Latest / Inside Politics / How our reporter helped to break the Trump tariff story

Transcript

How our reporter helped to break the Trump tariff story · 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, March 14th.
• 0:08
  S1: The verdict is in. Australia will not be granted an
• 0:11
  S1: exemption from US tariffs on steel and aluminium, despite hopes
• 0:15
  S1: that President Trump would look favourably on one of its
• 0:18
  S1: most loyal allies and grant us one.
• 0:20
  S2: The white House, in just the last hour, ruling out
• 0:23
  S2: Australia's bid to be excluded from the 25% tax tariffs
• 0:27
  S2: come into effect today.
• 0:28
  S1: But the news was greeted with dismay, with the Prime
• 0:31
  S1: Minister saying the decision was not a friendly act and
• 0:34
  S1: the opposition blaming it on the government, with Peter Dutton
• 0:37
  S1: saying Anthony Albanese had been weak and incompetent. They say
• 0:41
  S1: Albanese should have travelled to Washington to lobby Donald Trump
• 0:44
  S1: in person. So what does this mean for our relationship
• 0:47
  S1: with our closest ally? Will the US impose more tariffs
• 0:50
  S1: on us in the future? Did the government cock up
• 0:52
  S1: the handling of this delicate diplomatic issue? Plus, we will
• 0:56
  S1: delve into the strange case of the caravan full of
• 0:58
  S1: explosives and the fake terror plot with both sides of
• 1:02
  S1: politics accusing the other of weaponizing this incident. Who is
• 1:05
  S1: in the right? Joining me this week, we have chief
• 1:09
  S1: political correspondent David Crowe, as usual, and a very special
• 1:12
  S1: guest online from Washington. We have our US correspondent Michael Koziol.
• 1:17
  S1: Welcome to the pod, gentlemen.
• 1:19
  S3: Hello, Jackie.
• 1:20
  S4: Well, hello, Jackie. And hello, Michael.
• 1:22
  S1: So thank you for making time for us. I just
• 1:24
  S1: want to get a sense of what it's like there
• 1:26
  S1: on the ground for you. When did you find out
• 1:28
  S1: about the tariff decision? How did you find out? Are
• 1:30
  S1: you talking to people in the administration, or is there
• 1:32
  S1: some sort of edict that is emailed? How does this
• 1:35
  S1: news get communicated?
• 1:36
  S3: Look, it's a bit of a chaotic white House. There's
• 1:40
  S3: a lot of things happening very fast. So I wish
• 1:43
  S3: that I could say there was some smooth process for
• 1:46
  S3: engaging with it, but there really isn't. And I'm quite
• 1:49
  S3: new here. So, uh, whatever kind of back door tricks
• 1:53
  S3: there are, um, I wouldn't really know them yet, but
• 1:55
  S3: in this case, it just so happened that on that
• 1:58
  S3: Tuesday at 1:00, the white House press secretary, Caroline Leavitt,
• 2:03
  S3: was doing a press briefing. I went along to that.
• 2:07
  S3: There was another Australian reporter there, Carrington Clark from the ABC.
• 2:11
  S5: Good afternoon everybody. Good afternoon. How are you? Good. I
• 2:16
  S5: let my staff get settled. There's a lot of news today,
• 2:19
  S5: so I look forward to taking your questions.
• 2:21
  S3: It's a very packed briefing. I'm told that this is
• 2:23
  S3: a bit different to how things were under Joe Biden,
• 2:26
  S3: when perhaps media interest had waned a little bit by
• 2:29
  S3: the end. So the room is packed. It's standing room only.
• 2:33
  S3: You're very unlikely to get your question in the 30
• 2:38
  S3: or 40 minutes of the briefing, which was the case.
• 2:41
  S5: And I'll see you guys later. Perhaps you'll see the
• 2:43
  S5: president in a Tesla later this afternoon. Have a good one. Thanks.
• 2:47
  S3: So we decided to just go around the back and
• 2:49
  S3: poke our heads in to the press office. Uh, the
• 2:53
  S3: white House is very small, but it's quite accessible. So
• 2:57
  S3: you can just walk into the press secretary's office and
• 3:01
  S3: we said hello. And you know, what's the deal with
• 3:04
  S3: these tariffs, you know. Donald Trump said that he was
• 3:07
  S3: going to give great consideration to exempting Australia from the tariffs. Um,
• 3:11
  S3: what's his decision. And she was very clear and emphatic.
