Well, Australia and the world raising our sights. There's a lot to be said for modesty in the conduct of foreign policy, as in life itself. But modesty can be overdone. When it takes the form of excessive difference and dependence, seeking and achieving less influence than that which Australia is capable of exercising in advancing both our own interests and those of the wider international community, then I think that's a matter for regret rather than applause. There are obvious constraints limiting the exercise of Australia's diplomatic authority. We're not a great or major power, manifestly, with economic or military might to match. We're somewhat geographically isolated, although much less, I guess, than in the past. As a rusted-on US ally, at least until now, with an unbroken record for more than a century of fighting Washington's wars alongside it, we're not always seen, especially by the global south, to be quite as independently minded as we'd like to think of ourselves. Memories do linger of our past racist policies. And we have to be more careful than most about charges of double standards or hypocrisy if our immigration or other policies are either wrong-headed or misunderstood internationally. But against all this, we do have some wonderful strengths. Assets and capabilities giving real weight to our standing and reputation. Some of them inherent, very long-standing, some much more recently acquired. We are, by most measures, the 13th largest economy in the world. By any measure, we are the sixth largest land mass and with the third largest maritime zone. We're one of the most multicultural countries in the globe, with a very large pool, among others, of very fluent Asian language speakers, hundreds of thousands of Chinese Australians for start, constituting a fantastic, but so far, I think, underappreciated and underutilized resource. And we have belated, though it may have been, a strong commitment to our indigenous people, as the whole world applauded in particular with our apology to the stolen generation. We bring to the table a unique geopolitical perspective, bridging our European history and our Indo-Pacific geography. Australians working in international organizations, both official and non-governmental, and Australian peacekeepers, have won almost universally outstanding reputations. We have had a strong and long-standing commitment to a rule-based global and regional order. We've had a long record of demonstrated national commitment to the United Nations system in security, social, economic, justice, human rights dimensions. And beyond all of that, we've been seen for many decades as a creative middle power with global interests and a long, if not unbroken, record on both sides of politics of active and effective diplomacy on global and regional as well as on bilateral issues. Looking back at the course of Australian foreign policy history, it's fascinating, I think, to trace both the continuities and discontinuities in the way in which those strengths of ours have been understood and the way in which they've been applied. In identifying the extent to which, as I will, different prime ministers and foreign ministers have been active and enthusiastic international performers, punching variously above, at, or below their weight, party political and ideological divisions don't really seem to be a complete explanation of those differences of commitment and performance. Personal, psychological traits are arguably just as important, perhaps even more. So what matters most here may be whether our foreign policy leaders have been instinctively optimists or pessimists, or in many clerks' wonderful dichotomy enlarges or straighteners. While Australian political leaders were not entirely absent from the world's stages in the first decades of our nationhood, most obviously, although not very helpfully, for our reputation, I have to say, with Billy Hughes's performance at Versailles, Australian foreign policy, in the sense of a desire to pursue our interests combined with some independent capacity to do so, really only dates from the early 1940s. And the creation of any kind of systematic Australian foreign policy really only came with H. V. Ebert, whose most striking contribution was his internationalism. The part that he played in the founding of the United Nations is the stuff of which legends are made, and rightly so, especially in his fight for the rights of the smaller powers against the great powers in the respective role of the General Assembly, the Scooty Council, and in his faith in the United Nations as an agent for social and economic reform and as a protector of human rights. But there were, of course, aspects of Ebert's worldview very much shared, I have to concede by the Labor Party of the time, which were not remotely broad-minded, right up until the Whitlam era, White Australia and the prejudices which nourished it, and the perception of the world, and particularly our own region, as a dangerous place from which Australia needed to be protected were very strong strands in my party's thinking. The early support from Ebert and Chifling for Indonesia's independence struggle against the Dutch was really the closest we came to understanding the new forces at work in our region and our need to reposition ourselves accordingly. This never, however, became a sustaining or dominant theme in our foreign policy at the time and certainly did not become one in the conservative era that followed from 1949 all the way through to 1972. There wasn't much left of Ebert's cooperative internationalism by the end of the reign of Robert Gordon Menzies and his successors. It's true that with the Cold War rendering the United Nations more and more impotent, multilateral processes generally more and more sterile, there wasn't much to pursue other than as a regional extension of alliance relationships. And true it is that we developed, particularly under Casey, cordial diplomatic relations with the emerging new nations of our region. True it is that Spender's Colombo Plan made a very useful contribution to our long-term relations with Asia. True it is that McEwen deserves credit for the 1957 Treaty with Japan and the optimism and the foresight that went with that. And true it is that men like Hasluck, and particularly Gorton and Holt, had quite open-minded international outlooks. But against this there has to be weighed Menzies excruciating anglophilia, the maintenance until the late 1960s of the full vigor of the White Australian policy, the stridency of our support for Ebert's South Africa, the intensity of our antagonism toward China, the totality of our dependence on the United States, the ultimate comprehensive misjudgment of our intervention in Vietnam. All this combined to reinforce the image and the reality of an Australia largely isolated and irrelevant in its own region. The Whitlam government in 1972-5 well and truly broke that mould, undaunted by cold war constraints and showing a great capacity, as Ebert had done, to match Australia and foreign policy to the mood and the needs of the time. Recognising China, bringing home our last troops from Vietnam, finally burying the White Australia policy, taking France to the world court for its nuclear tests and the Pacific, accelerating Papua New Guinea's independence. These were just some of the decisions of that tumultuous three years which set Australia on a new, confidently optimistic internationalist path. When the Fraser government, which followed it from 1975 to 83, while the Fraser government was more than happy to re-embrace cold war verities and all the east-west division of friends and enemies that went with it, I think it really is to the very considerable credit of Malcolm Fraser himself that on the issues which mattered most for Australia's long-term capacity to advance its interests, especially in this region, Whitlam's policies were not only continued but reinforced. Certainly both Fraser and his foreign minister, Andrew Peacock, both understood, as many in the coalition for a very long time did not, the absolutely critical importance of abandoning government legitimised racism in any form whatsoever, at home and abroad. Most obvious manifestation of that was their embrace of Vietnamese refugees, in fact much less reluctantly than Whitlam had done. The Hawken Keating governments that took us through the next 13 years renewed that spirit of activist optimistic adventure, which so characterised the Whitlam period, but at least as I remember it, in a more focused and systematic fashion. And we were able to achieve quite a great deal, including helping create the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation Forum, APEC, other new cooperative regional economic and security architecture, in crafting, as we did, the peace plan for Cambodia, securing the completion of the Chemical Weapons Convention and advancing some major nuclear disarmament objectives, playing a central role throughout the course of the Uruguay round trade negotiations, building with France a strong coalition to save the Antarctic from mining and oil drilling, and being a key player in crafting the financial sanctions strategy, which finally brought down apartheid in South Africa. Throughout our term we did embrace wholeheartedly the optimism and the new cooperative spirit that was abroad with the end of the Cold War. And we had a sustaining model of what kind of country we wanted to be, and to be seen to be, namely a middle power of the strong Asia Pacific orientation, pursuing confidently and actively the global, regional and bilateral levels as appropriate, not only clearly defined geopolitical and economic interests, but also what I've, for a long time, like to describe as good international citizenship interests. And this is a concept I'll come back to a little later, because I think it does lie at the heart of how we and others should conceptualise national interests and influence how we should set up foreign policy priorities in this turbulent new world of the 21st century. To complete the narrative throughout John Howard's long term, from 1996 to 2007, foreign policy was dominated by the Prime Minister himself, certainly more than I would have found comfortable had I been in the shoes of my very long-serving successor, Alexander Downer. John Howard was and remains the quintessential pessimistic realist, over-focused on hard rather than soft power, deeply comfortable in following the US Alliance lead wherever it took us, unadventurous, I have to say, in seeking global or regional policy changes, profoundly uninterested in the UN, generally inward looking. In his relationships with our Asian regional neighbours, but especially China, I do acknowledge that the wheel did turn back in the latter Howard years, and his government did make major contributions to regional stability, and played his role in leading the East Timor and Solomon Islands peacekeeping operations. But John Howard did remain manifestly uncomfortable with the whole idea of our primary relationships needing to be in our own region, and quite unaccepting of the notion that our geography now mattered more than our history. When the Labour government was returned in 2007 with Kevin Rudd, the dominant foreign policy player as Prime Minister, then Foreign Minister under Julia Gillard, and then as Prime Minister again making common cause with Bob Carr, I think it's fair enough to say that the enlargers were back again at centre stage in the conduct of international relations. That was most evident in Kevin Rudd's work on climate change for all the domestic horror, the issue generated for him, in building the role of the G20 in global economic management in a wider set of policy fronts, in trying to give serious content and energy to a new global debate on nuclear disarmament, in creating, albeit again after a few diplomatic slips along the way, important new regional architecture in the expanded East Asia Summit, and in moving to claw back a seat at the table for Australia in the UN Security Council. It was also evident that approach in Australia's support by Carr and supported by Rudd in Backbench Exile, although proposed rather vigorously by Julia Gillard, for moves toward recognition of Palestinian statehood in the UN General Assembly. The two-year administration of Tony Abbott was more reminiscent, I think one has to say, of the early Howard period than anything we've seen before or since, narrower in its geographical focus and certainly narrower in its ideological embrace, with the US alliance relationship front and centre and multilateral diplomacy seen as of second or third order importance, except of course insofar as it involved the Anglo-sphere. Since 2015, Malcolm Turnbull's prime ministership has proved rather more continuity, rather more continuity of his predecessor than might have been expected in foreigners and domestic policy, and I guess that's been helped by Foreign Minister Julie Bishop for staying that role, maintaining an essentially transactional approach, generally less preoccupied with high policy than with management of the Department, Consulate of Administration, the aid program and the mechanics and trade negotiation. On the positive side of the ledger, Australia under the present coalition government was generally a very constructive contributor on a number of global security issues including that two-year term 2013-14 on the Security Council, not