you know, sort of Mafia style protection
7:09
S1: money is being demanded here. But what might Trump wish
7:13
S1: to extract from Australia in exchange for a deal not
7:16
S1: to impose these tariffs on steel and aluminum, as the
7:20
S1: Americans call it?
7:21
S3: He hasn't actually put anything on the table in that way.
7:23
S3: He hasn't sent a signal about what else Australia could do.
7:26
S3: It's not like he's saying we're going to put these
7:29
S3: tariffs on you. But gee, if you if you spent
7:33
S3: another $800 million on Aukus in the next month or two,
7:37
S3: that would change the game. None of his team have
7:40
S3: signalled anything like that either. So the Australian situation is
7:43
S3: quite unlike what's been happening with Canada, where it's, well,
7:47
S3: why don't you become a US state? Or why don't
7:50
S3: you stop fentanyl drugs coming into North America? Or the
7:54
S3: message to Mexico, stop the immigrants coming across the border
7:58
S3: and trade is all part of that negotiation with Australia,
8:01
S3: I think. It's a different dynamic, which is they really
8:04
S3: want no exceptions. So the issue for Australia is that
8:08
S3: if we get a special deal, it complicates the situation
8:11
S3: for them on other fronts. And in their second administration
8:16
S3: they are more determined. They're much more hardline in a way.
8:20
S3: They kind of know what they're doing better than in
8:22
S3: their first administration. So that's why there is this no
8:26
S3: free breaks here.
8:27
S1: Yeah, there's more of a single mindedness this time. Shane,
8:30
S1: previously Malcolm Turnbull as prime minister, managed to have Australia
8:33
S1: exempted from damaging tariffs. Can you tell us what arguments
8:36
S1: he used to win Trump over and grant an exception
8:39
S1: last time?
8:40
S2: Well, Malcolm Turnbull went the first argument about yes tariffs
8:44
S2: will hurt yourself. So I think Justin Trudeau overnight actually
8:48
S2: pointed out Canadians will be worse off. Americans will be
8:51
S2: worse off. But that's being a rationalist, well thought out
8:55
S2: constructed argument in the argument between Malcolm Turnbull. It was
8:59
S2: we you guys run a trade surplus with us, which
9:02
S2: comes back to this whole idea that if I'm running
9:05
S2: a deficit, well, it's terrible, even though.
9:09
S1: That means I'm getting.
9:09
S2: Ripped.
9:10
S1: Off. Yeah.
9:11
S2: For a guy who bankrupted so many of his own casinos. Yeah,
9:15
S2: it's a strange approach because he knows how to lose money. Um,
9:18
S2: but that's not how trade works, sadly. But that was
9:21
S2: the main argument. And that's again, you can see it
9:23
S2: in the argument, say, from Don Farrell. That's come through already,
9:26
S2: the trade minister here that the US is running a
9:29
S2: trade surplus with the United States.
9:31
S1: So sorry with Australia.
9:33
S2: Donald Trump, you're already winning. You're already winning in a
9:36
S2: bigly way against us.
9:37
S1: So just to clear that up, at the moment the
9:40
S1: US has a trade surplus with Australia. As in they
9:42
S1: sell more stuff to us than we sell to them.
9:44
S2: Yep. Certainly do. Like for instance, like we imported about
9:48
S2: $1 billion worth of American airplanes, uh, in December last year.
9:52
S2: Like it increased the trade deficit between us and them,
9:57
S2: but we run a huge trade surplus with China, where
10:01
S2: unlike the United States in that regards, which would be
10:03
S2: utterly confusing for the US administration as well.
10:14
S1: People like the Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro are accusing Australia,
10:18
S1: having effectively reneged on what they say is a deal
10:22
S1: that Australia would sort of roll back or ease up
10:25
S1: on its aluminium exports to the United States. So they
10:29
S1: say this deal was struck with Scott Morrison. David, you
10:32
S1: wrote about it in a really interesting piece this week
10:35
S1: at a at a dinner that they all had together,
10:37
S1: the Australians and the Americans. And this guy Navarro says
10:41
S1: that Australia is flooding the US market with with cheap aluminium.
10:46
S1: That's not true, is it?
10:47
S3: No, it's not true. We're a tiny supplier. When you
10:50
S3: look at all the other suppliers of aluminium into the
10:52
S3: US market. Canada sends in about 30 times the times
10:57
S3: the volume of Australia. We're number eight on the list
11:00
S3: of countries sending aluminium in. Peter Navarro also said our
11:04
S3: companies are backed by China and that's just not true.
