Is Australia more than a middle power?

ABC Listen.

Podcasts, radio, news, music, and more.

When Donna Nelson flew into Japan, she thought she was going to meet a man she'd been talking to online for years.

Instead, she was arrested at the airport.

Now Donna could face six years in prison for drug trafficking, but this month she hopes to clear her name.

I'm Stephen Stockwell, host of The Case Of, the follow-up to the hit podcast Mushroom Case Daily.

Together with the ABC's James Oten and Olivia Rousseau, we're following Dono Nelson's trial.

Search for the Case Slot podcast on the ABC Listen app or wherever you get your podcasts.

Today the Australian people have voted for Australian values.

Government is always formed in a sensible centre, but our Liberal Party reflects a range of views.

Politics is the brutal game of arithmetic, but no one's going to vote for you.

Don't stare this aren't you?

We've always been about the planet, but we've got to make sure that people have their daily needs met.

People are starting to see that there is actually a different way of doing politics.

Welcome to the party room.

I'm Brett Worthington, joining you from Nunabal Country here in Canberra.

And I'm Mel Clark, joining you from Wurundjeri Country in Melbourne today.

And Brett, I think my voice is holding up a little better than yours, but I'm sure it's going to hang on for this podcast.

We will be able to get through it.

I was also thinking about how I'm obviously filling in on the podcast for PK, you're filling in an afternoon briefing for PK.

It really is taking two of us to cover the one job that PK does.

So she can save this for her appraisal, sister.

Absolutely.

Absolutely.

And look, I feel like we're going to need to muster all of our strength for today's conversation because I really think we need to take a big wide look.

at the Albanese government and where it currently is in this term, in the beginning stages of this second term of government.

We've just had a real transition period, I think, of Anthony Albanese has started this period of being on the world stage.

He's had this big trip to the US and the UK, engaging on international issues.

He's briefly back in Australia, but he's going to be spending a lot of the second half of this year overseas attending a whole range of summits.

But we also have this period for the Albanese government where it's embarking on its second term.

It made a lot of promises at the election.

It's starting to deliver on that.

But where does it go from this point with the power that it has, with its big election win, the numbers it has in parliament?

Where is Anthony Albanese heading with this domestic agenda?

So I feel like this is a really good week to just take a step back and look at some of these big pictures of what is the Prime Minister doing on the world stage?

What is he doing back at home?

Well, the perfect person who can help us with that, Mel, is Matthew Knott.

He's been up close traveling with the Prime Minister on the world stage.

He's the Foreign Affairs and National Security correspondent for the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age.

Matthew, welcome back to the party room.

Thank you for having me.

A martini, I think, would be nice after time in New York.

That would be fitting.

Who knows what direction it would take the podcast, though?

So maybe we'll save it for the end.

Drinks for the end of the podcast.

But look, let's start with this big trip because you were there, Matthew Knott.

So you saw...

quite the extensive agenda that Anthony Albanese was prosecuting.

And I think it was a really notable trip in that the government went with a role to play in a really major international shift, being one of the countries that shifted to recognise Palestine, which is obviously part of the broader international moves we've seen over the last two weeks of attention on that conflict.

But I thought it was really interesting that this was a case of Australia playing a really proactive role in pushing a big global issue.

It wasn't just the Prime Minister going on and looking after bilateral relationships and making sure everything was steady as she goes.

So

tell me how you saw this up close.

Was this the Prime Minister being a bit ambitious in international affairs?

How much is it and how much of it is being driven by him and how much of this is being driven by the Foreign Minister, Penny Wong, a very experienced hand on international issues?

Definitely.

This was really striking throughout the whole trip

because it happened as big events were happening in the world and the Middle East.

And it was striking how Anthony Albanese was right in the middle of that as it was happening,

meeting the key players.

So on his first day in New York, he met the King of Jordan, who's a very important regional player.

While in London, he happened to meet with Tony Blair, who's being spoken about as leading a transitional authority in Gaza.

And then he ended up in the UAE meeting the president there.

And the UAE is a really crucial country in terms of thinking about a post-war scenario.

So you can see he was right in amongst it and meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, who led this two-state solution push at the UN.

And so the Prime Minister and Penny Wong as well, they do like to say repeatedly that we are not major players in the Middle East, but they're definitely looking at something more ambitious than being a bit player.

