June 4, 2025 • 15 mins
Greg Bourne, former BP Australasia president, once worked alongside Australia’s biggest LNG venture: Woodside’s North West Shelf.
Now a councillor at the Climate Council, he warns extending the project will unleash billions of tonnes of emissions and threaten tens of thousands of ancient rock carvings, while delivering a “pittance” in economic benefit to Australia.
Yet Bourne says the decision to keep the project running until 2070 was almost inevitable, after decades of lobbying in Canberra.
Today, Greg Bourne on how Woodside got the green light – and the reform he says is needed to stop the next fossil-fuel behemoth.
If you enjoy 7am, the best way you can support us is by making a contribution at 7ampodcast.com.au/support.
Socials: Stay in touch with us on Instagram
Guest: Former BP Australasia president, Greg Bourne.
Photo: AAP Image/Supplied by Woodside Energy
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
Perth Airport feels like a mining airport.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Now.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
The plane you got on when you flew out of
Perth was full of boots and orange and yellow. You
get off the airplane, it's hot. You look around, it's red.
Look in the other direction. Oh, there are these great, big,
massive plants. They're liquified natural gas plants. It feels high viz.
(00:26):
It is high viz.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Greg Bourne works at the Climate Council, but before that
he was an executive at BP at one point working
in partnership with Woodside's Northwest Gas Project, one of the
world's largest liquefied natural gas hubs.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
And then just to the south of Kiatha, you know,
twenty kilometers or so, about thirty kilometers, I think, is
this amazing rock art, the petroglyphs that have been there
for forty five sixty thousand years.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
There are tens of thousands of those ancient rock carvings,
the Mura Juga petroglyphs, and they're now weathering under a
haze pollution.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
And that was the decision that Murray what had to make,
you know, on the environmental grounds and cultural grounds should
this project go ahead? And he has basically waved it
through and that then allows Woodside to go to the
next stage of can we bring in the Browse Basin
oil fields?
Speaker 2 (01:22):
From Schwartz Media. I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven AM.
Now that Woodside has won the approval to keep its
massive craft the gas plant running another forty years, there
are questions as to whether new gas fields like the
Browse Basin will be opened up to keep the plant full.
(01:43):
Today Greg Bourne on lobbying efforts that helped make the
approval happen and the reform he says would stop future
fossil fuel behemoths like it from going ahead.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
It's Thursday June five, Greg. Thank you for joining me
on seven AM. It's great to have you on the show.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
Delightful to be here so Greg.
Speaker 3 (02:09):
The Labor government recently approved the Woodside development, which is
Australia's largest gas project all the way to twenty seventy.
Can you just tell me what your first thought was
when you heard that news.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
My first thought was I can't believe it. The Albanezi
government have just won an election. Climate change was very important.
May not have been talked about too much, but very
important for all of those people who are not baby boomers,
like me and so I was just so surprised the.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
Life of Australia's largest oil and gas project will be
extended to twenty seventy with Environment Minister Murray what to
give the long awaited environmental approval for the Northwest Shelf
project to be extended beyond twenty thirty.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
The twenty seventy date. Everyone's been talking about Netzer to
twenty fifty and here we are approving the ability for
that project to go on till twenty seventy. So shocked, amaze,
It was like a bombshell.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
Can we interrogate that decision making a little bit more?
Because the minister had to consider the world's significant rock
art which is close by. But tell me what other
considerations he had to make? What wasn't included in the
decision making process.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
So under the Act that he's operating, he has to
take into account the environmental effects of flora and fauna,
but also the cultural heritage. In this particular case, it's
the rock art. He was not and does not have
the powers to approve anything with regard to climate change
global warming emissions. He doesn't have the powers and nor
(03:45):
should he have the powers to approve a pipeline route
offshore or the emplacement of the drilling and production platforms.
He doesn't have those powers. They are held elsewhere. So
in one sense he could sort of sit back and say, well,
my hands are tied. I can only do what is
within the law. He could have, on the other hand,
(04:07):
spoken to the Prime Minister and said we have a
problem here, maybe we should delay this decision and maybe
we should be strengthening the laws. But he did what
he had to do. You know, yes, minister, he ticked
the box.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
So this project, we know that it's already one of
the biggest omitting facilities in the country. So if we
were to look at this extension, what will it potentially
mean for Australia's emissions.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
So there's two parts to the emissions. Really, there's a
part of the emissions which actually occur here in terms
of drilling gas, some of the escapes and so on.