least with our leadership on the pathbreaking issue of humanitarian access to Syria. We've also played an important leadership role in the General Assembly, including very recently, on a normative issue very close to my heart, as Brian mentioned in the intro, the responsibility to protect R2P, to protect peoples against genocide and other mass atrocity crimes. It's also the case that important bilateral trade agreements have been successfully concluded and pluralateral, ones advanced, and a serious commitment has been made to the Asian education of the next generation of Australians through the new Colombo Plan. But along the way, we have gone missing. We've gone missing on arms control. On our feet and climate commitments, we've exposed ourselves to a great deal of criticism on a number of specific fronts. Among other things being caught eavesdropping on the Indonesian president and his wife and refusing subsequently to apologise. Very recently, prosecuting whistleblowers now for exposing the equally egregious eavesdropping of Timor-Leste's Cabinet in 2004. The extreme isolation of the positions that we regularly take in Israel, Palestine, which was taken to, I have to say, my judgement, quite grotesque extremes with our vote alongside only the United States and the Human Rights Council against establishing an independent commission of inquiry to report on the Gaza massacre. There's been the international shame of some aspects, most notably the Manus and Nehru detention centres, of our asylum seekers policy. Although there, of course, I unhappily have to acknowledge a bipartisan policy. There's been our unwillingness to seriously call out or respond punitively to major human rights abuses in Cambodia, Myanmar and elsewhere in our region. And there has been the unbelievably savage slashing of our aid commitments now at their lowest level at 0.22% of GNI since our development assistance first began. The lowest level of aid is a proportioned GNI since development assistance first began. And I have to say that we're now beginning to stumble into that zero-sum game territory in managing relations with our major economic partner on the one hand and our major security ally. Unnecessarily alienating China while putting too many eggs into the United States basket, where at least under the present administration they're all too likely to be broken. Criticisms of the particular failings of particular administrations aside, my more fundamental concern is that Australian foreign policy for most of the last two decades has had an extremely ad hoc feel about it, lacking overall shape and coherence. Not founded on any obviously systematic articulation of what our national interests are and how they're best advanced and prioritised. And certainly not enabling Australia to make the positive impact on the world, on the region at which it remains capable. I've always believed in this context that while complete bipartisanship in this area is probably unachievable other than in occasional races to the bottom, as on asylum seekers, given the long history of our, given the long histories and distinctive culture of both major parties, nonetheless we have often found, and I hope I've described a number of those occasions, we have often found common cause in the past and we should try to find as much as we possibly can in the future. Not least since it's well established that foreign policy issues and what usually vote changes for most voters. I think the best way of finding common ground is to go back to basics. Focusing on what are our real national interests, our capacity to advance and protect them, and the priorities for action that follow from that. Recognising that the logical starting point is interests, it's not relationships, and that how particular relationships are managed with the United States or anyone else should be a function of hard headed assessment by us of our own national interests. So what are our national interests? There's no argument about the traditional geo, traditional geo of geopolitical, strategic, physical security related interests on one hand and economic and trade prosperity related interests on the other. But I've long argued, as I've foreshadowed a little while ago, I've long argued that instead of thinking of national interests in just these two bundles, we really do need now to think in terms of every country, every country, not just us, every country having a third kind of national interest. And that's the national interest in being and being seen to be a good international citizen. What do I mean by that? Well, to me the touchstone of good international citizenship is being willing to engage in cooperative international action to advance regional or global public goods. We'll put it in another way to help resolve what Kofi Annan used to describe as problems without passports. Those which by their very nature are beyond the capacity of any one state, however great or powerful to individually solve. And we're talking here about such issues, obviously as achieving clean and safe global environment. A world free of health pandemics, of out of control, cross border population flows of international trafficking of drugs and people and of extreme poverty. A world without cross border terrorism and a world on its way to abolishing all weapons of mass destruction. There's more to all this than just disinterested altruism. In the world of today, whatever may have been the case in the past, these issues should be seen as core foreign policy business, not just optional add-ons at the periphery to be pursued if you in the business of Boy Scout good deeds, but not otherwise. My argument in this respect is that by being seriously committed to cooperative international problem solving, even in areas where some sacrifice might be involved with no immediately compensating national security or economic benefit to ourselves, does indeed generate not just a warm inner glow, but a quite hard headed practical return. First, through simple reciprocity, my help for you today in solving your terrorism problem or environment problem might reasonably lead you to be willing to help solve my refugee problem tomorrow. And secondly, through reputational benefit, the perception of being a country willing to take the principled stands for other than immediately obviously self-interested reasons does no harm at all to one's commercial, wider political agendas. As the Scandinavians, in particular, have very long well understood. One of the attractions, I guess to the theoreticians, a good international citizenship concept, is that it does bridge the traditional gap between realism and idealism by making it clear that pursuing values and interests are not necessarily completely different ways of going about things. Rather, the pursuit of values can also be the pursuit of interests. Of course, however defined, interests are not the same as influence. Opportunities for influence in pursuing national interests, broadly defined, are in the international diplomatic, political diplomatic marketplace. What's left over when a country's capacities are discounted by the constraints which inhibit it? Foreign policy priorities then define themselves as those policy areas where a major interest coincides with at least some opportunity to influence its achievement. So in the present geostrategic environment, with all its multiple challenges, what are the opportunities for Australia to raise our sights, to make a positive difference, not just for ourselves but for others, to punch not just at our weight but above our weight? There can be no argument that the present geostrategic environment is extremely challenging. Big and often quite disconcerting geopolitical shifts have been occurring. Most of them faster and going further than almost any of us would have believed possible not very long ago. In our own region, the five big ones, most demanding our attention are obviously China's rapid rise, America's relative rapid decline, India's long-awaited emergence as a major player, obviously North Korea's rapid acquisition of nuclear weapons capability, and perhaps less obviously but I think significantly, ASEAN's loss of a significant amount in recent times of its coherence and credibility at a time when both have never been more needed. But overarching all these separate issues, each of which demand our concentrated attention, is a bigger issue. A bigger issue, namely that the assumptions which have sustained and underpinned Australian security and economic policy for decades, those assumptions are in meltdown. The post-Second World War global order, an open rules-based system underpinned by a robust network of security alliances and by effective multilateral institutions in which rules could be agreed and norms reinforced, that's the only system we've known in our modern history. Its maintenance has depended more than anything else on American belief. Belief in the liberal norms laid out in the San Francisco Peace Treaty and the Bretton Woods organizations. But as the Trump Administration conspicuously abandons those norms, that order is now unraveling with remarkable speed. Other factors have of course contributed to the current uncertainty. China no longer content to just benefit from the liberal global order without trying to reshape it, is now matching its spectacular economic rise with the determination to wield major political and strategic influence regionally and indeed globally. Russia under Putin after a long period of post-Cold War quiescence is using its Security Council and its military authority to play itself back into the role of regional hegemon and global spoiler whenever and wherever it can. The European Union divided and troubled. Few other inter-governmental organizations including ASEAN in our own region are punching anything, at anything like their necessary weight. But it has to be said, it is above all the United States that's now tearing up the order that it did so much to create. With President Trump initiating trade wars, treating allies as irritating encumbrances, preferring despots to Democrats, regarding multilateral institutions with contempt, and walking away from painfully negotiated international agreements, the Iran nuclear deal, and the Paris climate accords. In a way which has left America's word in doubt and its soft power in real disarray. Even when this president does the right thing, as I think he unquestionably did and with the circuit-breaking Singapore summit with Kim Jong-un, it is, again, it sort of has to be said, with such manifestly superficial understanding and with such indifference to process and with such fragility of temperament, that it really is hard for anyone to be confident that the ultimate outcome that will necessarily involve protracted multilateral trust-building diplomacy will be one of triumph or disaster. It's not been unknown in the past, as I've got good cause to remember as a long-standing foreign minister and as an international conflict prevention NGO head, not been unknown for the United States to be on occasions insensitive to allies' concerns, not unknown for us to justify consorting with dictators as necessary real politic, not unknown to be keener on international law in principle than in practice and indeed to very often, not always, exhaust all available alternatives before doing the right thing. Nor is it entirely unexpected, I guess, that after all this hectic international commitment of recent decades, much of it, of course, positive, constructive and underappreciated, it's not surprising that after that commitment of so much blood and treasure, there should be a mood in the United States for a return to the kind of isolationism which prevailed in the earlier part of the last century. But what's new, what really is new and what's largely unanticipated is that America now is behaving neither as primary defender of the liberal international order which it created nor as a state really an inward-looking retreat from it but rather, as what Robert Kagan recently described in the robust terms in the Washington Post, as a rogue superpower, active, powerful but recognising no moral, political or strategic commitments and no sense of responsibility to anything beyond itself. Now, it may be that that characterisation is overdrawn or if it's not that the Trump ascendancy will prove an aberration that normality will resume in 2020 but there is, I have to say, enough truth in it and enough reason to believe that irremediable damage has been done to the world orders we've known in Australia and indeed many other countries to need to do some very hard thinking as to how we respond. So I think the four key elements of that response can be summarised as less America, more civil rights, more Asia and more global engagement. So a few words on each of those. Less America. Continued US engagement in this region is certainly highly desirable and I'm not in any way suggesting that Australia should walk away from the US alliance from which we unquestionably benefit as we have for a very long time in terms of access to intelligence, to high-end armaments and however flimsy the answers guarantees may prove to be in reality we have benefited from the national deterrent protection of America's massive military firepower. But less reflexive support for everything the US chooses to do is really very long overdue. As I've often said, with a thou ghost, there I ghost