Speaker 1: FOTA.
Speaker 2: I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
Speaker 2: daily podcast presented by The New Zealand Herald. If the
Speaker 2: theme for twenty twenty four was cutting back, then twenty
Speaker 2: twenty five is all about growth. The word appears thirty
Speaker 2: one times in Prime Minister Christoph Luxen's State of the
Speaker 2: Nation's speech, and for good reason. Luxon said it's the
Speaker 2: key to brighter days ahead. After experiencing the biggest recession
Speaker 2: since the early nineteen nineties, Finance Minister Nikola Willis has
Speaker 2: been handed a revised economic growth portfolio. As part of
Speaker 2: that planning, working on things like driving up tourism numbers
Speaker 2: and international investment. Later on, we'll get some insight into
Speaker 2: how and weather New Zealand can actually stimulate growth from
Speaker 2: Independent Economy Cameron Bagri. First up today as that Harold
Speaker 2: Deputy Political Editor Thomas Coglin is with us to explain
Speaker 2: why growth is the topic of conversation. Thomas, why do
Speaker 2: you think the government has chosen to focus everything this
Speaker 2: year on growth?
Speaker 3: I mean a short answer is that because there isn't
Speaker 3: any The economy was shrinking at the end of last year,
Speaker 3: and a shrinking economy is really bad because it means
Speaker 3: that all of us get poorer and life just gets
Speaker 3: a bit tougher. And if a government wants to get reelected,
Speaker 3: then it wants to make life better for people. So
Speaker 3: the short answer is that when the economy is shrinking
Speaker 3: is really bad. So we need to get it growing
Speaker 3: again to start raising living standards for everyone. Here that's
Speaker 3: the living standards that you enjoy when you're not giving
Speaker 3: government services. But obviously, as the economy grows, people pay
Speaker 3: more taxes, and that means that the government gets more
Speaker 3: money and to pay for the public services that we
Speaker 3: all enjoy. So if the economy grows by an extra
Speaker 3: percentage point of GDP up of what you think it
Speaker 3: is growing at now, then that equates to an extra
Speaker 3: one point two billion dollars a text revinue the treasury sets.
Speaker 3: So if you can actually get the economy growing, it
Speaker 3: is a good way of or growing faster. I should say,
Speaker 3: it's a good way of making life better for people.
Speaker 3: The trouble is like, it's just really hard to get
Speaker 3: the kind of economic growth that the government wants. The
Speaker 3: long term average of the economic growth is pretty bad.
Speaker 3: And if you want to make the economy will grow
Speaker 3: this year because interest rates are falling and we're kind
Speaker 3: of moving out of that inflation reserve bank induced recession
Speaker 3: that we had, So the economy will grow that the
Speaker 3: government will want it to grow faster because it's that
Speaker 3: faster growth, the bigger growth that won't just get us
Speaker 3: back to where we were before. Well hopefully if it works,
Speaker 3: and there are some question marks over that and will
Speaker 3: hopefully make life better for us and make it life
Speaker 3: better than it was before, but that's that's pretty tough.
Speaker 3: One of the things that's really important just to finish
Speaker 3: that question is that Treasury recently has been revising down
Speaker 3: New Zealand's growth forcusts because they think that structurally the
Speaker 3: New Zealand economy is just not as strong as we
Speaker 3: previously thought it was. So every year from twenty twenty
Speaker 3: two to now, every six months, Trutories redes its forecasts,
Speaker 3: and each of those forecasts have basically become more pessimistic
Speaker 3: than the last forecast. That means that all of us
Speaker 3: are poorer. So in real terms, all of us are
Speaker 3: about one thousand dollars poorer a year, actually a wee
Speaker 3: bit more than that, because that figure uses an older
Speaker 3: uninflatent adjusted number, and it also means that there's less
Speaker 3: tax revenue for the government. So it's really it is
Speaker 3: a good thing that the government's focusing on it. Every
Speaker 3: government focuses on it. Every government wants the economy to growth.
Speaker 3: But yes, you can see why they are focusing on
Speaker 3: it because it's essential to providing a good standard of
Speaker 3: living for people.
Speaker 2: National is blamed labor for most of their economic woes. Hey,
Speaker 2: is that still a fair argument. But we're about midway
Speaker 2: through their term now, aren't we How long do they
Speaker 2: have to keep blaming labor.