I think they've decided this is the second term.

We got through the first term where we copped a lot of criticism on this issue from the left and the right, and it was hard.

In In the Pacific, the Prime Minister likes to talk about climate change as being the kind of price of entry that if you're not committed to climate change, you can't get anything done in the Pacific.

I think it's a similar situation now with the Middle East.

He sees it as recognizing Palestine was important to get Australia in the room to show that we care about both sides of this conflict and to play a role.

Now, there's lots of talk about post-war Gaza and say a stabilization force force in there.

I asked the PM during the week, for example, would Australia be willing to play a role in that?

And he says, look, we're considering it, we're open to it.

And a discussion I've been having with some people this week is, is there something between a middle power and say a great power?

I think Australia's in this...

Three-quarter power?

There's not a term for it, but people, experts I speak to, say we're actually much more than a middle power.

We just need to find out the right term for it.

And why is that?

Why do you think Australia can sort of rise above the heft that the size of our economy might otherwise limit us to?

Well I think you can see that there were two sides to it this week was joining together often with what you could say are really centre-left governments.

That was a big theme throughout this trip.

Australia joining with Canada, the UK.

We saw this relationship with Keir Starmer.

So we're putting ourselves in this camp of say the modern progressive countries while also holding on to our traditional alliance with the US.

There are contradictions there and complications in terms of balancing these two, but I think what the Prime Minister was very happy with was achieving that balance.

And so that's putting us

right at the centre of things.

Matt, back here it seemed like the government was pretty happy with how this trip went, that, yes, like you say, joining with allies on things like Palestine and climate action, but wanting to take more of a leadership role in terms of the social media ban, this pitch to try and get Australia back on the UN Security Council.

How were you viewing though the appearance at the Labor Party conference, given that was probably one element that the Coalition was very critical back here about Anthony Albanese's decision to go and speak there and really kind of offer such a vocal support at a partisan level for Kirstama?

We have no problem with the Prime Minister meeting the King, the Prime Minister of the UK and other UK leaders.

But giving a speech backing in a political party in another country, that really does cross the line.

And I know Australians would be disappointed in their Prime Minister for doing just this.

Yeah, it stood out from the get-go as a very different day, a very different event to everything that had been leading up to it.

All the events at the United Nations were clearly about prosecuting Australia's role on the world stage.

Arriving in Liverpool and showing up at this Labour conference with all the branding about the NHS and the slogans of UK Labor, it was clear we were in a very different world that was very party political.

In his speech, the Prime Minister himself did try to walk a line, but there was no getting around what he was saying.

But what I see here in UK Labor, under this man, this leader, this Prime Minister, my friend, is the same determination that I know lives in every member of the Australian Labor Party, An absolute resolve to stand together and defend democracy itself.

The whole dynamics of this conference was an Australian Prime Minister coming in saying

essentially, I struggled in my first term, but I won again.

You've got to be patient.

You've got to give Keer Starmer a chance was the whole subtext to what he was saying.

The centre left can take on the far right.

So that is a very political message.

It was a bit of an indulgence.

There's no way around it.

It definitely seemed, Mel, I'm not sure what you think, but the ways in which you've had this whopping majority, whether this was a victory lap that the Prime Minister was taking, this is a man who was so sensitive in his first term to those criticisms of being Airbus elbow.

We know we're going to see him on the world stage a lot over this next term.

But in choosing not to meet with Nigel Farage, of course he met with Kemi Badenock, the official opposition leader.

Well, I met yesterday with the leader of the Labor Party and the leader of the opposition.

Of the Conservative Party.

Yeah, that's right.

Would you meet Nigel Farage?

Well, I haven't been invited to meet Nigel Farage and, you know, I'm aware of his views.

We would have very different views.

Were he ever to be in a position?

I respect people's positions and I engage with them.

This trip to the US coming up, we'll obviously see him sit down with Donald Trump, but will he look to meet with other figures within the US political system?

I think will be an interesting one to watch and see.

How are you seeing how this back end of the year looks like for the Prime Minister?

I think what we're seeing is a Prime Minister that has much more confidence in this term than he did in the first term.

I think it's fair to say in the first term, whether we're talking international or foreign issues, the Prime Minister didn't want to step a foot wrong.