might be good theology but it's not great foreign policy for a country that values its independence and wants international respect. My own experience does strongly suggest that periodically saying no to the United States when our national interests are manifestly different makes for a much healthier and more productive relationship than one of craven dependence. Neither we nor anywhere else, anyone else in the region should be under any illusion that the United States will be there for us militarily in any circumstance where it doesn't also see its own immediate interest being under some threat. While that was almost certainly the reality under previous administrations it obviously has been thrown into much starker relief by Trump's America First approach and it shouldn't be now assumed that anything would be very different in a post-Trump era. So I think the reality is as ANU's Hugh White has repeatedly put it that we do need to prepare ourselves to live in Asia without America. So, secondly, more self-reliance. This certainly means being more of a diplomatic free agent adding to our reputation and credibility with an activist foreign policy that is creative, proactive, value-adding and unrestrained by a constant urge to look over the shoulder to Washington but more than that, more self-reliance does entail in military terms building defense capability that involves not only more bucks than we're usually comfortable spending but getting a bigger bang for each of them. It certainly means maximizing our capacity to protect our shores and our maritime environment including the Southwest Pacific from hostile intrusion. But it also means, I believe, having a capacity to engage in military operations wider afield if there is a good national interest including good international citizen interest reason for doing just that. While defense expenditure has been increasing with both sides of politics now committed to maintaining it at a credible 2% or slightly more GDP given the size of our continent, our capacity to defend ourselves against any really existential threat is limited. I'm optimistic enough to believe that in today's world the costs and the risks of waging war so wildly outweigh any conceivable benefits for any player that the likelihood of a major conflict in the foreseeable future is in fact very low. But defense planning always, of course, has to be based on worst case assumptions taking into account potential adversaries' capabilities not just their known intent and in that context we are just going to have to get used to doing more. More Asia. More Asia, this to me has two dimensions on the one hand strengthening our relationships at all levels with key regional neighbors like India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Japan, South Korea as a collective counterweight to a potentially overreaching China. On the other hand, it also means to me trying to develop a more multi-dimensional relationship not just a one-dimensional economic one with China itself. As to the first, as much as I would welcome of course I would, Australia developing an even closer relationship with ASEAN as a whole as an institution with all its potential for harnessing the region's collective middle power, energy capacity as much as I'd like to see that relationship perhaps extending to some form of associate membership rather than just partnership. I suspect that for the foreseeable future internal divisions and that organizations culture of extreme caution makes that unlikely and that accordingly our efforts in Southeast Asia should be focused really on its two heaviest players Indonesia and Vietnam as well as our traditional partners Singapore and Malaysia. If some or all of we five countries, and I've just mentioned were for example to mount regular combined freedom navigation operations quite independently of the United States in the contested waters of the South China Sea I think China would have to think very long and hard about any retaliation. While China manifestly does not want to provoke violent conflict anywhere it is clearly intent on recreating as much of its historical hegemonic tributary relationship with its southern neighbors as it can get away with and the united front of middle powers might be more effective in resisting this than relying on an increasingly erratic United States. There are of course less potentially confrontational ways of giving clear messages to China that the region is not prepared to lapse into tributary state mode for example there would seem to be considerable scope for maritime cooperation on search and rescue and humanitarian and disaster relief operations including involving Australia, India and Japan and the United States for example alongside ASEAN members which would create which would promote greater interaction between armed forces without triggering so many political sensitivities. It was in that humanitarian context the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami that in fact the idea of the Quad was born close military cooperation between the United States, Japan, India and Australia. This is now after a false start in that direction in 2007 being reborn as a more overtly strategic response to China's new assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific. While this hasn't yet developed further than four-way talks between each country's admirals with India actually still remaining quite reluctant to have Australia even join its annual Malabar naval exercise with the US and Japan China does paint this as having all the makings of a polarizing alliance dedicated to China's containment. While it's no bad thing again for China to get the message that overarching behavior will be met with pushback I do think it would be prudent for the quadrilateral, the quad to be seen for now and characterized by its participants not as some kind of new grand strategic alliance but rather simply as a mechanism for greater working level, foreign and security policy dialogue and military to military interaction in a nearly uncertain environment and as a mechanism for which the particular attraction for Australia is closer engagement with India and Japan not just relying on the United States. So far as China is concerned I said more Asia had two dimensions one was getting close to the other powers and the other was responding differently to China itself by the one-dimensional way we traditionally have. So far as China itself is concerned it is critical and I'm glad to see that the government's foreign policy white paper last year spelt this out quite clearly. It's critical I think to approach the relationship in a spirit of multi-dimensional engagement. We should be trying to build mutually beneficial connections at multiple levels, not just to see the country as a one-dimensional economic partner crucial for our prosperity treated warily and confrontationally on anything to do with security issues in the hope and the expectation almost certainly now misguided that the United States will do the heavy lifting for us on that front. None of what I'm saying means becoming Beijing's patsy any more than we should be Washington's. We shouldn't hold back in making clear our own commitment to democratic and human rights values and as I've already said we should be prepared to push back over riches as it manifestly has from the South China Sea. But it does mean recognizing the legitimacy of many of China's own security and national interest claims including I have to say the essential legitimacy of the scale and ambition of the Belt and Road Initiative with us being a little less anxious than we have been about its regional security implications and being prepared with appropriate commercial caution to be an active participant in that enterprise. And it certainly means recognizing the legitimacy of China's demand to be now not just a rule taker but a participant in global rule making. In that context one of the one of the most productive ways of building content into Australia's relationship with China maybe to work more closely with it on the whole range of global and regional public goods issues like change to arms control terrorism to health pandemics, peacekeeping responding to mass atrocity crimes on which as China, on which China I have to say with a few exceptions has in recent times been playing a much more interested and constructive role than has been generally recognized including for example being a major contributor in UN peacekeeping operations much more so than any of the other permanent five countries. Which brings me finally in terms of the set of responses to the proposition that more global engagement generally should come back into focus as a sustaining theme of Australian foreign policy. Picking up the idea that being and being seen to be a good international citizen really is itself a core national interest sitting alongside the traditional duo of security and economic interests. Looking back over the course of the diplomatic history that I summarized earlier I do think it's hard to argue with the proposition that Australia has been at its best and our standing in the world has been at its highest when we play to the national strengths that I described at the outset and when we projected ourselves effectively onto the world stage as a country deeply committed to our common humanity and determined to do everything we can to make the world safer, saner more prosperous, more just. In the contemporary world, every state's security, prosperity and quality of life really is best advanced by cooperation rather than confrontation. And Australia should be a relentless campaigner for just that. There are many global public goods issues in which we could make a positive difference using our own strengths as a capable, credible middle power and the strategies of international coalition building that are the essence of effective middle power diplomacy. To take just one quick example nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament where Australia has played a major role in global agenda setting in the past with the Canberra Commission on the Elimination of Nuclear Weapons initiated by Paul Keating, 1996 and the Australia-Japan Commission initiated by Kevin Rudd, 2010 which I had the privilege of co-chairing. But we badly dropped the ball toward the end of President Obama's term when we did have the opportunity to make a practical difference. Had we then, along with South Korea and Japan who could have been persuaded had we then supported Obama's move towards a no-first use doctrinal commitment on nuclear weapons the world might have taken a significant step forward towards reducing the salience and legitimacy of these most indiscriminately inhumane weapons ever invented and now the most immediate risk to life on this planet as we know it. There is in particular in this nuclear disarmament area a need to bridge the obviously widening gulf between those in the nuclear arms states you want to do nothing at all about disarmament and those in the wider community who clamour I fear rather hopelessly impractically for Global Zero now or Global Zero always tomorrow. And I think Australia is genuinely capable of playing a global leadership role in mapping out a workable, credible, practical middle ground approach to bridging that gap. Opinion polls, let me end on this note Opinion polls sometimes suggest like the Lowy Institutes in 2016 that Australians are more or less evenly divided when confronted with the general question as to whether we should seek to play a more influential role in the world or just mind our own business. But when questions are put more specifically for example whether our participation in the UN Security Council and the G20 was worth the effort and the cost other Lowy findings in 2013, 2015 showed very strong support, two thirds of more support in the wider Australian community. My own strong belief is that Australians just don't accept that we are another also ran and that any government which adopts a posture which concentrates just on our immediate neighbourhood, just on our more obvious bilateral relationship remains myopic about what is capable of being achieved if we engage in a whole variety of multilateral forums with the skill and the stamina which has served us so well in the past. It will be a government that does that which will simply in my judgment not be playing the confident external projection role which most Australians wanted to. Our track record over many decades overwhelmingly shows that Australia and individual Australians are decent and committed international citizens independently minded and of course with a real cultural egalitarian streak something which plays well with a great many other countries with our strong record particularly in the context of peacekeeping but also in other diplomatic forums of neither sucking up to the powerful nor kicking down at the powers playing to that instinct of decency focusing on cooperative problem solving using all the energy and creativity that has traditionally been associated with Australian middle power diplomacy at its best will I believe be far and away the best way of ensuring that in the years decades ahead in a region and a world in which the tectonic plates are shifting and every possible kind of uncertainty of bounds it will be far and the best way of ensuring that this great country of ours not only survives but thrives. Thank you.