So there's those emissions which occur in the country. But
then there's the emissions that occur when it's sold to Japan,
Korea and so on. In that case, the overall amount
(04:58):
of emissions that would go into the the atmosphere over
that period of time up to twenty seventy from the
Browse basin is something like four billion tons four billion
tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, which is roughly ten times
the amount of emissions that the whole of Australia, the
whole of Australia's economy emits in a year. It's vast.
(05:20):
Now Woodside will be saying, well, we're only being measured
on what we emit here. Murray what can't actually speak
about that? But he would have to say the same,
And of course the Prime Minister has already said, you know,
it's a small amount of emissions here in Australia. But
the premise basically behind Woodsides making sure they could get
through this box is to make sure they can get
(05:42):
through the next box, which is basically development approval pipeline routing.
So the way I look at it is this and
coming from my old company BP, the way I look
at it is Woodside by saying they want to produce
gas right out to twenty seventy at an even faster
rate than their now basically says our strategy relies on
(06:04):
the world's climate talks to either break down or go slow.
Being rejected by a Trump for example, there'll be another
one that comes along. It basically is saying we actually
don't give a stuff about the future our job wherein
it we an oil company a gas company are in
an existential crisis. If climate change is really acted upon
(06:25):
by everyone in the world, we go out of business.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Talk to me a bit more about the economic argument.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
So the economic argument for the oil and gas producers,
what they are having to judge is can I produce
it at a costs and then sell it overseas into
the market, And can I do that again for a
bunch of years out to twenty seventy Can I actually
do that? If it were not to be the case,
we would stop. But at the moment their view is
(06:56):
we will be able to set it twenty to thirty
years out with no problem at all. Well, what does
it mean for Australia. Well, yes, we get some gas
tariffs as it were, or resource rent tax comes via
the gas the companies pay taxes within Australia, but by
and large, compared with what other countries do and how
they exploit their gas, we get in Australia a pitanus.
(07:18):
We struck some extremely bad deals in the mad rush
to get gas out in the nineteen seventies and nineteen
eighties and nineteen nineties. Compared with other countries in the world,
it's not much of our economy really.
Speaker 3 (07:32):
There's not a huge economic benefit for us.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
No, it's a bonanza for the board and the executive
and the shareholders who get dividends. It's definitely a bonanza
for them. We wreak a dis benefit by more weather events,
whether they be the disastrous floods on the East Coast
that we've had or the bushfires that we've had, and
we will see more of those as we go into
(07:55):
a warmer and warmer world. So in a sense, you know,
West Australia gets you know, lots of jobs, that's for sure.
It gets a bit of money, it gets some taxes,
but by and large we are feeling it. We've had
floods in Queensland, floods in northern New South Wales, we
have drought in South Australia. At the moment, you know,
(08:17):
it's pretty parlous at the moment.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
After the break the lobbying that keeps feeding our gas habit.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
Greg this decision, which would potentially allow the Woodside project
to continue on for the next few decades it's been
six years in the making. Tanya PLIVERSECT, the former Environment Minister,
she put off making that decision twice during her term.
As someone who has worked in the industry, can you
enlighten me at all as to the kinds of conversations
(08:54):
and the kinds of lobbying that would have been happening
behind the scenes over the past six years in the
lead up to this approval.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Yeah, So let me start from the woodside point of view,
oil and gas company point of view. So you drill
a hole in the ground, you find some gas, you
work out how much it is, and then you say,
is this the right time to develop it? And you
might say no, not now, but let's start working the
process and we would probably want it to come on
(09:22):
in twenty thirty or twenty thirty five. And then you
work year by year, knowing that you're not going to
develop it now, but that you might want to develop
in the future if the price is are right. So,
in terms of how you think about these projects, you
know that you're going to go through a labor government
in Western Australia, a liberal government in West Australia, coalition
(09:44):
at the federal level, a labor one at the federal level,
and basically you walk the corridors of power and you
lobby with politicians, You lobby with junior public servants who
in ten years time are senior public servants, and you
build a relationship so that it becomes if you like,
the inertia over time is of course it's going to
(10:05):
go ahead. You know, we've been talking about this for
twenty five years, so of course it's going to go ahead.