• 3:15
  S3: She said he's considered it and he's considered against it. Um,
• 3:18
  S3: there won't be any exemptions. Uh, you know, if you're
• 3:21
  S3: steelmakers want to move their operations to the US, then
• 3:23
  S3: they're welcome to do that. So that was how the
• 3:26
  S3: news broke.
• 3:28
  S1: I mean, that's fascinating. I love that you just had
• 3:30
  S1: to kind of buttonhole the the white House press secretary
• 3:33
  S1: after her briefing. Um. Well done. What was the reaction
• 3:37
  S1: of the Australian diplomatic community in Washington? It wasn't unexpected,
• 3:41
  S1: but was it still a shock?
• 3:42
  S3: Yeah. You're right. I mean, I think they were. And
• 3:45
  S3: we're just still, at the time of this recording, um,
• 3:48
  S3: we're trying to kind of glean a little bit more
• 3:49
  S3: information as to the exact sequencing of how this all
• 3:52
  S3: worked out, but I've seen a reporter that Kevin Rudd
• 3:55
  S3: was meeting with Howard Lutnick, the commerce secretary, uh, probably
• 4:00
  S3: earlier in the day on Tuesday. So that would have
• 4:03
  S3: been Tuesday morning, US time. Um, and, and, uh, left
• 4:07
  S3: that meeting, I think, with, with an understanding that we
• 4:11
  S3: almost certainly weren't going to be exempted. But perhaps, you know,
• 4:14
  S3: given that midnight hadn't come around yet, there was still,
• 4:16
  S3: you know, half a day left to, to, uh, give
• 4:19
  S3: it a go. And that was certainly what, you know,
• 4:21
  S3: the Australians were saying once we broke the story that,
• 4:24
  S3: you know, the Australian government was saying, hey, you know,
• 4:26
  S3: there's there's this is bad, but there's still time. Uh,
• 4:29
  S3: whereas the impression that we got from Caroline Leavitt, which,
• 4:33
  S3: you know, again, was quite clear, was that this decision
• 4:35
  S3: had already been made, there would be no exemptions. That
• 4:38
  S3: and let's remember here, these tariffs have already been essentially
• 4:42
  S3: written down in an executive order that is due to
• 4:45
  S3: that was due to start on this date. So in
• 4:48
  S3: fact there would have to be a new executive order
• 4:51
  S3: introducing these exemptions in order for that to be given.
• 4:54
  S3: So from the White House's point of view, it was
• 4:57
  S3: sort of like, hey, there's nothing to see here. We've
• 4:59
  S3: already said what we're going to do. Um, and we're
• 5:01
  S3: not changing it. So, you know, they were fairly, um,
• 5:04
  S3: you might say, blasé about it, even though it was
• 5:07
  S3: obviously a very big deal for the Australians.
• 5:10
  S6: Tariffs and escalating trade tensions are a form of economic
• 5:15
  S6: self-harm and a recipe for slower growth and higher inflation.
• 5:21
  S6: They are paid by the consumers. This is why.
• 5:25
  S1: And is there any chance the decision might be reversed?
• 5:28
  S3: Well, I would say yes, because you never know what's
• 5:31
  S3: going to happen in this white House. I mean, look,
• 5:33
  S3: they've given no indication that that's going to happen, but
• 5:37
  S3: we've seen in the relationship with Canada that, you know,
• 5:41
  S3: things can change very quickly. I mean, on the same
• 5:43
  S3: day that this was all happening, Donald Trump was going
• 5:46
  S3: to double the tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminium to 50%,
• 5:50
  S3: and that lasted about three hours before, you know. The
• 5:53
  S3: Canadians reacted and then it was all off. So, you know, look, Donald.
• 5:59
  S3: Trump can always decide, um, based on a deal that
• 6:02
  S3: he makes that this is. An exemption is going to
• 6:05
  S3: be introduced or something's going to be reversed. At the moment,
• 6:08
  S3: there's no indication of that. But, you know, given the way.
• 6:11
  S3: That decisions are made in this white House, you would
• 6:13
  S3: just you would never rule it out.
• 6:15
  S1: Mhm. Mhm. It's fascinating. I mean it is really actually
• 6:17
  S1: quite hard to keep track of this news now David,
• 6:20
  S1: what was the reaction from Canberra just briefly from the PM,
• 6:23
  S1: the foreign minister, the deputy Prime minister. I mean it
• 6:25
  S1: was it was pretty strong wasn't it.