Speaker 3: That's a very questioner. I've been in the press gallery
Speaker 3: long enough to know that labor was still using the
Speaker 3: nine long years of neglect long after they took office
Speaker 3: in twenty seventeen. I think they'll blame labor for some time,
Speaker 3: but I don't think it's it is all labour's faults,
Speaker 3: or even partly labour's fault. To go back to your
Speaker 3: previous question, those two DP numbers that keep getting revised.
Speaker 3: The real problem is that structural weakness in the New
Speaker 3: Zealand economy and National's main allegation to who main allegations
Speaker 3: against labors that they spent too much money and that
Speaker 3: they were anti growth. Now is to spend too much
Speaker 3: money argument, Yeah, in some of those budgets that labor
Speaker 3: did in the second term, they did spend more money
Speaker 3: than in retrospect, it looks wise to have spent, but
Speaker 3: not vastly too much money, just probably a wee bit
Speaker 3: too much money, and money that they had little concrete
Speaker 3: plan of paying for. But in terms of why Labors
Speaker 3: left this government such a mess of deficit, the main
Speaker 3: reason for that was that revision to those growth forecasts,
Speaker 3: the amount of growth that was in the that were
Speaker 3: we were expected to get was going to generate more
Speaker 3: money and for the government and would mean that the
Speaker 3: books would be in much better shape now Because that
Speaker 3: growth has not transpired, It's meant that the spending that
Speaker 3: labor had done and had planned to do doesn't have
Speaker 3: enough revenue coming in to pay for it. The issue
Speaker 3: of Labor was not that they spent too much money,
Speaker 3: it's that the growth that was meant to pay for
Speaker 3: that that spending has not actually transpired now. Equally, the
Speaker 3: other relegation, which is that they were anti growth, that
Speaker 3: is slightly more complicated. They were certainly they ushered in
Speaker 3: a resource management regime where there was a debate about
Speaker 3: whether or not that was too restrictive that it wouldn't
Speaker 3: allow people to build. They were, I suppose, quite keen
Speaker 3: on labor laws. They hiked them in and wange a lot.
Speaker 3: The Fair pay agreements gave a lot of rights to workers,
Speaker 3: which were obviously great.
Speaker 4: If you're a worker.
Speaker 3: But if you're a foreign investor, you think, well, maybe
Speaker 3: we want to go to a country that has your
Speaker 3: rights for workers. Pretty grim, isn't it. But that is
Speaker 3: that the calculation that's made. Of course, Australia is rich
Speaker 3: enough that they tend to have greater workers rights and
Speaker 3: they also get foreign investments. So it's very very complicated
Speaker 3: and it really depends on it policy area. I guess,
Speaker 3: what are.
Speaker 2: Some of the policies and initiatives that the government's actually
Speaker 2: announced all ready to try and level up that economic growth.
Speaker 3: The first big one is the Digital Nomad visa, something
Speaker 3: that's been in the works for a long time. I
Speaker 3: would actually say I don't think that this has been
Speaker 3: announced as part of a growth agenda. I think this
Speaker 3: is something that the government was looking at that Labour
Speaker 3: actually wanted to do as well, and now seems like
Speaker 3: a good time to do it, and they've just rebranded
Speaker 3: it as a growth as growth policy. I don't regards
Speaker 3: on that that is the way the politics works, but
Speaker 3: this FEESA basically allows people who can work remotely from
Speaker 3: say you're an American and you can work remotely, or
Speaker 3: you can just arrive in New Zealand, open up your
Speaker 3: laptop and stay here for nine months working for your
Speaker 3: American firm, getting paid by your American firm, and traveling
Speaker 3: around the country as a tourist having a great time
Speaker 3: and hope. The hope is that with policy like that,
Speaker 3: it will attract lots of wealthy foreign workers who have
Speaker 3: a great time in New Zealand. Seal of our sites
Speaker 3: go to restaurants and bars, spend money, be taxed on
Speaker 3: their gst of course, and boost the tourism and actually
Speaker 3: boots a lot of industries because it will add population
Speaker 3: to New Zealand, and a population that life system and
Speaker 3: that will stimulate demand. We hope it's a good policy.