What's up everybody, Tori McElhaney here, checking in from the 2023 NFL Combine. Scott Barron and I have been here all week in Indianapolis and we've had a lot of conversations with national media about where they think your Atlanta Falcons are in 2023 and what this draft could hold for them. Now, as a special edition of the Falcons Final Whistle podcast, we wanted to bring you those conversations so that you could hear from them what they think the national perspective of your team is. So let's get into it. It's Scott Barron, at AtlantaFalcons.com, digital managing editor here with Ben Solak from The Ringer. Ben, it's gonna be a fascinating off season for the Atlanta Falcons. They have more than $66 million in cap space. They have a top 10 draft pick. They have a lot of needs too. What do you expect from this franchise over the course of the next weeks and months? I'm interested to see what happens with, you know, key free agent. I think Cale McGarry is a big conversation for them. So if you keep McGarry in the building, offensively you feel really good about what you got. The question mark is quarterback. How much you want to trust Desmond Ritter? What sort of lease you want to give him relative to the quarterbacks he might be able to get early? I like Ritter. I've liked Ritter for a long time. I think what you saw over that last quarter of the season makes you feel like he's getting it. He's coming up to NFL speed. You can see it starting to click. I would imagine they feel good about trying to see what that looks like in the first half of next year. And so if you can close the book on offense and say we like Arthur Smith, we like some of our talent, we'll fill in some gaps here and there, you can turn to that defense where there were some issues last season.  You're going from Dean Pease and it's an odd front. It's Blitzen and it's crazy. It's Ryan Nielsen who, I don't know if you saw those Saints defensive ends. They're a little bit bigger than the guys at Atlanta have. Oh yeah. It's a slightly different approach to playing defense. I think you'll start to see a lot of resources to get poured in there. And it's a pretty good defensive draft. It's a bit of a quiet free agency class overall, but there's good defensive options. I think you've got the chance to see a big turnover on that side of the ball and try to get that up to the speed of the offense. Yeah, and when you look at the state of the NFC South, right, I think Desmond Ritter might be the senior quarterback. What do you see from the entire four teams in that spot? It seems like it could be wide open. I mean, I remember the graphic in the middle of the season. The Falcons like five and four. Everybody else was like five and five, four and five. And it was like, that's where we're at right now, man. Everybody, it's neck and neck. The Bucks are so talented, but huge quarterback question mark and then they have a ton of free agents. So you don't really know, are they going to try to reload and let some of these guys walk and maybe take a year off? Or are they just going to try to hit it with Kyle Trask, hit it with a veteran and go. There's a question mark there. The Saints are, the Saints, I mean, like, the Saints are going to try to contend independent of whether or not that's a good idea. The Saints are going to be putting guys on the field and attacking and they've got good coaches, they're a smart team. And so the Saints are going to be around that 500 mark. And then there's Carolina who came down nicely across the stretch at the end of last season. Frank Reichs put together a great staff. Like a lot of the Carolina grassroots hype I feel myself getting swept up into. You know what I'm saying? They're likable there in Carolina. I was big on Atlanta to win the division last year. I was feeling great in like end of October beginning of November. I was loving it. And we couldn't get the hay in the barn, is it where? I'll like Atlanta again this year though. Like Arthur Smith, I think is the best offensive mind that you've got in the division. And this is a offensive football-driven league. And I think that Arthur Smith's on the cutting edge of that. And so that to me is the, that's the edge. That's the advantage. It's filling in the gaps. It's handling the free agency stuff, it's handling the defense, bringing that up to speed. But with what Smith does offensively, Atlanta's in a bit of a leading point as of right now. Block and change, the answer's out. It's so interesting though, because if you look at his offense in 2021, it was Matt Ryan Centric, right? And they were throwing the ball downfield. And then in 2022, it was grounded pound and run 10 times and score. What do you think about that kind of model? He really seems to mold his scheme to the players that he has. But do you think that we're gonna keep seeing that rushing foundation from Arthur Smith as we move forward? Yeah, cause defenses are gonna stay light. And they're a light personnel. They're gonna have an extra defensive back on the field. They're gonna have lighter pass rushers. And Arthur Smith is a, what don't you like coach, right? He looks at a defensive over the course of a week. He looks at a defensive over the course of the year and he says, all right, what do you not like today? Who are you trying to hide from me? What area of the field are you trying to keep me from? I'm gonna find my way there, right? And that's when you start to see like, hey, I got an ex Iowa linebacker playing full back. Well, I can just ram into a gap and he's bigger than your middle linebacker is. And we're gonna, you know, I've got a big back in the Cornell Patterson, a real big back in Tyler Algier, who was great for them down the stretch. Like I have size and physicality. I can do this. I can beat you on the ground. And then it's Marcus Mario to all 220 pounds and I'm on a boot throw in tenure. It's like average of 11 eight eight out, right? Like lead the league in depth of target. That sort of an approach works for the personnel you got. So okay, now it's Desmond Ritter. And then, okay, maybe, you know, Kyle Pitts has abused a little bit of different way. Maybe they draft the receiver early and now I've got a different guy and you'll see stuff change. But fundamentally, like Arthur Smith, this was goes back to his Tennessee days. He knows how to be bigger than the other guy.  And that's the development in the NFL is a pendulum, right? We saw the last 10 years, everything swings towards passing, it's been being lighter. And Arthur Smith's now starting to anticipate the swing back, where I'm gave, I'm gonna put heavy personnel on the field and win. I'm gonna do that and it'll be to my advantage. Yeah, and when you look at this defensive front, which does need some help and you look at what the Saints employ, they got defensive ends who are like 285. That it's a different breed. So would you anticipate some personnel changes up front? Or will it continue to be that multiple front hybrid model and trying to manipulate personnel on the defensive side of the football? To a degree, I think you're gonna see some personnel changes. The Saints are trying to solve a problem with their defensive fronts. Dennis Allen's been the DC there for a long time now as the head coach, wants to play with two safeties deep. Everybody wants to play with two safeties deep now, right? So okay, if you're gonna take a guy out of the box and play him deep, now you have a box count problem. You have one less dude. You're not gonna solve the problem. The Vic Fangio defense, they play these odd fronts and they add guys. Dean P. is gonna go too high with Blitz, right? Add guys from depth. The Saints solution was, let's just have four enormous dudes up front, right? And it worked for them great for a while. They'd run into some rushing quarterbacks and have some trouble, right? Because those Cam Jordan against Jalen Hurts and Lamar Jackson in space, it's not what you like. So your solutions, they got problems that they solve and then they also have weak points. And so what you're hoping with Ryan Nielsen, a guy who's got college background, we're hoping with Arthur Smith, the guy who's just a good football mind in general is, okay, we wanna play with two deep safeties, that's the way the league is going, but that's gonna present problems, box count problems, run defense problems. We need to have different solutions.  But there's also solutions that's like, how can we use D'Angelo Malone creatively? You know what I'm saying? Like how can we use some athletes in space a little bit better? There's a lot of ways to skin a cat. So they used to say where I grew up in Pennsylvania, a lot of different ways to skin a cat. And so they're gonna come up with, hopefully dynamic solutions that's not just relying on one thing to solve the problems you have on the defense side of the ball. There's no way that I can let you out of here without one more question. They have the number eight overall pick. There's lots of options. We could see quarterback chaos at the top that pushes edge rushers, maybe the first quarterback taken still there at eight. What do you anticipate being available to the Falcons around that number eight cluster? Absolutely, I think you're gonna see the peak of the quarterback class, which is really strong this year, be right there at that eight pick. And that's where I'm really interested in coming at the Falcons right now, because AJ Trell is so good. But you don't wanna be in a position where teams can go, okay, we don't wanna throw at that guy. We're gonna throw at the guy over there. Yeah, we're gonna throw a guy over there. Right, and when you saw the Saints defense be successful over the last few years, like Marshall and Latimore, incredible, obviously. But they had a Paulson and Debo that they could cycle and who was good for them, the outside of Ken Crawley who was good for them. They had Alonte Taylor, right? They did a great job of filling that corner two spot and that's you play man coverage, which is the golden goose in the NFL. If you play man coverage, you're good. And so I think you're gonna see that top of the corner position, Joey Porter, Jr. Penn State, Devon Witherspoon, Illinois, Christian Gonzalez, Oregon. You see those guys available.  