And I think there was caution in just about every decision you saw come out of cabinet, perhaps with the exception of being willing to change the stage three tax cuts.

Just about every other policy position that was taken and decision that was made was one that was done as a cautious and defensive move.

Don't give the coalition room to criticise.

Try to defend rather than go on the offensive.

And I think not only securing the second term, but securing it emphatically has definitely given the Prime Minister much more confidence with which to make decisions like recognising the state of Palestine.

That I cannot see how that would have played out in a first term or with less electoral support more recently.

So I do think a lot of it comes down to the internal emotional feeling of the Prime Minister and senior Labor Party figures, of them feeling very confident with where they stand electorally domestically, gives them a lot more willingness to be adventurous when it comes to policy abroad.

He probably got a warmer welcome at the British Labour Party than he maybe got.

Just on what you were saying, Mel, was that really came across at the UN at the event they had about the social media ban for under-16s?

Because that you had the

president of the European Commission, you know, essentially the head of the European Union, Ursula von der Leyen was there.

The leader from Greece was there and speaking and all these Asians were saying, Australia, you're the world leader.

You're pushing the bow down on this.

We're kind of right behind you.

We're going to watch what you do and see the mistakes you make and we want to follow you.

And that is an example of taking on a really tricky issue, powerful interests in big tech and prosecuting it.

I think there's a question, though, of with this confidence and with having developed relationships with other leaders overseas, what does Anthony Albanese do with it for the next two and a bit years?

We've got a lot of summits coming up in the second half of the year.

What have we got?

G20, APEC, ASEAN, of course the White House meeting.

How does Anthony Albanese take this opportunity and do something with it?

Matthew, when he has the confidence and he has the opportunity, do you see what the government's agenda is for foreign policy going forward?

Well, the first thing to get out of the way, of course, is the White House meeting and having a good relationship with Donald Trump.

They've actually met and shaken hands and had a little chat but this was what was dominating the early part of the trip was speculation about whether this meeting would happen essentially as Australia in the doghouse with the United States.

Seemed that we couldn't get a meeting.

We're very happy the fact that he had secured that.

Again, very confident that AUKUS is looking good, that this review might from the Pentagon might propose some changes, but there's a lot of confidence from the government about where they're going to land with that.

But that will obviously be such a huge thing in terms of really people reading the body language of do these two leaders from very different backgrounds, very different political persuasions get along.

We've seen a lot of activity on this trip around things like critical minerals and Australia.

Speaking to countries like the UK, there's a lot brewing in this space of Australia trying to position itself as a big player in the critical mineral space.

That's all about taking some power and control away from China.

I think we'll see more of that throughout these summits, throughout the rest of the year as well.

I think that's a really important point.

I think positioning when it comes to trying to buttress against China is a key part of the government's agenda and has been for a while, but I think there's sort of a growing confidence or willingness to figure out what Australia can put forward in that.

I think one of the really interesting things is that suddenly just maintaining relationships has become a much bigger deal than it used to be when the world is so volatile thanks largely to the White House and Donald Trump that what in the past might have been a fairly low-key job of just making sure everything in the relationship is okay, just making sure existing treaties, be they free trade agreements or AUKUS are humming along nicely, in the past would have been a fairly caretaker type role.

But nowadays, that actually requires an enormous amount of proactive work just to try and maintain status quo relationships.

So even without necessarily looking for a big change in policy, the government is having to do a lot more work just to maintain what it already has in place.

Brett, I think it means that we've got a government that is facing a foreign policy task that's quite different from what previous prime ministers have had to tackle.

Yeah, and you've got a prime minister that one of the central criticisms of him by the coalition has been this relationship with Donald Trump and the possibility of AUKUS not going ahead.

So within weeks we will see the two meet and all roads seem to be pointing towards the US coming out and backing in AUKUS and like Matthew says maybe some tweaks around the edges.

But to what extent does that then neutralize what has been one of the unifying things, one of the rare unifying things I probably should say on the coalition side in the criticism they've been able to level at the government I think will be fascinating to watch over this next period.

But we have seen this week the coalition come out and say, well, you've taken the decision to recognize Palestine.

So you, Prime Minister, need to use this capital that you've earned with world leaders to help deliver peace in the Middle East, kind of setting a new threshold of what Anthony Albanese needs to be achieving on the world stage.

Now, realistically, is he going to be able to land peace in the Middle East?