Speaker 3: I think Australia doesn't have a similar scheme. So I
Speaker 3: suppose if you're someone from the rich Northern Hemisphere looking
Speaker 3: to escape the northern winter and have a lovely southern summer,
Speaker 3: then New Zealand starts to look pretty attractive.
Speaker 2: And we're also looking at this year how fast track.
Speaker 2: We've got RMA reform, reform of health and safety laws.
Speaker 2: We've got a mining announcement from Shane Jones, less red
Speaker 2: tape as well. So there's a lot of things that
Speaker 2: the government is angling towards. Do you think any of
Speaker 2: it's going to work?
Speaker 3: That is a very good question. I actually think the
Speaker 3: more difficult question is how you know it's going to work.
Speaker 3: And the government's sort of avoided putting strict targets or
Speaker 3: performance metrics around this because this year. One of the
Speaker 3: reasons we haven't had growth in the last year has
Speaker 3: been at the Reserve Bank piked interest rates really high
Speaker 3: to squeeze inflation out of the economy, and that has
Speaker 3: meant the economy has shrunk and like I've got pretty
Speaker 3: hard as we all know last year. Now this year,
Speaker 3: the inflation has largely gone, or the problematic and a
Speaker 3: level of inflation's gone, and the Reserve Bank is cutting
Speaker 3: interest rates and that will restore growth to the economy.
Speaker 3: It will mean that people borrow more, invest more, and
Speaker 3: spend more and grow the economy. So there will be
Speaker 3: growth this year and the government will of course try
Speaker 3: to play and credit for that growth, but a large
Speaker 3: part of that of that growth will come from the
Speaker 3: fact that you know, we're just we're at a different
Speaker 3: point of that interest rate cycle. One would think that
Speaker 3: stuff like fast track, it's hard to see with health
Speaker 3: and safety it would really depend You'd have to talk
Speaker 3: to some companies to and ask them, did you look
Speaker 3: at investing in New Zealand and growing a presence in
Speaker 3: New Zealand and was it health and safety laws that
Speaker 3: stopped you from doing that? I certainly haven't seen cases
Speaker 3: of that reported, but you know there might be. But
Speaker 3: parsuably stuff like fast tracked, you would think that that
Speaker 3: will that that is a tracking foreign investment to New
Speaker 3: Zealand to build things, to create jobs, to spend money here,
Speaker 3: which will which will grow the economy. So yes, like
Speaker 3: those measures probably will mean that there is more growth
Speaker 3: than the other wise would be, but it'll be very
Speaker 3: difficult to disentangle. Well, you know how much of the
Speaker 3: growth is thanks to fast tracking these other measures, and
Speaker 3: how much is just thanks to the fact that the
Speaker 3: reserve banks cutting interest rates. People are borrowing a whole
Speaker 3: lot of money and specificative how we usually grow the economy.
Speaker 5: But I'm telling you recovery isn't enough. We have to
Speaker 5: go for growth and driving economic growth is absolutely critical
Speaker 5: for improving our quality of life, strengthening our local businesses,
Speaker 5: lifting our incomes, and creating opportunity all across New Zealand,
Speaker 5: because a growing economy means giving Kiwis more choices and
Speaker 5: the confidence to find a new job, or hire a
Speaker 5: new staff member, or to open a new business, or
Speaker 5: to start a family.
Speaker 2: The other word of the year seems to be the
Speaker 2: word no, or they're now being a lack thereover it.
Speaker 2: I suppose Luxon has said, there's always a reason to
Speaker 2: say no. If we keep saying no, we'll keep going nowhere.
Speaker 2: We need larger ports, we need more concerts. What do
Speaker 2: you make of this new anti no stance.
Speaker 3: I think it's been it's interesting, it has been quite
Speaker 3: well received by people, and certainly I think New Zealand
Speaker 3: has has historically had a very restrictive regime when it's
Speaker 3: come to stuff like that, even part concerts, stuff like
Speaker 3: the resource management. It's been pointed out that's reported. It's
Speaker 3: been reported this week I can't remember where that time
Speaker 3: that that Christopher Laxon is in a local MP himself
Speaker 3: lobbied to say no to a housing development in his electorate.
Speaker 3: So you know, everyone is New Zealanders do love saying no.
Speaker 3: It's what we do. So I think I think it's
Speaker 3: quite a persuasive persuasive message.
Speaker 4: Certainly.