We talked a lot about getting those big defensive ends. Lucas Van Ness out of Iowa was the guy who's got that size. You're gonna start to see those guys come into play. Other than that, yeah, you're gonna get like the edge of the quarterback class as well. And you have to have an honest conversation about that. How much do you like some of these guys who can develop, who's a project, who do you wanna get into the building? But that, the corner position specifically, Atlanta's really well suited for that right now. So that's where my mind goes first. Fascinating conversation. Heading into a fascinating offseason. Ben Solak from the ringer, thanks for stopping by. Appreciate it man, thank you. We're here catching up with NBC Sports NFL analyst, Chris Sims, to get his thoughts on the Falcons in 2023. So, we're here at the Combine. If you're the Falcons, if you're Terry Fauno, if you're Arthur Smith, what are you looking at as you are kind of going into this week? Well, there's a few things I think you could, you know, certainly look at. The defense is out of the ball. Pass rusher certainly won the area. Look at what the Falcons can improve. The quarterback situation, I think's maybe still on the radar, right? I mean, where you guys are picking, this group looks pretty good as far as that position's concerned. I know Desmond Ritter did some good things too, but I would think, you know, some evaluations are gonna be done there in that department as far as what they wanna do. Rookie, maybe a veteran, somebody, they're gonna add somebody to the mix, right?  I always think with Arthur Smith, you know, offense alignment at some point, but they got some damn good offense alignment too, but I guess that, you know, pass rusher quarterback, that's probably the two I think about it the most here. This is kind of a very different off season than these two guys, Arthur Smith and Terry Fong have had over the last two years. I mean, what can you kind of say about the work that they did over those two years to get to the point where you have 66.676 million dollars in cap space? I like what they have done. First off, you know, Terry has built the team with what I would say, you know, not like a lot of good meat and potatoes guys, right? And, you know, maybe now there's some sizzle that's gotta be added to it with all this money, right? Cause that's how you get the, you know, want the really expensive steak that sizzles, you gotta pay some money for it, right? So I would think that's the thing they look at. And then Arthur Smith, I'm a huge Arthur Smith fan. I just, you know, I'm a huge Mike Brable fan. I know what that coaching culture is like. I know Arthur Smith has brought that there as well. It's tough, it's hard nose, it's detailed. Every game I watch, I go, this is the right game plan for them against this team. This is what they should do, you know? So I like their cohesion and mix here. And, you know, hey, offense to Lyman, there is some size on the defensive front, right? You gotta AJ Terrell at corner, the Drake London, the tight end, all of that. Now I think it's time for, yeah, some difference makers. Some guys that, hey, it doesn't always have to be the most perfect drive. This guy can catch a slant and run for 60 yards or, you know, get a big sack to close out a close football game there. We come out on top. I feel like that's where we're at with Atlanta right now. I mean, let's just talk about quarterbacks for a second. I mean, with Desmond Ritter, I mean, only a four game sample size, but what did, when you're watching what he did in that four games, what are you kind of taking from that? Right. I mean, he does a lot of good things. I love, first off, the Desmond Ritter, the person, the leader, the worker. I, you know, I've heard so many good things about him. I've gotten to be around him a little and he really popped to me in that way, right? He plays with size, you know, his arm is not a big time arm, but he can make all the throws, right? And we saw the athletic ability pop, you know, from time to time as well. So those are the things I like, you know. Now, are they sold? Am I sold that he's definitely the guy for the future? No, I'm not. Like you said, it's four games. It's early. And there's some things I question about his game. And so that's where I go. Like, I think all doors are open for Atlanta in that department. I mean, I don't know.  I still, am I crazy to think Lamar Jackson and Atlanta make sense? I continue to throw that out there. So, you know, no disrespect to Desmond Ritter got great respect for him. But yeah, I don't think he's nailed down that spot quite yet. So what is it going to take for, I guess the Falcons to take the next step and where Terry and Arthur want to take them? I think it's kind of what we talked about, you know. It's an old line that we know can open up some holes and just impose their physical will on you, right? Drake London looks like he's going in the right direction, all that. You know, I think it's just kind of rounding out the roster now. Let's get another receiver along with Drake London, right? Let's maybe add another game-breaking type. You know, Algiers is great between the tackles. Let's get a speed guy. You know, when we throw screens or third down, he's a real viable option in the pass game, right? And then I think when you get into that pass rusher, maybe big time, middle linebacker conversation, those are kind of the things I guess I look at with Atlanta. But not far off, they've exceeded my expectations the last few years as far as wins or losses. And I think that's because the job, you know, Terry has done with value, value picks, value free agents to get that meat and potatoes.  Last question, and then I'll let you get on. With Arthur and kind of establishing an identity, even kind of when we're talking about the meat potatoes, guys rotating in and out, I mean, when you look at the Atlanta Falcons offense, do you see an identity forming and something that's there? Definitely, yeah. It's close, it really is.  I mean, that's the identity. It's just like, hey, we're gonna run it, you know we're gonna run it, and we're still gonna get five yards up the middle. That's, there's something to say about that. There is, they're well-coached up front. They got the type of guys that makes sense. And then he makes them tougher, I feel like, with, you know, his Mike Brable-ish type culture, right? You know, you get around Arthur, he's tough. There's no nonsense. He never cracks a smile. I'm always like, I think he hates me, but maybe he likes me, I'm not sure. But that's a good coach, right? I think my dad would probably say, Bill Parcells was like that. I don't know if he hated me or liked me on a certain day. So yeah, I think, what was the original question? I actually, yeah, I think there is an identity there. I think the NFL knows their identity. I think the public, because they are not enough of a national stage games yet, haven't realized it yet, but I'm guessing this is gonna be the year that, you know, people kind of realize what they got going on down there. Senior NFL reporter for Sports Illustrated and author of the MMQB and a thousand other titles, Albert Breer is here with me to talk a little Falcons football. Now the Falcons have a lot of cap space. They have a top 10 draft pick. What is your outlook for what can be accomplished over the course of what's gonna be a very important off season for this organization? Yeah, I mean, I think what's really interesting is they've got a good group of young core players now. And you look at the Chris Livstroms and Kyle Pitts and Drake Lundins and AJ Terrells, Mercy Grant, like they, I feel like they feel like now they've got a good core players where now they can sort of go into the draft, go into free agency with their options open, just looking to add more good players. And, you know, look, I think last year was tough for them logistically for a lot of different reasons, but they had to do it. And I think it's, you know, similar, and I'm sure you guys have used this comparison a million times, but it's like what, what Brandon Bean and Sean McDermott did their second year in Buffalo where they cleared the decks in that one year. And then they were aggressive building around Josh Allen going into 2020. I think you're gonna see a similar approach this year where they're gonna be maybe not targeting specific positions as much, it's just looking to bring in good players, both in free agency and the draft and being aggressive and doing it. Yeah, they really had to make some tough choices and some sacrifices to create this financial flexibility. What was the national perception of how they went about their business? And they, I mean, Arthur Smith and of course the Falcons GM. Yeah, well, I'll start with Arthur. And I think one thing you noticed about Arthur's teams the last two years is there's a very well-defined identity, like they're tough, they're creative in the run game and they play hard. They may not be winning all the time yet but they play really, really hard. And so the national perception is that it's like a really well-coached team and that they're being patient and building and that Terry Fontenot is taking a very methodical approach in the way he's doing it.  Now they did it in year one with Andy, Bruce and Ryan Poles. But that's what happens a lot of times in these situations where, you know, on the back end, whether again, Rex Ryan and Buffalo or, you know, Dan Quinn in Atlanta or, you know, or Matt Nagy in Chicago, the end a lot of times with, you know, a coach or a general manager who's hanging on, cap issues arise because you see the team trying to hold on and trying to make it work with the core players that maybe they won with earlier. And, you know, like I think it's interesting when you see the kind of cleanup crew come in in these places and they have to do that one year where they're really taking on the dead money and clearing the decks. And so, you know, I think it wasn't a matter of if, it was a matter of when they did it. And so, you know, obviously the Falcons hang on to Matt for that extra year and try to establish something in year one, which again, is just what Buffalo did. And then in year two is their clear of the next year. But, you know, I think it was gonna have to happen sooner or later. As you look at this young foundation that the Falcons have and you also look at what they need. How would you prioritize their off-season needs and where or if quarterback fits into that list? Yeah, I think quarterback's gonna be interesting because I think that they'll pull multiple levers there. I also think like, I mean, I don't think Desmond Ritter is like guaranteed to be the starter, but I think it's gonna get an opportunity.  