• 6:27
  S4: Actually I think it was you know cautious. They're not
• 6:30
  S4: happy with it. But I thought it was interesting that
• 6:33
  S4: Ed Husic, the industry minister, called it a dog act
• 6:35
  S4: by America. But Anthony Albanese didn't back in that comment
• 6:39
  S4: in quite as forceful a way he says it's disappointing.
• 6:43
  S4: I think what's been happening here is that behind the scenes,
• 6:47
  S4: whenever I've talked to people in the government, there's been
• 6:50
  S4: an expectation that there would be no exemption. As the
• 6:53
  S4: time went on, they were gloomier about getting an exemption
• 6:57
  S4: just because of the unpredictability of the white House and
• 6:59
  S4: the fact that there were no signals from any of
• 7:01
  S4: the people around Donald Trump, that they were going to
• 7:04
  S4: make the argument for Australia. Howard Lutnick being one of
• 7:07
  S4: the examples, you know, really singling Australia out as a
• 7:10
  S4: source of dumping in the American market so strongly against
• 7:14
  S4: Australia that's made it challenging for Anthony Albanese and for
• 7:18
  S4: Jim Chalmers as treasurer. But they didn't want to say publicly, look,
• 7:22
  S4: we're going to cop it here and there's not much
• 7:24
  S4: we can do about it because that looked defeatist. And
• 7:26
  S4: the public remarks are still words like, oh, we're going
• 7:30
  S4: to keep fighting. We're going to keep arguing, keep making
• 7:33
  S4: the case in the hope that we can get a
• 7:34
  S4: good outcome. So that's the public line for obvious reasons.
• 7:39
  S4: But behind the scenes look, they can see the way
• 7:41
  S4: Donald Trump works just like everybody can. And they didn't
• 7:44
  S4: have much hope of an exemption.
• 7:46
  S1: Mhm. So what about the opposition. Because they've been much
• 7:48
  S1: stronger and they've basically blamed the government for this haven't they.
• 7:52
  S4: Yeah. And the line from Peter Dutton is that he
• 7:54
  S4: could get a better deal.
• 7:55
  S7: It's not just Australians who see the Prime Minister as
• 7:58
  S7: weak and incompetent. It's our trading partners as well. And
• 8:02
  S7: the sad reality is because of the Prime Minister's inability
• 8:05
  S7: to deal with this issue, Australian jobs are at risk
• 8:08
  S7: and Australian industry is at risk.
• 8:11
  S4: And I think that's a very interesting line. When you
• 8:13
  S4: think that, is he really going to go to the
• 8:14
  S4: election saying I can get a better deal on tariffs
• 8:18
  S4: if you elect me prime minister? That's a very big call.
• 8:21
  S4: It's a very big promise to make and I think
• 8:23
  S4: it's an unlikely scenario.
• 8:25
  S8: Have you called Donald Trump?
• 8:26
  S7: I haven't I haven't as opposition leader, but I will
• 8:30
  S7: as prime minister and we'll get a deal done and
• 8:32
  S7: we'll make sure that we can protect jobs and protect industry,
• 8:35
  S7: because otherwise Australians are the ones who are going to
• 8:37
  S7: lose out under Mr. Albanese's inability to.
• 8:40
  S4: That doesn't seem to be the way Donald Trump works here.
• 8:43
  S4: Donald Trump loves tariffs. The people around Donald Trump love tariffs.
• 8:47
  S4: The thing that's going to make a difference here is
• 8:50
  S4: the impact in America. When people see higher prices, that's
• 8:54
  S4: actually going to be the impact. The other impact, of course,
• 8:57
  S4: is what's happening on the share market with prices falling.
• 9:01
  S4: Donald Trump doesn't like that. I'm thinking about this for
• 9:05
  S4: my Friday column. Is there anybody in the world who
• 9:09
  S4: is as driven by money as Donald Trump? Like he
• 9:12
  S4: measures a lot of things by money.
• 9:14
  S1: I think it's his only metric.
• 9:15
  S4: And when the market is tanking, that sends him a message.
• 9:19
  S4: And I do wonder whether that would have an impact,
• 9:21
  S4: far more an impact on Trump than any lobbying from Australia.
• 9:25
  S1: Mhm. Michael, is Australia potentially in line for further US
• 9:29
  S1: tariffs on other goods? Beef exports have been mentioned. I
• 9:34
  S1: notice in dispatches.