Speaker 3: I think when you look at it as from the
Speaker 3: speak to of New Zealand, you look over the ditch
Speaker 3: in Australia, which is arguably one of the most successful
Speaker 3: economies in the world, and New Zealand's not an unsuccessful economy.
Speaker 3: We're just much much less successful than Australia, which makes
Speaker 3: Australia look much more successful than it is. But they
Speaker 3: are probably better saying yes to stuff like mining. They're
Speaker 3: a bit less hung up on, you know, the agricultural sector.
Speaker 3: They are a bit more pro growth in those in
Speaker 3: those areas and certainly in the past, you know, with
Speaker 3: then we're blots of agriculture through the lens of climate change.
Speaker 3: It's obviously a very big mess. But agriculture also if
Speaker 3: we say, you know, quote unquote yest to agriculture, then
Speaker 3: then you would, you know, maybe expect to see more
Speaker 3: economic growth the dairy prices that reportize at the moment. Also,
Speaker 3: you know, mining, we we do very very little mining
Speaker 3: in New Zealand at the moment. Australia obviously does rather
Speaker 3: a lot, and and so there's probably rude to grow there.
Speaker 3: So if we were to decide to say yes to
Speaker 3: mining and then you probably would see more economic growth.
Speaker 3: And of course one of the reasons why this is
Speaker 3: so difficult is that obviously that you know, the reasons
Speaker 3: are saying no are often quite good ones. The agricultural
Speaker 3: emissions issue isn't going to go away simply by saying
Speaker 3: yes to more agriculture, and you know, environmental degradation aspects
Speaker 3: of mining aren't going to go away simply by saying
Speaker 3: yes to mining. So there's a really very real trade
Speaker 3: off between saying yes to growth enjoying the better living
Speaker 3: standards that come with that. You know, they think that's
Speaker 3: probably where chrystper Lutson's are being quite innovative with this
Speaker 3: REASUREP is saying that by saying yes to economic growth,
Speaker 3: you're saying yes to better public services and yes to
Speaker 3: better living standards. But of course, the reasons why we
Speaker 3: have historically said no, don't go away either, which is
Speaker 3: that you know, New Zealand has a beautiful environment which
Speaker 3: many New Zealanders love to protect. And it's a difficult
Speaker 3: decision and that's why this debate is going to be
Speaker 3: such a challenge.
Speaker 6: Chrystper Luction says, the bottom line is that we should
Speaker 6: say no less and yes a lot more. What did
Speaker 6: they say to delivering new inter island fairies?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 6: What did they say to delivering a new to need
Speaker 6: an hospital?
Speaker 4: No?
Speaker 6: What did they say to delivering affordable water reform? What
Speaker 6: did they say to delivering new state housing? What did
Speaker 6: they say to delivering school classroom O brains? What did
Speaker 6: they say to delivering improved infrastructure for the care.
Speaker 2: I've been watching a lot of clips out of the
Speaker 2: debating chamber this week. Are you sick of hearing both
Speaker 2: sides of the chamber just shouting the word no yet?
Speaker 4: Yes?
Speaker 3: Well, actually, this week is my seventh anniversarriend of Press Gallery,
Speaker 3: and I suppose the whole time that I have been here,
Speaker 3: the economy has been in a pretty challenging state. And
Speaker 3: one of the things that, certainly as a journalist you
Speaker 3: get quite concerned about is the fact that Parliament has
Speaker 3: become a bit of a circus, if an equal opportunity.
Speaker 4: Circus as well.
Speaker 3: I don't think one side of the House is more
Speaker 3: or less culpable than the other. But as the long
Speaker 3: term economic issues become more and more acute, politicians seem
Speaker 3: less and less inclined to debate them seriously, and more
Speaker 3: and more inclined to her insults at each other. And that,
Speaker 3: you know, that's quite concerning for New Zealand too, And
Speaker 3: you think there's a logical reason for this, which is
Speaker 3: that those long term issues are difficult to debate, and
Speaker 3: they involve everyone making difficult trade offs with what they
Speaker 3: believe and compromises on what they believe. And it seems
Speaker 3: many of our politicians, not all of them, but many
Speaker 3: of them seem to turn their backs on that difficult
Speaker 3: debate and would instead prefer to her insults as each other,
Speaker 3: which I don't think quits them very well, and it
Speaker 3: certainly doesn't doesn't look at the country very well because
Speaker 3: because it means that important discussion hasn't really had.