No.

Is he going to be a voice in the mix?

Maybe.

But ways in which the coalition is trying to shape up for some of these debates, it can bring its side together is interesting.

And it may be all of this is playing out because, of course, there's all these moves globally, but on the domestic front, a lot of legislation was rushed through the Parliament before we even got to the election.

A lot of Labor's legislation that it took to the people at the election has already been passed.

So what role is the Parliament even playing here?

It's sort of like times it feels like there's tumbleweed rolling through this place about what is going on.

This is a really good question because a lot of the announcements we've had from Anthony Albanese, especially this week, he's back from overseas, showing that he's in touch with what the government's doing at home.

He's talking about introducing all the beginning of measures that were announced either during the election campaign or prior to the election.

So it's very much an implementation phase.

When it comes to what the government wants to progress in this term of government, I think there is some setting of groundwork when it comes to the economic reform roundtable that we've had, which sort of suggests that maybe towards the end of the term, we'll get some more progress on taxation reform.

For example, we've had some discussion about road user charges and maybe that's something we gradually need to move towards.

But these all seem a fair way off.

So,

Matthew, I'm not sure if it's clear to you what the government's plan is for the

next six months, but also next two years on the domestic agenda.

They're very sensitive to this issue.

The Prime Minister, when he came back, I went straight away in Sydney to a housing event with Claire Claire O'Neill to talk about the 5% deposit.

What we are doing as of today is bringing forward our plan for 5% deposits.

What that will do is to allow more young people in particular to get into their first home.

We want more Australians to realise the dream of home ownership.

Even though he's very confident on the international stage, he knows that that's not where most Australians are thinking about in their daily lives.

Like they have to keep the focus on practical issues in Australia.

So that was a very deliberate decision to do a reset and say, we care about that.

That issue is not going to go away.

Everyone acknowledges that they've taken some positive steps, perhaps, although he did acknowledge that it's going to raise house prices overall.

But housing is going to be the issue that just won't go away.

And there's always going to be a demand for more, a demand for bigger policies.

The other one is the NDIS.

I think that just looms large as a big issue for a Labour government that created it to put it on a footing where it is sustainable, but where it's doing what

it's supposed to do and helping the most vulnerable people.

That's something that I think Albanese sees as part of his legacy, not to let that become completely adrift.

But they're also benefiting, I think, from the lack of an effective opposition, not putting them under much pressure over the lack of a domestic agenda.

There's only three weeks of parliament left.

Are the Prime Ministers going to miss some of that with international travel?

I can imagine a different world in which the government's under much more pressure from an opposition about what they're doing domestically with all this focus on international issues.

And I think we've got this week a bit of a sign of what...

the term of the parliament could look like in that you've seen this Senate committee look into home care packages for older Australians.

Essentially, the idea here being if you can keep Australians in their homes for longer with more support, then it prevents people having to go into residential aged care.

It takes the pressure off the residential aged care sector.

David Pocock this morning was on RM breakfast.

He was singing the praise of the Greens and the Coalition in the work that they did here together to try and put pressure on the government to make sure there is a greater flowing of those aged care packages.

Whether or not they team up again and look into Optus and want to try and needle the government to go into areas where the reviews currently aren't going in terms of the triple zero outages.

I think those relationships in the Senate become interesting because yes, Labor's got a whopping majority in the House of Representatives, but it still doesn't have outright control of the parliament.

And then outside of the parliament, the premiers are making very clear this week that they are not happy with what the federal government is doing.

A lot of these premiers are on the same side of the political aisle as Anthony Albanese on healthcare funding.

They are arguing that they're being stooged by the federal government, that the federal government is not living up to

what it said it would do in terms of those extra billions going into the states to help with the public health care system in return for the states doing more on the NDIS.

And the frustration we saw last month where the government's announcing extra changes around the NDIS and it's catching the states on the fly, their willingness to talk out could well prove a greater opposition for the government than what you see from the coalition federally.

I think this still begs a bit of a question, though, of what is the government's agenda.

And I think in in the first term it was very clear that helping people with cost of living whilst trying to bring inflation down was sort of the overriding objective that informed a lot of decisions that were made.

We're not in that zone anymore.

There is a recognition that inflation has been largely tackled.

Cost of living pressures still exist, but we're not at the point that it requires new or additional government measures to do that.