• 9:35
  S3: Yes. Look I think that's certainly possible. So there's another
• 9:41
  S3: round of tariffs that are due to come in in
• 9:43
  S3: less than a month. What Donald Trump calls the reciprocal tariffs,
• 9:48
  S3: which is basically, in his parlance, you know what what
• 9:53
  S3: other countries charge us. We're now going to charge on
• 9:56
  S3: on them and rolled up in all of that is
• 9:59
  S3: the sort of, you know, bunch of other grievances that
• 10:03
  S3: the US may have with various countries, uh, you know,
• 10:06
  S3: non-tariff measures that a lot of countries have around protecting products,
• 10:12
  S3: particularly agriculture. And I must say, I'm not au fait
• 10:15
  S3: with what the rules around, um, Australian agriculture might be
• 10:20
  S3: and not, for example, letting you know US agricultural products
• 10:23
  S3: into the country. Um, David might have more detail about
• 10:26
  S3: some of that, but I mean, I do know, as
• 10:28
  S3: everyone who flies into the country knows, we're very, very
• 10:31
  S3: protective of our agriculture. Um, not only from a safety
• 10:34
  S3: point of view, but trying to protect the livelihoods of
• 10:37
  S3: our farmers, as is the US. And we don't really
• 10:41
  S3: know where that's going to land yet, and that's certainly
• 10:43
  S3: something that we need to try and find out over
• 10:44
  S3: the coming weeks. But there seem to be all sorts
• 10:47
  S3: of grievances. I've seen the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme mentioned as
• 10:51
  S3: one grievance that the US had when they were negotiating
• 10:54
  S3: the free trade agreement with Australia 20 years ago.
• 10:57
  S1: Why is that? Whatever pharmaceuticals, the US exports to Australia
• 11:01
  S1: are subsidised and too cheap. I've never understood that.
• 11:05
  S4: There's a government decision basically on subsidies for some pharmaceuticals
• 11:09
  S4: and not for others. And so I guess in that sense,
• 11:12
  S4: it's not completely open slather because a government advisory committee says, look, this,
• 11:18
  S4: this pharmaceutical is worth supporting and will subsidize it under
• 11:22
  S4: the PBS. And the Americans have got concerns with that.
• 11:25
  S4: But I think that that's a risky fight to pick,
• 11:28
  S4: because some of the subsidies are going to drugs sold
• 11:31
  S4: by American suppliers that helps them sell in Australia. So
• 11:35
  S4: if they want to pick a fight over that, maybe
• 11:37
  S4: they'll lose.
• 11:38
  S1: But so the argument is that pharmaceuticals from other countries
• 11:41
  S1: are being subsidized, and that would prejudice US companies who've
• 11:45
  S1: got similar products on the market.
• 11:47
  S4: Well, I think the subsidy from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme
• 11:51
  S4: isn't country by country, it's product by product.
• 11:54
  S1: Yeah.
• 11:54
  S4: So I don't actually see the logic for the Americans
• 11:59
  S4: in picking a fight over it. But, you know.
• 12:01
  S1: Yeah. Because us pharmaceutical companies would presumably take advantage of
• 12:05
  S1: it as well. I guess that's another fight that we're
• 12:07
  S1: going to see play out. I just I just want
• 12:10
  S1: to talk more broadly now. And I want to ask
• 12:11
  S1: you both both both about this. What does this tell
• 12:15
  S1: us more broadly about the reliability of the US as
• 12:18
  S1: an ally? There's been a lot of talk about Aukus
• 12:21
  S1: and how much we're going to be able to count
• 12:23
  S1: on the Americans now to deliver those submarines that we're
• 12:27
  S1: paying so very much money for and that we've already
• 12:30
  S1: put down. I think it's an $800 million down payment recently. Michael,
• 12:34
  S1: what are the implications more broadly?
• 12:36
  S3: Well, we've paid $800 million just to help boost American
• 12:41
  S3: submarine building industry. That's before you know that that doesn't
• 12:45
  S3: bias any of the actual boats. We have to pay
• 12:48
  S3: for those separately. And we'll be paying another, uh, form.
• 12:53
  S3: I'll do the math for 100.
• 12:55
  S1: We're journalists. We're not supposed to be good at maths.