Speaker 2: Thanks for joining us, Thomas, thanks for having me. Now
Speaker 2: on the front page, we talk with independent economist Cameron
Speaker 2: Bagri for his thoughts on the government's new growth focus.
Speaker 4: Well, it's not just about growth. One of the most
Speaker 4: important things across society is one of the big drivers
Speaker 4: of growth, and one of the drivers of growth is
Speaker 4: productivity growth. Productivity drives living standards, and what we're seeing
Speaker 4: over the past decade is a very big deterioration and
Speaker 4: productivity growth. I used to average one point four percent
Speaker 4: every year the last ten years, the year which has
Speaker 4: been zero point two, So that means living standards are
Speaker 4: basically stagnant. And if living stands is stagnant, you've got
Speaker 4: a pretty big economic percent to leave employ your trade overseas,
Speaker 4: which is obviously what we've seen.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I noticed that in a recent column you wrote
Speaker 2: for Business Desk. You wrote about a recent speech by
Speaker 2: the Reserve Bank's chief economist, Paul Conway. One of his
Speaker 2: main points you drew attention to was productivity. Hey, how
Speaker 2: concerning are those stats around that?
Speaker 4: Well, we're in serious trump and zero point two percent
Speaker 4: per year is basically flat, and what the Reserve Bank
Speaker 4: has done of laid is revised down. The estimate of
Speaker 4: what's called potential growth, and potential growth is the combination
Speaker 4: of labor, capital inputs, along with productivity growth. It sort
Speaker 4: of defines how fast economy can grow without unlocking inflation.
Speaker 4: That number is now between one point five and two percent.
Speaker 4: That number used to be up in excess of three percent,
Speaker 4: and that's a big wack up cool now, because if
Speaker 4: we can't get this economy moving, then unemployment remains high,
Speaker 4: people leave to go apply their trade overseas, and this
Speaker 4: economic upscreen is not going to look too strong if
Speaker 4: we don't get productivity growth up.
Speaker 1: So the government's Going for Growth plan is about accelerating
Speaker 1: the immediate economic turnaround while laying the foundations.
Speaker 2: For faster growth in the years ahead.
Speaker 1: And a critical pillar of this plan is looking out
Speaker 1: to the world and confidently pursuing greater trade, investment and
Speaker 1: international opportunities. We simply won't get rich selling to ourselves. Instead,
Speaker 1: we must take practical steps to encourage our exporters, encourage investment,
Speaker 1: and critically give people from around the world good reasons
Speaker 1: to come to New Zealand to spend and invest.
Speaker 2: How can the government go about improving those numbers? And
Speaker 2: do you think any of those growth policies announced by
Speaker 2: the government so far can achieve.
Speaker 4: That we're moving in the right direction a bit, But
Speaker 4: I guess the biggest shew in my mind is that
Speaker 4: whether we're going hard enough and to be fair, lifting productivity, growth,
Speaker 4: lifting you can performance is not just going to be
Speaker 4: a function of government policy, and the private sector needs
Speaker 4: to get out there and lift their game as well.
Speaker 4: And one of the big issues that I'm thinking about
Speaker 4: at the moment is that whether we've not a lot
Speaker 4: of that old traditional entrepreneurial spirit on the head, because
Speaker 4: it almost feels like you're in New Zealand's a big
Speaker 4: part of the population is entering the retirement zone and
Speaker 4: it sort of feels a little bit like the business
Speaker 4: community is entering the same zone.
Speaker 2: What can the business community do then, what's it like
Speaker 2: a textbook way of improving productivity?
Speaker 4: Investing in technology, investing in AI, investing in your staff,
Speaker 4: constantly looking at your cost structure, constantly looking at your
Speaker 4: better ways of doing business.
Speaker 2: Cameron, you're also write in your column about how we
Speaker 2: need to become a go economy and how we need
Speaker 2: to lift risk appetites to drive entrepreneurial behavior like you
Speaker 2: just mentioned, then can you expand on that for us?
Speaker 2: I mean, is it just the private sector that needs
Speaker 2: to make more of these risks in perhaps startups, or
Speaker 2: can the government do something to better place businesses to
Speaker 2: be able.