11:08
S3: Rio Tinto's got 14% ownership by a Chinese aluminium company,
11:12
S3: but it's not deciding the management of Rio Tinto. So
11:15
S3: it's interesting that these claims are coming out of the
11:17
S3: white House, but they're wrong. And that gets back to
11:21
S3: some of that negotiation about a verbal commitment that the
11:25
S3: white House believes the Australian side made to limit aluminium exports.
11:30
S3: That goes back to a dinner in Japan in 2019
11:33
S3: at the G20 summit. And of course, there are different
11:35
S3: memories of a verbal commitment. There's nothing in writing to
11:38
S3: show what we agreed.
11:39
S1: Isn't there one guy who could clear this up quite
11:41
S1: nicely for us? Scott Morrison, who's now, I believe, working
11:45
S1: in the United States with close ties to the Trump administration.
11:48
S3: And he has not commented. Mike Pompeo, who's a friend
11:51
S3: of Scott Morrison, was also in the room. Several others
11:54
S3: in the room. Scott Morrison hasn't commented. Others who were
11:57
S3: in the room have talked about the fact that there
12:00
S3: was an understanding that Australia would not send too much
12:03
S3: aluminium into the US market, but it wasn't an understanding
12:07
S3: in perpetuity. And of course, in the meantime, we've had
12:10
S3: the Russian invasion of Ukraine, which means there have been
12:13
S3: sanctions on Russian suppliers of aluminium, which means other suppliers
12:17
S3: of aluminium become more important. So we ship a bit more.
12:20
S3: There's been a lower Australian dollar, which changes the game.
12:24
S3: There's been the Biden administration for four years in the middle.
12:28
S3: So the world changed. But people like Pete Navarro in
12:31
S3: the white House don't want to acknowledge that. They want
12:34
S3: to get back to what they wanted in the first
12:37
S3: Trump administration and go harder. What I found really interesting
12:41
S3: about this was when Pete Navarro said things that were
12:44
S3: quite untrue about Australian aluminium exports. I really struggled to
12:50
S3: get commentary on that and a and a repudiation of
12:54
S3: that from the Prime Minister's Office from Trade Minister Don Farrell,
13:00
S3: from the opposition, trade spokesperson, from the aluminium industry, from
13:04
S3: other industry chiefs and from the aluminium exporters. So when
13:08
S3: you get a lie in Washington, D.C., nobody in Australia
13:12
S3: wants to come out and call it a lie because
13:15
S3: they're so worried about escalating the tension with the people
13:19
S3: around Donald Trump.
13:20
S1: And I mean, that's part of the full press kind
13:22
S1: of bullying of this administration, isn't it, that, you know,
13:25
S1: you can put lies and false information out there, knowing
13:28
S1: full well that other people will be too intimidated to
13:30
S1: push back on those lies. And then the news environment
13:34
S1: and the negotiating environment is informed by those lies as
13:37
S1: though they're truths.
13:38
S3: And also, we'll then later get politicians who complain about
13:42
S3: this terrible misinformation that spreads around the world. Well, I
13:46
S3: tried to get people to repudiate the misinformation and they
13:49
S3: ran for cover.
13:49
S1: Yeah, thank God we're here to do it for on
13:52
S1: their behalf. Just just very quickly, Shane, if these tariffs
13:55
S1: are imposed on us. It's obviously devastating for the industries involved.
13:59
S1: Steel and aluminium. But will it have devastating or any
14:02
S1: sort of broad impacts on the Australian economy more generally?
14:05
S2: I'm not convinced. It's a it's devastating for the steel
14:08
S2: and aluminium industry of Australia. Okay. Like we've just we
14:11
S2: just saw China impose $20 billion worth of tariffs. And
14:15
S2: I'll give the example of barley. Barley exports are worth
14:18
S2: more than steel and aluminium.
14:20
S1: As in our exports to barley.
14:22
S2: Our exports to China. We're worth more right. Barley gets
14:25
S2: shut out. Where did the barley grow? Barley production and
14:29
S2: exports in this country actually hit a record high. Mexican
14:32
S2: beer producers are loving Australian barley. For instance, Saudi Arabia
14:38
S2: took up all this extra Australian barley. So this idea
14:41
S2: that it stops like its end of days is just
14:46
S2: not true.
14:46
S1: Basically, those industries will find other markets or will find other,
14:50
S1: other avenues to sell the same material.