There has certainly been plenty of suggestions from senior government ministers that getting on a sustainable budget track is a top priority, that that is something that they really need to tackle.

And I think we've seen that in talk about aged care and the reforms to try and make the new system more sustainable.

We've seen that with talk about NDIS and needing to formulate that and have the battle with the states about how that will work.

We've seen that play out with debates between the Commonwealth and the states around hospital funding.

These are all key areas that are significant areas of growth well beyond inflation to the cost to the budget.

But the government doesn't exactly come out and sell that as a message.

We're trying to get these spiralling costs out of back under control and getting the budget back on a good footing is our key and overriding objective because that's not a great message to send to the voters, right?

You don't want to tell voters the budget's not in a great state.

So is there a difficulty, Matt, with messaging here of the government's got some really tricky things that it needs to do and is aware of it wants to do, but trying to sell that to the public isn't necessarily how you want to put forward what your government is up to.

You want it to be a more positive vision that you're proposing for people, right?

Yeah, and as we go into summer, I think there will be some thought that they need to think about what is the grand narrative.

What are they really about?

What do they want to prosecute?

What do they want to do with this surprising majority that they did not expect and they were not...

The Prime Minister will tell you, Matthew, he knew it.

He predicted every seat that he was going to win, they were going to get.

Yes, yes, yes, they will say that.

But the Prime Minister is not...

saying that he's going to be indulging in hubris.

He's still insistent, telling his MPs that they need to deliver on their promises.

Australians are not necessarily in the mood for a revolution and sweeping change that doesn't have a mandate.

We see him being confident, but still, the caution is still there in terms of the way he operates with policy.

The other thing I'd be looking from the Prime Minister is if you knew one thing about Anthony Albanese before was his passion for infrastructure and transport and building things.

That hasn't been a central feature of his prime ministership.

I'm always waiting for that to come about as part of the Labour narrative of rebuilding Australia, getting Australia moving, high-speed rail.

I've always thought that that has to be coming around for where Anthony Albanese is coming from.

There's a bit of that in Made in Australia, but not that much.

I just believe that has to be something coming down the pike and could provide a narrative for the government, because if people can see progress, then they're not going to...

be inclined to go to the political extremes.

So I'd be looking for that.

Well, maybe this is a case of the government, while it thinks about its grand vision for this term and sets the groundwork for the third term that it would like, the reality is it's still got to deal with all of these issues that crop up that it does not expect.

Isn't that it?

The problem of governing is you have to deal with events as they arise.

Events as arise.

Exactly.

Exactly.

Well, and I think that Keir Starmer, there was reporting this week from Keir Starmer, who's in the delivery, delivery, delivery phase of his leadership, but basically said, sure, government is tough some days, but you'd rather be here than sitting on the opposition benches.

And so, yeah, the government might be having a tough time with some things, but my goodness, you'd rather be there than sitting where Susan Lee and the coalition is currently sitting.

Without a doubt, I think that's a truth that would be universally acknowledged.

So, let's end on that point.

I think that wraps us up nicely.

So, thank you very much, Matthew Knott, for extending your memory of that overseas trip a little bit longer to give us the big picture of what's going on with the government.

Thank you.

It was a pleasure.

Thanks for having me.

Questions without notice?

Are there any questions?

Members on my route.

Prime Minister has the call.

Thanks very much, Mr Speaker.

Well then I give the call to the Honourable, the Leader of the Opposition.

Thank you Mr Speaker.

My question is to the Prime Minister.

The bells are ringing and that means it's time for question time.

This week's question comes from Vish.

Hi Bretton Mel.

With the Prime Minister getting a meeting shortly before the new age restrictions on social media come in, it's got me wondering for the first time in my life about True Social.

I would assume that age verification laws would apply to it, but do you think President Trump would let this happen to his own company?

I guess any fine for the company is, by extension, a fine on Trump.

It seems like a storyline heading into the meeting that's not as consequential as AUKUS to us, but it could be a sticking point for the US.

We'd love to hear your thoughts.

Thanks.

All right.

So thanks for that question, Vish.

It's really great to get questions, especially those sent through on audio notes.

It's like you're part of the podcast.

Keep sending them in.