Speaker 4: To do this? Well, I guess I'll give you an
Speaker 4: illustration of one area we're very poor at. It's called
Speaker 4: capital productivity, basically how we manage sets, and capital productivity
Speaker 4: for thirty years has pretty well consistently been a negative number.
Speaker 4: So we build stuff, then we miss manage it, and
Speaker 4: then alarm, behold odds, we've got to build it again. Yeah.
Speaker 4: So there's a big debate going on at the moment
Speaker 4: in regard to SX sales, and of course society tends
Speaker 4: to be against set sales. Yeah, I'm not sure that
Speaker 4: local government or central government is actually best placed to
Speaker 4: manage a lot of sets that are on on their books.
Speaker 4: Let's get those sets out under the private sector. Well,
Speaker 4: we can look it running and managing those sets well.
Speaker 2: And do you think New Zealand is actually willing to
Speaker 2: take those risks though?
Speaker 4: Well, I guess that's one of the biggessues that I've
Speaker 4: been debating with people at the moment. Have we gone
Speaker 4: down the risk curve? And when you go down the
Speaker 4: risk curve, you're not prepared to take risk, then don't
Speaker 4: expect the same returns on the other side. You've got
Speaker 4: to both take risk, but you've got to manage risk.
Speaker 4: And it just feels like New Zeon's a step back
Speaker 4: and lost a little bit of its mojo. You have
Speaker 4: that preparedness to get out there and ready have a
Speaker 4: crack and drive a bit of economic growth. It's almost
Speaker 4: like the economy or society we've just lurched too much
Speaker 4: into that safety design and the issue is how do
Speaker 4: we get back out of or into an environment where
Speaker 4: people are prepared to have a bit of a crack.
Speaker 4: Less Government interference is one thing, but ultimately the private
Speaker 4: sector needs to be prepared to get out there and
Speaker 4: give it a crack.
Speaker 2: Do you think opening up to more foreign investment will
Speaker 2: better things for New Zealand in the long run, But
Speaker 2: some of those local owned businesses might have a look
Speaker 2: at the foreign investment coming into the country and thinking
Speaker 2: all right, we can do this.
Speaker 4: It's not just about the foreign investment, it's about the
Speaker 4: foreign ideas. New Zealand needs to be far better connected internationally.
Speaker 4: There we cd with the near twenty twenty two Economic
Speaker 4: Survey in New Zealand made some pretty specific damning comments
Speaker 4: on New Zealand's managerial capability, particularly in regard to tech
Speaker 4: AI preparedness to take risks that we tended to be
Speaker 4: around bordering tables. It tended to be a lot about
Speaker 4: governance and not about strategy. They're report way back in
Speaker 4: twenty twenty two was a pretty good snapshot of where
Speaker 4: we stand. And one of the ways we can improve
Speaker 4: there is to improve our connectivity with best practice around
Speaker 4: the globe.
Speaker 2: You mentioned that science innovation, you know, the AI advancements
Speaker 2: that New Zealand could be involved with, But what about
Speaker 2: going back to basics. I'm thinking you know Shane Jones
Speaker 2: announcing more mining in the country for example.
Speaker 4: Yeah, Well, New New Zealand's blessed with a pretty good
Speaker 4: natural endowment. Whether you look at stuff that could get mined,
Speaker 4: give water, it rains. We've got to harness the power
Speaker 4: of water in the form of irrigation so we can
Speaker 4: produce more food, we can manage the veriability around your
Speaker 4: mother nature in New Zealand's sitting on a bit of
Speaker 4: a winning lottery ticket. If you think about what our
Speaker 4: natural endowment is, and I guess what Shane Jones is
Speaker 4: pushing aheadworth is trying to maximize or unlock a lot
Speaker 4: of those natural endowment resources so that we can get
Speaker 4: ahead a little bit easier.
Speaker 2: Thanks for joining us, Cameron. That's it for this episode
Speaker 2: of the Front Page. You can read more about today's
Speaker 2: stories and extensive news coverage at enzadherld dot co dot
Speaker 2: enz The Front Page is produced by Ethan Sells and
Speaker 2: Richard Martin, who is also our sound engineer. I'm Chelsea Daniels.
Speaker 2: Subscribe to the Front Page on iHeartRadio or where do
Speaker 2: you get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for another
Speaker 2: look behind the headlines.