14:52
S2: Yeah. The bigger problem with tariffs is right. He pushes
14:57
S2: up the price of goods in the United States. So
14:59
S2: when he did it last time, steel and aluminium employment
15:03
S2: rose by about 5000. The industries that use the more
15:07
S2: expensive steel and aluminium lost about 75,000 jobs. That's. And
15:11
S2: that's an impact on him. But if, say, there's a
15:14
S2: retribution from the Canadians and the or the Europeans, you
15:18
S2: get an increase in inflation. Jerome Powell, the head of
15:21
S2: the US fed this week. He is signaling we may
15:24
S2: not they may not cut interest rates in the United
15:26
S2: States this year because there's going to be an inflationary
15:29
S2: pulse caused by Donald Trump. But then he will deny
15:32
S2: it's him. He will blame everybody else.
15:35
S1: So so the broader effects you're saying are more, um,
15:38
S1: because the Australian economy is a globalized economy. We we
15:42
S1: depend upon a rules based order and the principles of
15:45
S1: free trade. And if there's this.
15:47
S2: They're being ripped up at the.
15:48
S1: Moment by.
15:49
S2: That's by the that's the issue. My, my test is
15:52
S2: how far will Trump go. Yeah. So Trump as we
15:55
S2: know loves Big Macs. A lot of beef in those
15:59
S2: Big Macs is Australian beef. We are a very big
16:02
S2: supplier of beef, along with the Mexicans and Canadians and
16:06
S2: the Brazilians. And if he goes full war, full trade war,
16:11
S2: which he's signalled, which means putting tariffs on everything. Will
16:15
S2: he hold the line when it comes to the price
16:17
S2: of his Big Mac going up?
16:19
S1: And he also personally loves Big Mac. So maybe we've
16:21
S1: got that in our favour coming back home. David, I
16:24
S1: want to talk about the Australian domestic sort of impact
16:26
S1: of this, because this is a huge test for Anthony Albanese.
16:29
S1: What's at stake for him here if he fails and Trump,
16:32
S1: you know, says to hell with Australia. How damaging is
16:35
S1: that for him? And conversely, if he manages to get
16:39
S1: an exemption granted, does that make him look like a hero?
16:42
S1: That and he can sort of triumphantly declare an election?
16:46
S3: I think it works in those two ways. Personal authority
16:49
S3: is at stake. Uh, sort of personal prestige, the perception
16:53
S3: of his competency and his ability to stand up for Australia,
16:57
S3: which is the central function of of his office. But
17:02
S3: bear in mind what change has said. The economic damage
17:05
S3: to Australia on aluminium and steel is not that great.
17:08
S3: It's not like there would be thousands and thousands of
17:12
S3: jobs being lost where people are queuing up at the
17:15
S3: employment centres. It's so it doesn't work quite that way.
17:18
S3: But he has to have a message on how he's
17:22
S3: going to handle it, and he's got to be prepared
17:24
S3: for not getting the exemption because I think, contrary to
17:27
S3: the positive vibe that the government wants to send about
17:30
S3: this exemption being under consideration, I think that the the
17:34
S3: trade hawks in that in the white House are really
17:37
S3: going to push Donald Trump hard on this to have
17:39
S3: no exemptions at all. And I think that's very challenging
17:42
S3: for Anthony Albanese to handle, because that is a blow
17:45
S3: to his authority. He doesn't look like he's been able
17:47
S3: to negotiate with Donald Trump. And then you get a
17:49
S3: live question going into the election campaign, who is the
17:53
S3: best leader to handle an extremely volatile global situation. And
17:58
S3: that's where Peter Dutton exploits the scenario, to present himself
18:02
S3: as somebody who can negotiate better with Donald Trump.
18:04
S2: But I just want to add, we're just talking about
18:06
S2: steel and aluminium, which the tariffs don't kick in until
18:09
S2: March 12th. We've got weeks in which Donald Trump could
18:13
S2: announce tariffs on other things. And that is going to
18:17
S2: be a real threat. And yes, I think the politics
18:22
S2: are pretty tough for Albanese. But for if Peter Dutton
18:27
S2: says I'll be able to get a deal on anything,
18:29
S2: I don't think anyone that's that's not quite believable. If
18:32
S2: there's tariffs on everything else, which is that is the
18:35
S2: stated policy position of Donald Trump.
18:38
S1: Isn't there a political calculation, though, that you would make
18:41
S1: as a voter where you think, well, you know, we've
18:42
S1: got this giant bully on the world stage who is
18:45
S1: throwing his weight around and he's throwing it in our direction.
18:48
S1: You can either you know, Albanese has tried to sort
18:51
S1: of paint himself, I suppose, as the reasonable leader, and
18:53
S1: Dutton just wants to wants to fight. Dutton's tried to
18:56
S1: paint himself as a strong leader who is able to
18:59
S1: stand up to the likes of Donald Trump or whoever.