I think the Falcons will look around at all of their options and probably sign a free agent and probably draft another one, you know, but they're gonna give, I think Des is gonna have a legitimate shot. There's a lot of things to like about Des, both tangibly and intangibly. And I'm sure you know Scott, who he is as a guy. So, I think quarterbacks near the top of the priority list. Now does that mean they're gonna take a massive swing? Maybe not, but I think they're gonna do multiple things at the position. You know, and then outside of that again, like I think that there's just sort of in this position where they can sort of add where they need to add because they've got good pieces and a bunch of different position groups to build around without, I think, a crying need anywhere. And so if you look at like where they're picking, for example, they're picking eighth, I think, right? So they're picking eighth overall. Well, you know, if you look at the makeup of the draft class, that puts them right in front of the cliff where there's really supposed to be a drop off around the 11th or 12th pick. And the players who are above that cliff are more or less defensive pressure players. So like, could you be looking at like the Iowa pass or should could you be looking at one of the Clemson kids, whether it's Brazee or Murphy? You're probably not gonna get Jalen Carter or Will Anderson, but like you've got a chance to get a really good defensive player up there. So I mean, that's gonna sort of, that sort of illustrates the way I think they're gonna approach this, where it's, they don't, I think they go both into free agency in the draft without a feeling that they need to press a certain need and that allows them to just go get good players. And I have one more question for you. There is a new defensive coordinator in town, Ryan Nielsen, comes from the Saints, is well known for developing a solid pass rush. What is your take on that move and what do you think he can bring to this Falcons defense? Ryan's incredibly well respected and was one of the more well respected people in the Saints building. And obviously Terry knows them. And I think, you know, like having the background with him helps, you know, and I think when you look at the physical edge that Arthur's brought to the offense, the idea is Ryan will bring that to the defense and he's got a lot of head coach qualities. And I think you guys will find that out about him when you get around him a little bit more. But yeah, I mean like creative because Sean Payton demanded that and building his staffs in New Orleans. So I think you're gonna see a defensive coordinator who's creative and a defensive coordinator who's gonna prioritize toughness, which sounds a lot like what the Falcons have been doing the last couple of years on the offense. Albert Beer, thank you so much for the time and for previewing what is going to be a fascinating off season for the Falcons. Thanks, Scott. I'm here with Robert Mays, the host of the Athletic Football Show to talk a little Falcons football. Kind of just looking at where the Falcons are right now in comparison to kind of what they've had the last couple of years. Let's just talk salary cap. I mean, what do you see when you're looking at the opportunity that the Falcons have going into this off season? Just a chance to build. I think that over the last two years, you're just trying to get out from under the financial boulder that the last regime created for you. And you understand how you get there, right? You have Matt Ryan, you have Julio Jones, you have ownership that's willing to spend to the cap every single year. I mean, Thomas DeMitroff did what he did to squeeze everything you could out of those rosters, but eventually the bill comes due. And Terry Fondo had to clean up that over the last couple of years. And now you get a chance to build the team that you envision. They've been able to do it slowly through the drafts and the patience that they've shown there. But now, if you wanna go out and get a top of market free agent at safety, like Corner and some of those positions of need, that's on the table now. So it just creates a little bit of a different sense of urgency. I like what they did with the two extensions that they handed out. So Jake Matthews, Grated Jar, they retained both of those guys because you wanna have these kind of beacons in your locker room, even when you're in sort of a rebuild tear down mode. And I think on offense and defense, they had those guys. This is what we want the Falcons to be. So having those two guys under contract, we're also trying to skimp and save other places and giving yourself flexibility to move on from Marcus when it was time. They've just done a good job of never cutting off pathways to different versions of the team and different team building options. So that's how you end up with $70 million in cap space and the eighth overall pick. It's a choose your own adventure sort of off season for them and they can go any direction positionally, financially. And that's all you can ask for as a general manager. I'm not painting myself into any corners. We can go wherever we want to with a roster that has a ton of needs all over the place. So they're in a really good spot. But like he said yesterday at the podium, when you have $70 million in cap space, that means you have a lot of work to do and the Falcons have a lot of work to do. CBS color commentary guy on Sundays and a film that work analyst Charles Davis and we're here to talk a little Falcons and they could be a very interesting team over the course of this off season. They have plenty of cap space. They have a top 10 pick. What are you expecting out of this franchise over the next couple of weeks and months? I'm expecting all of us to enjoy watching what Terry Fontenau and the front office are gonna do because all the things you just lined up, perfect, right? Then you take into account the division right now. Tampa Bay won the division, but they don't scare anyone. And when you have a division, it's as wide open as you have right now. Plus it certainly looks like you found your quarterback. And you know, a lot of times we analyze divisions by quarterbacks. In the NFC South right now, the ranking quarterback is one Desmond Ritter, which is just wild to me. It is wild for all of us because just a couple of seasons ago, we were talking about Cam Newton was at Carolina. Tom Brady was in Tampa Bay. So this is what we're looking at right now. Desmond Ritter looks to be the guy. That's who they'll build around. I like how they've played under Arthur Smith because they look like a three, four win team. Yeah, every game they're in, they're bad. Like they're still there. And down the stretch, there was still an opportunity. Didn't quite get there. But I certainly love what they're doing. I really like the fact that Ritter already has a number one receiver in London. And now you've got to find yourself a runner. It was a pretty good runner last year, Tyler Alger. Yeah, and my favorite Desmond Statt was that he was 44 and six in college. The guy's just a gamer. What did you learn about him studying his tape, entering the professional leagues? And what do you think he did during his first four NFL starts? Scott, I think you brought up the biggest one right there, 44 and six in college. Now, look, it's not like a professional pitcher in terms of record, but there is an element of how did he drive a football team and help elevate a program to a level where they were playing in college football playoff against Alabama? There's something to that, right? There's something to him getting better each and every year in consistency and throwing the football. The ability to run the football and have consistency there and toughness, which he helped give that ball club because Cincinnati built themselves on being a tough group, that group of Bearcats. Take that to what we saw this year in San Francisco with Brock Purdy, who had about 46-48 college starts, who elevated a program at Iowa State that wasn't ever supposed to be that great to where they were playing for a big 12 championship, where they were a pre-season top 10 the next year. And he goes to a ready-made team, and I say ready-made, meaning all the elements in front, really good offensive line, excellent runners, trade for McCaffrey to make them even better, wide receivers, Debo Samuel, you name it. Plus, Kyle Shanahan does a great job running offense. He fit in perfectly. Desmond Ritter would have been a perfect candidate to have been that same Brock Purdy type, but his team wasn't ready for him yet. They're going to come along with him. So tell Falcons fans what they can expect around that number eight overall pick. There's definitely some intriguing talents, pass rushers, cornerbacks, Falcons need a lot of help, especially on defense. What can they expect within that draft cluster around that number eight spot? The quarterbacks always drive a draft, good, bad, or indifferent. This year is not superstar power like we've had in the past, but plenty of really, really good ones. Does Bryce Young come off the board first, right? Does CJ Stroud come off the board first? How deep do we go with Will Levis, right, with Kentucky? So once all that kind of gets taken care of and do people come up to get the guy that they absolutely want, that could drive things for Atlanta as well, because then if it's more quarterbacks and defenders, does Jalen Carter go for maybe being the top player in the draft to slide into a point where Atlanta may have a shot? Does Will Anderson from Alabama, maybe the top player in the draft? Does he slide, quote, unquote, to where Atlanta has an opportunity? Those sort of questions will play themselves out, but the quarterbacks will drive it. No ifs, ands, and buts. I don't think we have the receivers that come all the way up this year. It's not the same. We'll have a lot of good ones, but not quite the same. I really think it's gonna be the quarterbacks and then we're gonna have the elite defenders. They'll be the ones in the top cluster. The Falcons have made no secret that they want to get better rushing the passer and they want to get more explosive on offense. If we're focusing on the defensive side of the ball, talk about the depth of this edge rusher and maybe defensive tackle class that everybody focuses on number eight, but can you get some sneaky good players down the line at those two spots? You certainly can, and what's gonna be interesting is I think you can get them all the way through. Really? And what people are going to look at, obviously the higher the draft pick, the more the expectations, the lower the draft pick. Are we sure about this guy? Was it the senior ball? And I'm watching guys playing and saying, they may not be first round guys. They may not be second day guys, but these guys can play. I look up and see this kid, a Gerard Clark from coastal Carolina, this behemoth of a run, you know, a space eater who can flat out play, get up field a little bit. He might be a third day guy, but he might be a guy you can plug in right away. I'm looking at Will McDonald, the outside linebacker defensive end from Iowa State. Size might be an issue because he's not the thickest guy, but if you have a plan for him and make him a designated pass rusher early as he grows into his body, this guy knows how to go chase quarterbacks. I think he has the big 12 record for quarterback sacks in a career. Again, I don't think he's a first day guy. He's probably a second, third round guy. But again, you better have a plan because I don't think he's a full line starter right out of the gate. And my