And that mental model is, oh, it's an extensible resource.
We AUSTRAYA do well at that. And we've done it
in iron, we've done it in gold, we're doing it
in box site. You know, we dig it and ship it.
So that's what you do at supply and at the
(10:27):
demand end. If you want to keep going, then the
argument you make, and wouldside have been making this argument
for since nineteen ninety six, is that gas is good.
It will help you get off coal, it'll help you
clean up your cities. They don't say it will slow
down the introduction of renewable energy within your country. They
don't say. If it's a nuclear country, they don't say
(10:50):
it will slow down the expansion of your nuclear power stations.
If there is what you have Japan, Korea, China for example,
doesn't say that at all. No, it is we want
to sell to you.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Which brings us where we are at today. Given that,
then is it really down to governments to change the
legislation that they consider when they're deciding whether or not
to approve projects like this?
Speaker 1 (11:16):
Absolutely? Absolutely so. I think the Albanezi government have got
around about three months in which to signal to Australia
and indeed signal to the world, that they're going to
accelerate their action on climate change. And some of that
would be seen, for example as bringing in legislation to
(11:38):
Parliament with regard to a climate trigger, whether it's in
a current Act or a future Act or whatever else,
that they're actually going to do that. The reason I
say three months is because Australia also wants to host
in Adelaide and in the region COP thirty one, and
they want to do that with the Pacific countries as well.
(12:00):
A decision was expected to be made in June but
has to been made by the end of September, and
already we are hearing from the Indo Pacific countries that
hang on, what are you guys in Australia doing do
you actually care about us? Going under? What do you
care about? Climate change? They understand, they're smart, They understand
the decision that Murray WHATTT had to take, and they
(12:20):
also understand the importance it sends with regard to are
we going to develop more and more gas and oil
coal and just keep going on out to twenty seventy.
The twenty seventy, as I come back to the beginning,
is the big shock. So that's what people will be
looking for.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
Now.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Will the Albanezi government in this next three months begin
to start signaling that they're going to be tackling climate change,
tackling it hard and actually going to put some legislation
behind it.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
And what impact would a climate trigger have?
Speaker 1 (12:52):
The climate trigger would be basically saying, right, okay, you
are producing emissions, and then you are actually trying to
reduce not only the emissions that we have within Australia,
but you are working all along the supply chain to
the customer trying to help them reduce their emissions because
Japan has to reduce its submissions. Carea does as well,
(13:14):
China does it, someone like that. But if all you're
doing is feeding a habit, and I have been known
to say that we push our products with the zeal
of a drug lord. You know, you have a supplier,
you have a consumer. And unless you tackle that chain
from both ends deliberatively trying to reduce emissions here where
(13:35):
we have real control over it, and also control those
emissions when you sell them into Japan or elsewhere. Unless
you're doing it diligently along the totality of the supply chain,
you're just consuming the habit.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
Greg, thank you so much for your time today.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Thank you, Ruby. I enjoyed chatting.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Also in the news today, accused triple murderer Erin Patterson
has given her account of how she made a beef
Wellington dish that resulted in the deaths of three relatives
and made another seriously ill. Miss Patterson has pleaded not
guilty to all charges. Giving evidence in her murder trial,
Miss Patterson told the court she accepted the meal contained
death cap mushrooms, saying she repaired the dish using mushrooms
(14:27):
she believed or purchased from a grosser, but considered they
may have been foraged and oppositionally to Susan Lee says
she'll work with the federal government to secure Australia an
exemption from higher US steel tariffs. US President Donald Trump
has signed an executive order to double tariffs on imported
steel and aluminium from twenty five to fifty percent. The
(14:49):
UK has negotiated an exemption from the increase in Susan
Lee says she would assist the government in negotiating to
get the same result. I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am.
See tomorrow Man and
Perth Airport feels like a mining airport.
Speaker 2 (00:04):
Now.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
The plane you got on when you flew out of
Perth was full of boots and orange and yellow. You
get off the airplane, it's hot. You look around, it's red.