19:02
S1: I mean, who do you want to confront, Donald Trump?
19:05
S3: Well, I think the complicating factor is the the care with, with,
19:10
S3: with which Peter Dutton has got to manage that situation,
19:13
S3: because if he looks like he is siding with Donald
19:17
S3: Trump in any way or exploiting what Donald Trump is
19:20
S3: doing for his own personal political advantage, then I think
19:24
S3: it's got incredible potential to backfire completely because, um, because
19:31
S3: let's face it, Donald Trump is the problem here. Um,
19:34
S3: and Australian voters generally don't like Donald Trump. They would
19:38
S3: have preferred a different presidential candidate to win that election.
19:43
S3: So siding with Donald Trump is not the way to
19:45
S3: do it. And Peter Dutton this week was very careful
19:48
S3: to say it would be damaging to Australia if Donald
19:50
S3: Trump went ahead with the tariffs.
19:52
S7: What's important now is that the Trump administration hears that
19:56
S7: there is a bipartisan position in Australia to stand up
19:59
S7: for our national interest. If it stays in place, then
20:01
S7: I think it damages the relationship.
20:03
S3: However, he's also praised Donald Trump as a big thinker
20:06
S3: on things like Gaza, which so he, Peter Dutton, has
20:09
S3: not got his message straight yet about where he stands. Um,
20:16
S3: you know, with or against Donald Trump. And that's going
20:18
S3: to be incredibly complicated because Donald Trump is going to
20:22
S3: do a lot of things every day, and it's going
20:24
S3: to be. Uh, you know, show interrupting our election campaign
20:31
S3: on a daily basis.
20:32
S1: Yeah. I mean, one Trump, one thing Trump does better
20:34
S1: than anything is to control every part of the news
20:37
S1: cycle all the time, be everywhere all the time. And
20:40
S1: it must be very, very hard, as an Australian politician
20:43
S1: not to get drawn into that huge political risks on
20:45
S1: both sides. Just quickly, David, when are we likely to
20:48
S1: get a resolution to this? I mean, when are we
20:50
S1: going to know whether or not we are granted an exemption?
20:54
S3: Technically, I think we need it by March. The the
20:57
S3: tariffs are due to start from March 1st. Right. If
20:59
S3: we don't have an exemption by March 1st, then clearly
21:03
S3: we're copying it. But we did find with the Malcolm
21:07
S3: Turnbull negotiation and with the Scott Morrison negotiation, you get
21:10
S3: an agreement or an understanding with Donald Trump. But his
21:13
S3: team come back at you the next year and try
21:16
S3: and renege on it. Then you have to fight it
21:19
S3: all over again. Then they come back the following year
21:22
S3: and they and they push back. And then you've got
21:24
S3: to negotiate all over again. So it it kind of
21:26
S3: never ends. Even if there was some understanding before March 1st,
21:31
S3: I don't think you can really take it to the bank.
21:33
S1: Yeah. Um, gents, this is such an interesting discussion, and
21:35
S1: I'm sure we're going to revisit it. Should we send
21:38
S1: Donald a giant crate of Tim Tams? Would he prefer Vegemite?
21:43
S1: Should we threaten beef exports? What can we do here?
21:47
S2: I think it's it's got to be beef because I
21:49
S2: don't think his palate would extend to Vegemite.
21:51
S1: You don't think he's a Tim Tam guy? Like, maybe
21:55
S1: he doesn't.
21:56
S2: He never drinks Diet Coke. He. Maybe he doesn't want
21:59
S2: the sweetness of that.
22:00
S1: Yeah, maybe. Maybe he's watching his figure. Okay, um. Well, TBA. Thanks, guys.
22:05
S1: Very interesting, as always. And we'll see you both again soon.
22:08
S3: Cheers.
22:08
S2: Thanks, Jackie.
22:09
S3: See you.
22:10
S1: Today's episode of Inside Politics was produced by Tammy Mills
22:14
S1: with technical assistance from Josh Towers and Debbie Harrington. Tom
22:17
S1: McKendrick is our head of audio. Inside politics is a
22:20
S1: production of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. If
22:22
S1: you enjoy this show and want more of our journalism,
22:25
S1: subscribe to our newspapers today. It's the best way to
22:28
S1: support what we do. Search The Age or Smh.com.au and
22:34
S1: sign up for our politics newsletter to receive a comprehensive
22:38
S1: summary of the week's most important news, analysis and insights
22:42
S1: on politics in your inbox every week. Links are in
22:45
S1: the show. Notes. I'm Jacqueline Maley, this is inside politics.
22:49
S1: Thank you for listening.