equation for him is Alden Smith coming out of Missouri. That's a pretty nice equation. But Vic Fangio had a plan in San Francisco, we're not gonna overload Alden early. So he had 15 and a half sacks while they didn't overload it. I'm not saying that's what Will McDonald's going to do, but he has great potential coming off the edge. And I just have one last question for you, Charles, and thank you so much for taking the time with us. You look at the state of this NFC South and you'd already mentioned it. There are a lot of veteran quarterbacks who have left. It's wide open and we see time and time again that the NFL is built on parody. You see worst to first, thirds to first, and the Falcons have all these assets. Now, do they have to get it right? Sure, but is there the opportunity, do you think, for Arthur Smith and Terry to upgrade this roster and maybe get right into the playoff chase here? The opportunity's definitely there and here's why I say it. Not just roster, not just upgrading, not just what I saw them do over these first two years. This is what you're seeing. What you're seeing on Sundays, where you have to deal with the Falcons, where people look at it normally, it should be okay. And then all of a sudden, it's tough. You take an L that you didn't expect to take. You escape by the skin of your teeth. They competed each and every week. They got better each and every week with talent that a lot of people say, yeah, not so great. They've got more than a chance, especially in this division. Could it truly is wide open? You can't sit here and say, I know Tampa won it last year. Are they truly the favorites or is everyone a favorite this year? Right, good for them to reach out and grasp it and take it, because the league is built to be eight and eight. Well, nowadays it's nine and eight, I guess, right? Which way are you going to go from nine and eight? Plus or minus? They have a chance to elevate. It's going to be fascinating to see all of these developments around the Atlanta Falcons. Charles Davis, thank you so much for taking the time to talk about it. Thanks for spending time with me. Well, there you have it, everybody. Thank you so much for joining us on this very special edition of the Bafken's final whistle podcast. You can catch us on Spotify, YouTube, all the things, iTunes even. Go and give us a five star review and we'll be back throughout the remainder of the 2023 NFL offseason.


fellow human beings dogs and cats it's Monday morning we're making the dangerous journey into work and I'm not joking it's a dangerous journey the way people drive out here especially on Mondays nobody wants to be out there on Mondays they're all going way over the speed limit all making dangerous passes you've heard the whole spiel before you know how it is let's keep our eyes open let's get to the truck we have two trips into the US today to do we're going to Thief River Falls twice we'll be crossing into Minnesota from Tolstoy Manitoba into Lancaster Minnesota we're back and forth there twice reset the tripometer I reset my tripometer every Monday see how many kilometers I I drive every week clean fresh laundry a brand-new week two trips to the US today yet lost my truck doors behind me we got to go find a step-deck trailer and pull it with us let's go find one I think I found one on the way in already I think it's gonna work just perfect a long day today so try to get done as fast as we can I wasn't expecting it to be raining I walked the dogs this morning I come outside it was just pouring got soaked first thing in the morning that was fun good thing we're gonna be in the truck most of the day today just on the other side of this pole trailer there's a tandem step-deck I'm gonna take it with me right there that one of ours oh wait no that's an owner-operator trailer nope can't take that one then that one doesn't belong to us guess I didn't look closely enough and I was oh there's another one over there no that one's got something on it okay okay the only other step-decks I saw back here were tri-axle so I guess we're taking a tri-axle doesn't really matter either way see if I had a choice I was gonna take a tandem 402 DT I choose you make sure everything's working I'll line in gear when we come back around the other side see the lights working under here already yeah three axles we don't need three we only need two but since we don't have two we'll take three that makes sense they all have premium compressed air my favorite brake lights are working tail lights are working signals are working license light is working once again compressed filled with the best air of manitoba lights are working fantastic oh that's not leaking that's just adjusting first we'll need some go-go juice running a little low once again I didn't fuel up at the end of last week because I'm like oh I'll just do it Monday morning no worries turns out there's no fuel stops along the 59 highway all the way to Thief River Falls and I got to do that twice that's about 10 hours of driving today at least approximately and I won't have enough fuel to do it all so I had to swing past the flying hook out here in Santa Gath real quick and fill her up so I don't get stranded that'd be embarrassing you know this truck may be old may have some rust on it it may have a lot of rust on it it may have a lot of dirt on it may not be clean and shiny but you know what the best part of what this truck is no DEF I saw a truck just similar to this was a day cab extended wheelbase at the truck show I was at on Saturday I showed it in the in the vlog there at the end in that in those that picture slideshow at the end I'm sure you saw it was the blue day cab I took a ton of pictures of it and it's for sale I dream I'm a dreamer I'd love to have a nice shiny chocolate I take it the truck shows like that it's a nice truck but in all honesty if they're going to get new trucks for us city guys and I had any say in it all if they asked me my opinion I'd probably ask for like a little little sleeper doesn't have to be a full-size sleeper but a small sleeper put on the back of the truck just in case I need to do an overnight and then I got a sleeper behind the truck right away and that one didn't have it was just a day cab so 880 dollars and 67 cents 683 liters she was thirsty you want to know what that is an American speak because these are these are the Canadian dollars the Americans they have their own dollars I don't know why our currency is called the same thing American dollars Canadian dollars Australian dollars and then you have the British pounds at least you know when you're talking about pounds you're talking about the UK whenever I'm talking about dollars I always have to like clarify that's Canadian dollars Canadian dollars let's see here 880 67 right you do a CAD that that stands for Canadian dollars to USD stands for US dollars it equals 685 dollars and 48 cents United States money the exchange rate right now looks to be 78 cents US equals one dollar Canadian if you didn't know now you know buckle myself in so I don't fall out okay thanks I took 15 minutes to fuel we needed a lot of fuel so the fuel price here for diesel is a dollar 28.9 so a dollar 29 per per liter for diesel here in Manitoba today let's get out of here now we got to get back over to 59 this is why you should always fuel on Friday and in wintertime I fuel every day because I don't want my fuel tanks to get too low because then I'll have problems with my condensation building in my fuel tanks and then that could lead to fuel gelling when it gets really cold and then your truck stalls and you're cold really cold but for the summertime I can usually get away with just fueling once a week for the work I do and I usually do that like on Friday so I come to work on Monday morning with a full tank of fuel right for whatever reason I forget what we did on Friday I guess I didn't have the time or I couldn't get it fueled up I'm like I'll do a Monday morning so here we are Monday morning officially off to the races this is mine right here load numero uno load number one for today getting ready for winter it's coming I can feel it oh it tipped me off but something tells me that winter is coming they load them this needs to come home with me somebody's getting some new toys let me tell you I wish it was me one day everything is on hold all new toys everything's on hold until we build our house that's most important build the house that is an asset that will appreciate and make money for us and gain value as long as things go the way they should but really who might have tell you what to do with your money you want one of those right now and you're renting you don't have a house yet but you want one of these go for it man gives me something to do go for it you do what you want to do you don't have to listen to me I'm just some guy on the internet so we actually have a better highway on this side than on the American side they just spent a whole bunch of time and money under this one so they did a good job will and I wrote up this highway on our bikes this weekend the motorcycle you can get a little bit of a closer look you're a little bit closer to the highway you know if they did a better job then then I've seen done in the here so that way takes us north of St. Pierre right now in Manitoba I didn't take diesel with me today it was Brits day off she doesn't work today so I figured it's gonna be a long day for me I figured instead of you know diesel hanging out with me here in the truck we could I could just leave him at home and he can run around outside he'll probably be playing outside most of the day and be there with all his brothers and with Brett we're empty time for round two let's go drop this empty out in the open in the yard here where they can load it so we drop this trailer here so it can be loaded that's ours that's ours and that's ours and that's the one we're taking now so let's quickly drop this hook up to that one gotta be back here ready to go in the morning better get home and go straight to bed thanks for hanging out with me today everybody hope to see you here tomorrow don't forget to subscribe