Look in the other direction. Oh, there are these great, big,
massive plants. They're liquified natural gas plants. It feels high viz.
(00:26):
It is high viz.
Speaker 2 (00:28):
Greg Bourne works at the Climate Council, but before that
he was an executive at BP at one point working
in partnership with Woodside's Northwest Gas Project, one of the
world's largest liquefied natural gas hubs.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
And then just to the south of Kiatha, you know,
twenty kilometers or so, about thirty kilometers, I think, is
this amazing rock art, the petroglyphs that have been there
for forty five sixty thousand years.
Speaker 2 (00:53):
There are tens of thousands of those ancient rock carvings,
the Mura Juga petroglyphs, and they're now weathering under a
haze pollution.
Speaker 1 (01:01):
And that was the decision that Murray what had to make,
you know, on the environmental grounds and cultural grounds should
this project go ahead? And he has basically waved it
through and that then allows Woodside to go to the
next stage of can we bring in the Browse Basin
oil fields?
Speaker 2 (01:22):
From Schwartz Media. I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven AM.
Now that Woodside has won the approval to keep its
massive craft the gas plant running another forty years, there
are questions as to whether new gas fields like the
Browse Basin will be opened up to keep the plant full.
(01:43):
Today Greg Bourne on lobbying efforts that helped make the
approval happen and the reform he says would stop future
fossil fuel behemoths like it from going ahead.
Speaker 3 (01:57):
It's Thursday June five, Greg. Thank you for joining me
on seven AM. It's great to have you on the show.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
Delightful to be here so Greg.
Speaker 3 (02:09):
The Labor government recently approved the Woodside development, which is
Australia's largest gas project all the way to twenty seventy.
Can you just tell me what your first thought was
when you heard that news.
Speaker 1 (02:22):
My first thought was I can't believe it. The Albanezi
government have just won an election. Climate change was very important.
May not have been talked about too much, but very
important for all of those people who are not baby boomers,
like me and so I was just so surprised the.
Speaker 4 (02:40):
Life of Australia's largest oil and gas project will be
extended to twenty seventy with Environment Minister Murray what to
give the long awaited environmental approval for the Northwest Shelf
project to be extended beyond twenty thirty.
Speaker 1 (02:55):
The twenty seventy date. Everyone's been talking about Netzer to
twenty fifty and here we are approving the ability for
that project to go on till twenty seventy. So shocked, amaze,
It was like a bombshell.
Speaker 3 (03:08):
Can we interrogate that decision making a little bit more?
Because the minister had to consider the world's significant rock
art which is close by. But tell me what other
considerations he had to make? What wasn't included in the
decision making process.
Speaker 1 (03:23):
So under the Act that he's operating, he has to
take into account the environmental effects of flora and fauna,
but also the cultural heritage. In this particular case, it's
the rock art. He was not and does not have
the powers to approve anything with regard to climate change
global warming emissions. He doesn't have the powers and nor
(03:45):
should he have the powers to approve a pipeline route
offshore or the emplacement of the drilling and production platforms.
He doesn't have those powers. They are held elsewhere. So
in one sense he could sort of sit back and say, well,
my hands are tied. I can only do what is
within the law. He could have, on the other hand,
(04:07):
spoken to the Prime Minister and said we have a
problem here, maybe we should delay this decision and maybe
we should be strengthening the laws. But he did what
he had to do. You know, yes, minister, he ticked
the box.
Speaker 2 (04:24):
So this project, we know that it's already one of
the biggest omitting facilities in the country. So if we
were to look at this extension, what will it potentially
mean for Australia's emissions.
Speaker 1 (04:36):
So there's two parts to the emissions. Really, there's a
part of the emissions which actually occur here in terms
of drilling gas, some of the escapes and so on.
So there's those emissions which occur in the country. But
then there's the emissions that occur when it's sold to Japan,
Korea and so on. In that case, the overall amount
(04:58):
of emissions that would go into the the atmosphere over
that period of time up to twenty seventy from the
Browse basin is something like four billion tons four billion
tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, which is roughly ten times
the amount of emissions that the whole of Australia, the
whole of Australia's economy emits in a year. It's vast.