• 12:57
  S3: Well, we're paying another 4.2 billion towards that industry capacity
• 13:02
  S3: building before any boats even are put up for sale. Now, look,
• 13:07
  S3: I mean, Donald Trump won't be the one who makes
• 13:09
  S3: the decision on whether we ultimately get those boats. It
• 13:13
  S3: will be the president of the day in, you know,
• 13:16
  S3: the 2030s. But they will have the capacity to say, actually, no,
• 13:21
  S3: the US needs this boat and we're going to hold
• 13:23
  S3: on to it. So there's no guarantee in there that
• 13:25
  S3: we will get anything. And, uh, you know, look, in
• 13:29
  S3: terms of the broader question of the alliance, I think, uh,
• 13:32
  S3: you know, well, we've been shown where we stand, but
• 13:36
  S3: we're not alone there. Um, that, uh, that this administration
• 13:40
  S3: basically thinks everyone around the world, including our friends, has
• 13:44
  S3: been ripping us off for a long time. Um, and
• 13:46
  S3: we're now going to get our own back. That's that's
• 13:48
  S3: the basic view of the Trump White House. So they
• 13:52
  S3: will gladly say, you know, we'll take that 800 million.
• 13:55
  S3: We'll take the next 4.2 billion. And by the way,
• 13:59
  S3: you know, you need to up your defense spending to 3%
• 14:03
  S3: of GDP while you're at it. So, you know, they
• 14:05
  S3: don't even think that the 800 million we've given them
• 14:08
  S3: is enough, essentially. Um, they want us to be upping
• 14:11
  S3: our own, uh, defense spending to 3% of GDP, which
• 14:15
  S3: is a story that, um, our colleague, um, Matthew, not, uh,
• 14:18
  S3: broke last week. That's their view. And they basically think that, uh,
• 14:22
  S3: we and many other friends and allies of the US
• 14:25
  S3: haven't been paying our way and need to do so.
• 14:28
  S1: Mhm. Chloe, what's your sense, particularly in Canberra, of how
• 14:31
  S1: much we can now rely on the United States as
• 14:34
  S1: an ally generally.
• 14:35
  S4: Why would you listen to the United States telling us
• 14:38
  S4: to lift defense spending to 3% if they are an
• 14:42
  S4: unreliable ally? It doesn't make sense, does it? The whole
• 14:46
  S4: situation is forcing a rethink about the alliance. And I
• 14:51
  S4: think there is a, you know, an undeniable fact that
• 14:56
  S4: Aukus has made us more dependent on the United States
• 14:59
  S4: at the very time when the United States is less dependable.
• 15:03
  S4: And this is a really huge problem. But I think
• 15:06
  S4: it's quite separate from tariffs. The tariff, economic impact in
• 15:11
  S4: steel and aluminium is minimal. If there is a China
• 15:15
  S4: shock because of tariffs, that will hurt the Australian economy
• 15:18
  S4: big time. But at the moment we can actually navigate
• 15:21
  S4: this tariff dispute because it's focused on those industries. Look,
• 15:24
  S4: if it broadens to beef that's a problem. But aukus
• 15:27
  S4: is a is a huge question that's entirely separate. And
• 15:31
  S4: I know there are even ideas about going back to
• 15:33
  S4: the French and saying, look, remember that contract we tore up?
• 15:37
  S4: Is there another way to do it? I mean, that's
• 15:39
  S4: a pretty out there concept.
• 15:40
  S1: Just go crawling back to Emmanuel Macron.
• 15:42
  S4: But now people are canvassing these ideas because of what
• 15:47
  S4: Michael's pointed out with the Virginia class submarines. The Americans
• 15:53
  S4: may not want to sell them to us in the 2030s.
• 15:56
  S1: Mhm. I want to just ask quickly, what's your sense
• 15:59
  S1: of the domestic political fallout, whether or not voters will
• 16:03
  S1: blame Albanese for the tariff decision as the coalition is,
• 16:07
  S1: you know, really trying to do, or will they just
• 16:09
  S1: sort of figure that's all part of the madness of
• 16:11
  S1: Trump 2.0 in the white House and give the government
• 16:14
  S1: a bit of a pass on it?
• 16:15
  S4: It's really a gut, gut call at this point, but
• 16:19
  S4: everybody can see the unpredictability of Donald Trump, and Australians
• 16:23
  S4: generally don't like him. They would have preferred Kamala Harris
• 16:25
  S4: to be president. Clearly we polled that and we saw that.