And you work with some, you know, with all these agents that you're working with, what are some characteristics you see, you know, like, man, I see this pattern all the time, like these agents that are high performers, they're, you know, absolutely sales wise or building business wise, like what are some of the characteristics that you see the most? Yeah, I noticed that they, they, they're coachable, they want to learn constantly, right? They want to consistently learn every single day. They know they can learn something from anybody and they're open to it, right? They also have some type of mentor in their life that, that they can learn specifically from someone that they can learn what they've done. They can take the blueprints of success and they can apply them to themselves, right? The mentor piece. Most people, most people struggle with, you know, they think they know it all, ego gets in the way, they don't want to learn, they don't have mentor because that's cheesy, I don't need, I don't need goals or a mentor or someone to tell me what to do or someone to help me, you know, I got it all, right? I got it. And then the third is, is they invest in themselves, they invest in themselves all the time, you know, I mean, like we're putting on a 1% mastermind in Scottsdale that I'm going to invite you to, that we're going to bring 50, 50 top money earners, top leaders from the industry to come and network together for four days. And the ideas, the relationships, the partnerships, the knowledge, the tools, you pick up an idea, an elevator that's like freaking life changing, like those kind of moments are insane. So that's what we're doing, like the 1% mastermind, the representation conference, I do a weekly accountability call for agents every single week. Most people don't invest in themselves. They think it's weird to spend money on making themselves better between, this is, this is true, by the way, between retreats, conferences, events, bootcamps, coaches, sales training, universities, etc, etc. I guarantee you I've spent in excess of $300,000 investing on other people's training, investing in me, exactly from other people, just in me, pouring into me. And I bet I've invested that over the last 30 months. Oh wow. And if you look, everything started to change early 2018. That's when I finally pulled out my credit card and invested 15 grand to change me. And it makes you think bigger. It pulls you in a direction when you get around big time people, success people, it lifts you up.  And when you speak investment, you always want to think what you get back in return. But if you think about the money you spend, but tell us a little bit about what has you gotten back from that. Yeah, I mean, okay, so I've got specific things. So like, like, More than what you spend, right? Oh, totally. I've paid business coaches 30 grand. I've paid, you know, I've paid marketing coaches. I've paid, I've paid just to go to one specific conference.  There's been three events. I'm constantly investing. But what I'm looking for, I'm not even looking for like a monetary immediate return. Because if you go into it, most people, their favorite radio station is WIFM. What's in it for me? Well, most people think too short term. I want to think what's in it for me, but I want to think long term, right? And so for me, our brand has been lifted because of all the things we're doing. I've met some people that's allowed me to be on stages and speak and be on podcasts, everything else that I probably shouldn't be on. Right? I've also taken away relationships from a networking aspect.  But man, networking is where it's at, dude. Like the relationships I have in the industry are deep. They're incredible. And you can tell like I try to be active with them, you know? And then I also have specific nuggets of ideas. Somebody says one word. And it makes me think of something that I'm going to do. Like we were on doing a power panel, a Medicare panel the other day with just like six of us on video talking live, just hanging out. Someone said something that made me think about something else that gave, that I'm going to make 50 grand off of that idea this year. Just somebody said something because I was hanging out with them, you know? So that's what I look for. Like it makes me think on a different level as well. Yeah, absolutely. But yeah, it's crazy whenever these like game changing ideas come from. You just never know. But if you're always like actively looking and thinking and, you know, working with other agents and just if you're always, you know, your mind's going, I've had those moments too. Yes. Dude, you seem like an idea, man.  It's just like not, it's like all day, every day I'm like, like some of them I got to put in a parking lot, you know, because I can't do them all. You just have to write it down and kind of like go through and see which one wins. But yeah, when it comes to, when you said coaching and mentorship investing, I think one of the things that totally makes sense is that the humility, you know, because when you have the ego, that becomes the enemy. And that's really when you don't, well, I don't need the coaching, you know, I got to figure it out, like you said. And that's really something that I strongly believe in too. Like real successful ones are ones that take the next level, the ones that want to invest the money, they want to keep learning. And they feel like they don't, they haven't figured it out yet. Yeah, I feel like, you know, we, we still have a lot more to get done. For sure. It elevates my brain. I learn stuff every time I do it, man, every time I invest. What are some things that you asked me this question, as far as numbers wise, that you're proud of as far as, you know, to look back, you know, decade in numbers, why it doesn't, you know, it could be monitor, it could be staff wise, or it could be like, you know, I mean, the subscriber count is amazing to me because that, you know, in the insurance game, I think there's no channel that's doing that, that kind of, you know, training and, you know, but what, what are some things right now you can say that I'm pretty, I'm pretty proud to share? I mean, something pretty private, I guess, that, that since you ask is a great question to lead into. This next year, with everything we have going on, there's no doubt our total company revenue will be in the eight figures. No question about it. Wow. So you're thinking about doubling then? Yeah. Yeah. 100%. Always, right? How do I double everything we're doing every, you know, I would love to double everything every 90 days. Sometimes once it's big, a bigger, a big enough number, you know, it becomes a lot more difficult.  What is the aha moment that got you to that point? What are some advice you could give to other agents that doing well, you know, we're happy, you know, we have a great lifestyle, maybe, you know, we're very blessed, but what is it that we need to do to take it to the next level, Yeah. I think, I think exposure and environment motivates me, right? Exposure to people's places and things, to new things, right? Having a new environment that levels me up, that makes me think on a different level. Because I mean, there's going to be a lot of farmers agents that watch us, which is incredible. And I'm blessed and honored to be the first non-farmers agent on here. And I love farmers, by the way. Okay, I really do. What I want to add though is, do you want to be the 32nd ranked farmers agency in the country? Why don't we think about being the 32nd ranked agency in the world, the number one farmers agent, the number one farmers agent by 10X, right? Like, how do we start to challenge ourselves? Like, when I get bored and complacent and lazy, it's because I don't have something challenging me. So what I do when I lose momentum, when I lose motivation, right? When my mindset starts to slip, what I do is I put a target out in the near future that is big enough to challenge me to go hit it, to go get it. That's the reason we started throwing the APRONATION conference back in 2018. Because for me, I need stuff to pull me forward constantly. And so we just came up with the 1% mastermind idea literally last week. No joke, last week. And we're going to roll it out publicly this Friday. And it's going to fill up within a matter of a couple of weeks, right? And it's because I know what that getting around big time people has done for me. And I know what it'll do for others. And farmers agents need to start to think about, how do I get exposure to new people's places and things? And how do I increase my environment and get around some amazed people doing some big things? And I'm telling you, it'll start to level you up. It'll start to challenge you. It's getting me jacked up just thinking about it, man. I just, you know what I mean? It just starts to flow. It does. Yeah. No, yeah, the exposure is so important. And then the goals have to be exciting enough. Yes. Like you said, like you said challenging, but if it's like, man, if that could happen, I'll be so excited, then you'll go, like you said, you'll do whatever it takes because you're so excited about that goal. So the goal being big enough is important, I feel like. So if there's a farmer's agency out there that's doing, I mean, what's a good number? Quarter of a million a year in commissions or what? Yeah, that's definitely above average. Okay. So say two, and then it's sad that that is above average, but we're going to use it anyway. Yeah, yeah, it probably is though, right? But let's just say 250 grand in commissions per year for an agency. The goal shouldn't be to get to 300, right? Because an extra four grand a month, a thousand bucks a week in commissions is not going to motivate me. It's not going to pull me, right? So why not? When I say, I want to get to half a million in commissions in literally 12 months. Your life will change. My life will change. It'll make me, it also, the bigger I think, the more the creativity starts to flow. And the more the ideas start to show up, right? And then I've got to think, okay, how do I make that a reality? If it was possible, how would I do it, right? And you kind of start to back up and start to break down the numbers and think, okay, well, I've got two salespeople. To do that, I would probably need six. Okay. Now we know one thing we got to do, we got to hire four more, right? Okay. So then what are some other things we need to do, right? I can elevate my marketing budget, right?  And I'm telling you, most people, most farmers, a lot of farmers agents just, I think a little too small, like we all do. And if we just thought a little bigger, and if we challenge ourselves a little more, we raise the bar a little higher, it will force us, because I truly believe, I truly believe I could get into your, I could get into your space. I could go, I'll open up a farmer's agency, put me in freaking Maine. I don't care. And I truly believe that I can go from zero to, which is above average, $250,000 in commissions, year one. Yeah. It's definitely possible. I love the idea of just kind of like having a target and working way backwards, the reverse engineering that part. So setting that goal, you really could figure everything out. And I love that creativity part too. I totally get what you're talking about there. Hey, if you enjoyed this, I got another one you're gonna love. It's right there. Click on it. See you in there. If you want to make $221,520 next year in 2021, I'm going to show you the seven steps that you need to master. The seven things you need to grow at, the seven things you need to absolutely get great at. And I'm going to go over.