(05:20):
Now Woodside will be saying, well, we're only being measured
on what we emit here. Murray what can't actually speak
about that? But he would have to say the same,
And of course the Prime Minister has already said, you know,
it's a small amount of emissions here in Australia. But
the premise basically behind Woodsides making sure they could get
through this box is to make sure they can get
(05:42):
through the next box, which is basically development approval pipeline routing.
So the way I look at it is this and
coming from my old company BP, the way I look
at it is Woodside by saying they want to produce
gas right out to twenty seventy at an even faster
rate than their now basically says our strategy relies on
(06:04):
the world's climate talks to either break down or go slow.
Being rejected by a Trump for example, there'll be another
one that comes along. It basically is saying we actually
don't give a stuff about the future our job wherein
it we an oil company a gas company are in
an existential crisis. If climate change is really acted upon
(06:25):
by everyone in the world, we go out of business.
Speaker 3 (06:29):
Talk to me a bit more about the economic argument.
Speaker 1 (06:33):
So the economic argument for the oil and gas producers,
what they are having to judge is can I produce
it at a costs and then sell it overseas into
the market, And can I do that again for a
bunch of years out to twenty seventy Can I actually
do that? If it were not to be the case,
we would stop. But at the moment their view is
(06:56):
we will be able to set it twenty to thirty
years out with no problem at all. Well, what does
it mean for Australia. Well, yes, we get some gas
tariffs as it were, or resource rent tax comes via
the gas the companies pay taxes within Australia, but by
and large, compared with what other countries do and how
they exploit their gas, we get in Australia a pitanus.
(07:18):
We struck some extremely bad deals in the mad rush
to get gas out in the nineteen seventies and nineteen
eighties and nineteen nineties. Compared with other countries in the world,
it's not much of our economy really.
Speaker 3 (07:32):
There's not a huge economic benefit for us.
Speaker 1 (07:35):
No, it's a bonanza for the board and the executive
and the shareholders who get dividends. It's definitely a bonanza
for them. We wreak a dis benefit by more weather events,
whether they be the disastrous floods on the East Coast
that we've had or the bushfires that we've had, and
we will see more of those as we go into
(07:55):
a warmer and warmer world. So in a sense, you know,
West Australia gets you know, lots of jobs, that's for sure.
It gets a bit of money, it gets some taxes,
but by and large we are feeling it. We've had
floods in Queensland, floods in northern New South Wales, we
have drought in South Australia. At the moment, you know,
(08:17):
it's pretty parlous at the moment.
Speaker 2 (08:21):
After the break the lobbying that keeps feeding our gas habit.
Speaker 3 (08:33):
Greg this decision, which would potentially allow the Woodside project
to continue on for the next few decades it's been
six years in the making. Tanya PLIVERSECT, the former Environment Minister,
she put off making that decision twice during her term.
As someone who has worked in the industry, can you
enlighten me at all as to the kinds of conversations
(08:54):
and the kinds of lobbying that would have been happening
behind the scenes over the past six years in the
lead up to this approval.
Speaker 1 (09:01):
Yeah, So let me start from the woodside point of view,
oil and gas company point of view. So you drill
a hole in the ground, you find some gas, you
work out how much it is, and then you say,
is this the right time to develop it? And you
might say no, not now, but let's start working the
process and we would probably want it to come on
(09:22):
in twenty thirty or twenty thirty five. And then you
work year by year, knowing that you're not going to
develop it now, but that you might want to develop
in the future if the price is are right. So,
in terms of how you think about these projects, you
know that you're going to go through a labor government
in Western Australia, a liberal government in West Australia, coalition
(09:44):
at the federal level, a labor one at the federal level,
and basically you walk the corridors of power and you
lobby with politicians, You lobby with junior public servants who
in ten years time are senior public servants, and you
build a relationship so that it becomes if you like,
the inertia over time is of course it's going to
(10:05):
go ahead. You know, we've been talking about this for
twenty five years, so of course it's going to go ahead.
And that mental model is, oh, it's an extensible resource.
We AUSTRAYA do well at that. And we've done it
in iron, we've done it in gold, we're doing it
in box site. You know, we dig it and ship it.