• 16:28
  S4: At the same time, a lot of people think that
• 16:31
  S4: Peter Dutton is better able to handle Donald Trump. But
• 16:35
  S4: at the moment we've got Anthony Albanese saying that Peter
• 16:39
  S4: Dutton is being, in a sense, not on Team Australia.
• 16:42
  S4: By picking this domestic fight over the impact of the
• 16:45
  S4: Trump tariffs, will that play out in a way that
• 16:49
  S4: helps Anthony Albanese convince Australians that they need to back him,
• 16:53
  S4: rather than Peter Dutton, who labor is trying to pin
• 16:59
  S4: as a more Trump like candidate? I don't know whether
• 17:02
  S4: that will succeed, but that is the dynamic we're in
• 17:04
  S4: for in the election campaign.
• 17:06
  S1: It's fascinating. Michael Koziol, you have a dinner to attend.
• 17:10
  S1: I hope you are going somewhere very glamorous. Have a
• 17:12
  S1: martini on us. Thank you for being such a champ.
• 17:16
  S3: Thanks. See you buddy.
• 17:17
  S1: See you soon. So, David, I want to talk about
• 17:25
  S1: a more domestic political conflict now, which is this fight
• 17:27
  S1: over the caravan full of explosives that was discovered in
• 17:30
  S1: Sydney in January, and the caravan also had a list
• 17:33
  S1: of synagogues and a note displaying anti-Semitic messages. And it
• 17:36
  S1: obviously put a lot of fear into the Jewish community.
• 17:39
  S1: But it was revealed this week that it was actually
• 17:42
  S1: a fake terror plot, designed not for sort of truly
• 17:46
  S1: antisemitic purposes, but to distract police resources away from organised
• 17:50
  S1: crime figures. How did this issue become politicised?
• 17:54
  S4: There are a sequence of events, really, beginning with the
• 17:57
  S4: fact that it was leaked to the Daily Telegraph in Sydney.
• 18:00
  S4: They got a good story and good luck to them.
• 18:03
  S4: They reported the fact of the discovery of the caravan,
• 18:06
  S4: which hadn't been known until that point. And I'm not
• 18:10
  S4: going to get into the guessing game about their sources. Right.
• 18:13
  S4: They they reported a story that was newsworthy and they
• 18:16
  S4: got stuck into it. That then triggered a press conference
• 18:20
  S4: by New South Wales Premier Chris Minns and police officers
• 18:25
  S4: in Sydney, where they talked about this, and that's where
• 18:27
  S4: Chris Means made that fateful remark about how this was terrorism,
• 18:31
  S4: and it was potentially a mass casualty event.
• 18:35
  S9: That anyone attempting terrorism, violence, hatred in our community will
• 18:41
  S9: be met with the full force of the law, that
• 18:44
  S9: there are massive.
• 18:44
  S4: And things got very high alert from there. From then on.
• 18:49
  S4: Anthony Albanese backed in the terrorism word the next morning,
• 18:53
  S4: and then we saw Peter Dutton go very hard on
• 18:57
  S4: who knew what when.
• 18:58
  S1: Yeah.
• 18:59
  S7: The prime minister of our country wasn't notified for nine days,
• 19:02
  S7: ten days of what was believed to be the biggest
• 19:08
  S7: planned terrorist attack in our country, in our country's history.
• 19:12
  S4: And it was apparent that Chris Minns had been told
• 19:15
  S4: about this caravan. But reading between the lines, it seems
• 19:18
  S4: that Anthony Albanese had not been told in the same
• 19:21
  S4: time frame at least.
• 19:22
  S1: But now we know that the police actually knew very
• 19:25
  S1: early on. They say that this was not a genuine
• 19:28
  S1: anti-Semitic plot. That it was actually this sort of fake
• 19:30
  S1: terror plot by organized crime figures. So Tony Burke is
• 19:34
  S1: saying that Dutton basically refused to have briefings along those
• 19:38
  S1: lines and went around town talking about a terror plot,
• 19:41
  S1: even though he knew that it might very well not
• 19:44
  S1: be a genuine terror plot. Is that right?
• 19:46
  S4: Peter Dutton never had the personal briefings that he could
• 19:50
  S4: have had from the AFP to establish what they knew,
• 19:53
  S4: where they could have told him in private what their
• 19:56
  S4: various lines of inquiry were. Now, they never ruled out
• 20:00
  S4: from the start terrorism. You know, it was a line
• 20:02
  S4: of inquiry, but this other option was also a line
• 20:06
  S4: of inquiry. And that was clear to us when we
• 20:08
  S4: spoke to officials. And it became even clearer when we
• 20:12
  S4: reported that the explosives were 40 years old and that
• 20:15
  S4: there was this theory about organized crime.