Now, this is a really interesting one, Brett, because I've been looking at some of the guidelines that the e-safety commissioner, Julie Inman-Grant, released in the recent weeks to guide companies, tech platforms about what they have to meet and what the expectations are

and listen to a lot of what she was saying.

And I have to say, I haven't heard her mention Truth Social specifically at any point.

I don't know if you've heard it, Brett, but I don't think it's come up at all when she's discussed different platforms.

No, I haven't heard it.

And I even asked our very talented colleague, Angela Poipier, the National Technology Reporter for ABC News, and she said she hadn't hadn't explicitly heard about Truth Social as being listed as part of that.

Yeah, so I guess the question then comes down to, well, what's the process for assessing platforms?

So effectively, the legislation doesn't name specific platforms, and that's probably a good thing because...

Platforms come and go and change.

You don't want to be changing laws every time a new Snapchat or the next TikTok pops up.

So there's a framework then against which tech companies have to assess whether they think they need to comply.

Now, looking at those, it seems like something like Truth Social would apply under Australia's laws.

So

that tech platform would be obliged to self-assess if it wants to operate in Australia effectively.

Now,

the reason it probably hasn't come up as for specific attention or for specific communication with the eSafety Commissioner is because she's made a point of saying she is effectively triaging.

She's focusing on the platforms that have the most reach amongst young users.

Your TikToks, Instagram.

Exactly, Snapchat.

This is where the young kids are, Brett.

And I think there's probably much fewer young kids on Truth Social.

Now, I don't know because I'm not on Truth Social, but chances are the number of one, Australians and two,

Australians under 16 using Truth Social is probably minuscule compared to those other platforms.

So I think that's probably why you probably haven't heard much about it or why Julian McGrant hasn't been putting a huge amount of attention on it.

But then that still, we still have vicious question then about, well, how would Donald Trump feel about this and would he want to let it happen?

This is where you might get into interesting diplomacy, right?

So this is an Australian law.

It applies to something that operates in Australia.

So in theory, Donald Trump doesn't have any ability to push back against that unless he wants to launch a legal challenge in the Australian court system to somehow argue that it doesn't apply to truth social he's not fond of a he's not fond of a legal challenge any day of the week

look he's not afraid of uh of launching legal challenges but I think he's got enough on his own he's played in the US to probably worry about little old Australia it doesn't mean that if someone got in his ear and he wanted to raise it, that he's not beyond raising personal issues in diplomatic conversations.

Maybe Anthony Albanese should be ready in case it pops up as a topic when they meet in in October.

And surely that's the greater risk, right?

Less than, say, whether or not the e-safety commissioner does look to take action against a Truth Social.

If Donald Trump is, you know, reacting to this in a personal visceral way because he's interpreting it as a way in which they're trying to restrict his platform, does that create headaches at a diplomatic level, like you say, rather than it being a legal stout or the Australian government looking to fine a Donald Trump company?

The legal and legality part of it is one bit, but the diplomatic side of it is probably far more consequential in terms of the impact it could have.

So do you think in Australian diplomats over in Washington are like, just don't mention it, just don't bring up Truth Social.

The less anyone's thinking about it, the better.

Is that the best approach?

I think the general approach of Donald Trump always seems to be, and I think the advice within the federal government is keep your head low and stay out of direct eyesight.

So whether or not the government, you know, the government was very keen to put social media bans up in lights at the UN, you very much suspect it won't be at the top of the agenda when Anthony Albanese sits down with Donald Trump.

Anything you can do to attract his ire, I suspect is not going to be on Anthony Albanese's list of talking points.

All right, Vish, I hope that answers your question.

And you can be like Vish and you can send your questions in.

We do love getting them, and we're especially fond if you do it via a voice note.

You can email them to us.

That's thepartyroom at abc.net.au.

Remember to follow Politics Now on the ABC Listen app so you never miss an episode.

Well, that's it for the party room this week, Mel.

I've got a date with a lozenge, some honey, and some lemon.

Get the tea into you, Brett.

Look, you do have a little bit of a break.

We do have David Spears coming back for Insiders on Background on Saturday.

He's been traveling around the world just like Matthew Knott was, but no rest.

He's going to bring us a podcast episode.

And then, Brett, if your voice is still with us in a couple of days, you'll be back with the next edition of Politics Now on Monday.

There will be no talking this weekend.

See you, Mel.

Rest up.

See you, Brett.