So that's what you do at supply and at the
(10:27):
demand end. If you want to keep going, then the
argument you make, and wouldside have been making this argument
for since nineteen ninety six, is that gas is good.
It will help you get off coal, it'll help you
clean up your cities. They don't say it will slow
down the introduction of renewable energy within your country. They
don't say. If it's a nuclear country, they don't say
(10:50):
it will slow down the expansion of your nuclear power stations.
If there is what you have Japan, Korea, China for example,
doesn't say that at all. No, it is we want
to sell to you.
Speaker 3 (11:01):
Which brings us where we are at today. Given that,
then is it really down to governments to change the
legislation that they consider when they're deciding whether or not
to approve projects like this?
Speaker 1 (11:16):
Absolutely? Absolutely so. I think the Albanezi government have got
around about three months in which to signal to Australia
and indeed signal to the world, that they're going to
accelerate their action on climate change. And some of that
would be seen, for example as bringing in legislation to
(11:38):
Parliament with regard to a climate trigger, whether it's in
a current Act or a future Act or whatever else,
that they're actually going to do that. The reason I
say three months is because Australia also wants to host
in Adelaide and in the region COP thirty one, and
they want to do that with the Pacific countries as well.
(12:00):
A decision was expected to be made in June but
has to been made by the end of September, and
already we are hearing from the Indo Pacific countries that
hang on, what are you guys in Australia doing do
you actually care about us? Going under? What do you
care about? Climate change? They understand, they're smart, They understand
the decision that Murray WHATTT had to take, and they
(12:20):
also understand the importance it sends with regard to are
we going to develop more and more gas and oil
coal and just keep going on out to twenty seventy.
The twenty seventy, as I come back to the beginning,
is the big shock. So that's what people will be
looking for.
Speaker 2 (12:38):
Now.
Speaker 1 (12:38):
Will the Albanezi government in this next three months begin
to start signaling that they're going to be tackling climate change,
tackling it hard and actually going to put some legislation
behind it.
Speaker 3 (12:50):
And what impact would a climate trigger have?
Speaker 1 (12:52):
The climate trigger would be basically saying, right, okay, you
are producing emissions, and then you are actually trying to
reduce not only the emissions that we have within Australia,
but you are working all along the supply chain to
the customer trying to help them reduce their emissions because
Japan has to reduce its submissions. Carea does as well,
(13:14):
China does it, someone like that. But if all you're
doing is feeding a habit, and I have been known
to say that we push our products with the zeal
of a drug lord. You know, you have a supplier,
you have a consumer. And unless you tackle that chain
from both ends deliberatively trying to reduce emissions here where
(13:35):
we have real control over it, and also control those
emissions when you sell them into Japan or elsewhere. Unless
you're doing it diligently along the totality of the supply chain,
you're just consuming the habit.
Speaker 3 (13:51):
Greg, thank you so much for your time today.
Speaker 1 (13:54):
Thank you, Ruby. I enjoyed chatting.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
Also in the news today, accused triple murderer Erin Patterson
has given her account of how she made a beef
Wellington dish that resulted in the deaths of three relatives
and made another seriously ill. Miss Patterson has pleaded not
guilty to all charges. Giving evidence in her murder trial,
Miss Patterson told the court she accepted the meal contained
death cap mushrooms, saying she repaired the dish using mushrooms
(14:27):
she believed or purchased from a grosser, but considered they
may have been foraged and oppositionally to Susan Lee says
she'll work with the federal government to secure Australia an
exemption from higher US steel tariffs. US President Donald Trump
has signed an executive order to double tariffs on imported
steel and aluminium from twenty five to fifty percent. The
(14:49):
UK has negotiated an exemption from the increase in Susan
Lee says she would assist the government in negotiating to
get the same result. I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am.
See tomorrow Man and
Popular Podcasts
Cold Case Files: Miami
Joyce Sapp, 76; Bryan Herrera, 16; and Laurance Webb, 32—three Miami residents whose lives were stolen in brutal, unsolved homicides. Cold Case Files: Miami follows award‑winning radio host and City of Miami Police reserve officer Enrique Santos as he partners with the department’s Cold Case Homicide Unit, determined family members, and the advocates who spend their lives fighting for justice for the victims who can no longer fight for themselves.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.