• 20:17
  S1: Yeah. So there was a there was a seed of doubt,
• 20:19
  S1: a pretty strong seed of doubt there from the very beginning.
• 20:21
  S1: And although Dutton himself didn't attend the briefing. Members of
• 20:24
  S1: his staff did and senior ministers did. So I think
• 20:28
  S1: James Paterson, for example, who's the shadow home affairs, never modified.
• 20:32
  S4: They never modified their line of attack. So we don't
• 20:36
  S4: know what they were told during those briefings. But even
• 20:39
  S4: now they're going hard saying that Anthony Albanese should have
• 20:42
  S4: been briefed immediately on this. But I have a real
• 20:45
  S4: problem with that because I don't think, given what we
• 20:48
  S4: know now, it actually reached a threshold that demanded instant
• 20:52
  S4: attention from the Prime minister. It was an organised crime plot.
• 20:55
  S1: Yeah. Okay. So Tony Burke, Home Affairs Minister, has said
• 20:59
  S1: that Dutton leveraged the whole thing for political gain. Dutton
• 21:02
  S1: has hit back and said that actually, it's the government
• 21:04
  S1: who has politicised this. I just want to ask you
• 21:07
  S1: one thing in sort of wrapping this up, we know
• 21:09
  S1: that Dutton has been seen as not a particularly likeable leader,
• 21:12
  S1: at least in the past. And his reputation, reputation, whether
• 21:15
  S1: or not it's true, is someone who's very black and
• 21:17
  S1: white about the issues of immigration and sort of law
• 21:20
  S1: and order, you might say Some voters even think that
• 21:23
  S1: he might be cold or hard hearted. I'm interested in
• 21:26
  S1: your opinion whether or not you think this is going
• 21:27
  S1: to sort of cement that view for voters or for
• 21:29
  S1: some voters of Peter Dutton, or whether or not it's
• 21:34
  S1: just going to look like a shemozzle. And actually, the
• 21:36
  S1: Prime Minister himself looks weak because he didn't know what
• 21:39
  S1: was going on.
• 21:39
  S4: Peter Dutton did go very hard for weeks on this,
• 21:43
  S4: and so there would have been a lot of attention
• 21:45
  S4: and a lot of publicity, and households would have seen
• 21:48
  S4: him talking up the threat from the caravan. The caravan
• 21:53
  S4: now turns out to be not an imminent threat to people.
• 21:57
  S4: So I think that will cost him in New South
• 22:01
  S4: Wales in particular. And New South Wales is a key
• 22:03
  S4: state for the coalition. They really need to make some
• 22:06
  S4: gains in New South Wales. They can't win that many
• 22:09
  S4: more seats in Queensland because they're so strong in Queensland.
• 22:12
  S4: It's Victoria and New South Wales that are going to
• 22:14
  S4: decide this election for the coalition. So I think as
• 22:17
  S4: a problem for Peter Dutton in New South Wales, it
• 22:20
  S4: does have political significance.
• 22:22
  S1: Mhm. Okay. We've got to wrap up there. But it's
• 22:25
  S1: been a fascinating chat and we will see you again
• 22:27
  S1: next week David. And who knows what the news will
• 22:29
  S1: be next week particularly out of the white House.
• 22:32
  S4: It's a wild ride.
• 22:33
  S1: It is. Strap in. Thanks, David.
• 22:35
  S4: See ya.
• 22:38
  S1: Today's episode of Inside Politics was produced by Julia Carr Katzel,
• 22:42
  S1: with technical assistance from Debby Harrington and Josh towers. Our
• 22:46
  S1: executive producer is Tami Mills. Inside politics is a production
• 22:49
  S1: of The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald. To support
• 22:52
  S1: our journalism, subscribe to us by visiting The Age or smh.com.au.
• 22:57
  S1: Forward slash subscribe and sign up for our Inside Politics
• 23:01
  S1: newsletter to receive a comprehensive summary of the week's most
• 23:04
  S1: important news, analysis and insights into your inbox every week.
• 23:09
  S1: Links are in the show. Notes. I'm Jacqueline Maley, this
• 23:13
  S1: is Inside politics. Thank you for listening.