Australia's PM says easing of curbs on US beef not prompted by Trump
Trump this week said the U.S. would sell "so much" beef to Australia after Canberra announced the relaxation of restrictions, potentially smoothing trade talks with Washington.
In place since 2003, the curbs were due to concerns about bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, which can kill cattle as well as people who eat infected beef.
When asked on Sunday if the easing had anything to do with Trump, Albanese said "No, this has been a process that has been there for 10 years, the review process".
"This wasn't a political decision," Albanese said in remarks on Australian Broadcasting Corp television, adding that Trump had not raised the issue with him in a phone call.
The comments come after U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins called the easing a win for Trump. In April, Trump singled out the beef trade disparity with Australia after Australia's beef exports to the U.S. surged last year, reaching A$4 billion amid a slump in U.S. beef production.
By contrast, Australia's agriculture minister said the rules were relaxed after a "rigorous science and risk-based assessment" concluded that U.S. measures to monitor and control cattle movement were effectively managing biosecurity risks.
News of Australia changing its policy was first reported by the Australian Financial Review. The report said Australia will use the easing of rules to argue its case for the U.S. to wind back 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium and Trump's threat to impose a 200% tariff on pharmaceuticals. Collins said the decision was a purely scientific one.
A loosening of beef import rules is not expected to boost significantly U.S. shipments because Australia is a major beef producer and exporter whose prices are much lower, according to analysts.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
.jpeg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C5%2C0%2C5%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
7 minutes ago
- The Independent
White House reportedly told Pete Hegseth's team to stop doing polygraph tests after complaint
The White House has put a stop to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth 's alleged use of polygraph tests in an attempt to root out leakers to the press, according to a new report. As Hegseth became embroiled in the Signalgate scandal, his team began administering polygraph tests in April to those in his inner circle, U.S. officials, and others with knowledge of the matter, according to The Washington Post. The White House's intervention came after Hegseth's senior advisor, Patrick Weaver, raised concerns to officials that he could be the next target of the defense secretary 's polygraph campaign, the sources said. Weaver, who held posts in the Department of Homeland Security and the National Security Council in Donald Trump 's first administration, allegedly grew irate after learning he might be ordered to take a polygraph test. Weaver remains an adviser to Hegseth, according to The Post. The alleged spate of polygraphs came during a tumultuous period where Hegseth fired three senior Pentagon appointees – Dan Caldwell, Colin Carroll and Darin Selnick – who he accused of leaking classified and sensitive information to the media. The men deny any accusations of wrongdoing, and Hegseth's team has presented no evidence to back its claims. Just days later, the defense secretary was engulfed in Signalgate after top officials mistakenly included The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg in a Signal group chat, giving him a front-row seat to discussions about impending U.S. strikes on Houthi militants in Yemen back in March. Multiple tests were carried out over several weeks, with approval from Hegseth and his private attorney, Tim Parlatore, the sources said. However, a Trump administration official intervened with a phone call, instructing the Defense Department to halt the campaign. Members of the Joint Service Interagency Advisory Group, a specialized Pentagon team assembled to address national security issues like drug cartels, had already been administered tests prior to Weaver's complaint, the sources added. Senior Hegseth advisor Colonel Ricky Buria took a polygraph test and received inconclusive results, the sources said, which officials first told the Guardian in May. Navy Admiral Christopher Grady, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Army Lieutenant General Douglas Sims, the director of the Joint Staff, have also faced the threat of polygraph tests, those with knowledge of the matter said. The Pentagon declined to provide a comment to the newspaper on reports of polygraph testing, citing an 'ongoing investigation.' 'The Fake News Media's obsession with months-old workplace gossip is a reflection of the sad and pathetic state of 'journalism' in Washington,' spokesperson Sean Parnell said. Despite facing multiple scandals, Trump continues to publicly support Hegseth. 'A lot of people swirl shit to try to take him down, honestly — but talk of drama with him is overblown,' a senior White House official told Politico on Monday. 'What I know is that everyone who matters has his back completely, currently.' However, some Trump allies and MAGA supporters have expressed concerns that the defense secretary's controversies could damage the administration's credibility. One source close to Hegseth said he is being urged to make peace with the employees he has ousted. 'If there's any chance at Pete resetting and ensuring that whatever time he has left in this position is well served, he's got to do it — otherwise Pete is just doubling down on the lie,' they told Politico.
The Independent
7 minutes ago
- The Independent
Creating realistic deepfakes is getting easier than ever. Fighting back may take even more AI
The phone rings. It's the secretary of state calling. Or is it? For Washington insiders, seeing and hearing is no longer believing, thanks to a spate of recent incidents involving deepfakes impersonating top officials in President Donald Trump 's administration. Digital fakes are coming for corporate America, too, as criminal gangs and hackers associated with adversaries including North Korea use synthetic video and audio to impersonate CEOs and low-level job candidates to gain access to critical systems or business secrets. Thanks to advances in artificial intelligence, creating realistic deepfakes is easier than ever, causing security problems for governments, businesses and private individuals and making trust the most valuable currency of the digital age. Responding to the challenge will require laws, better digital literacy and technical solutions that fight AI with more AI. 'As humans, we are remarkably susceptible to deception,' said Vijay Balasubramaniyan, CEO and founder of the tech firm Pindrop Security. But he believes solutions to the challenge of deepfakes may be within reach: 'We are going to fight back.' AI deepfakes become a national security threat This summer, someone used AI to create a deepfake of Secretary of State Marco Rubio in an attempt to reach out to foreign ministers, a U.S. senator and a governor over text, voice mail and the Signal messaging app. In May someone impersonated Trump's chief of staff, Susie Wiles. Another phony Rubio had popped up in a deepfake earlier this year, saying he wanted to cut off Ukraine's access to Elon Musk's Starlink internet service. Ukraine's government later rebutted the false claim. The national security implications are huge: People who think they're chatting with Rubio or Wiles, for instance, might discuss sensitive information about diplomatic negotiations or military strategy. 'You're either trying to extract sensitive secrets or competitive information or you're going after access, to an email server or other sensitive network," Kinny Chan, CEO of the cybersecurity firm QiD, said of the possible motivations. Synthetic media can also aim to alter behavior. Last year, Democratic voters in New Hampshire received a robocall urging them not to vote in the state's upcoming primary. The voice on the call sounded suspiciously like then-President Joe Biden but was actually created using AI. Their ability to deceive makes AI deepfakes a potent weapon for foreign actors. Both Russia and China have used disinformation and propaganda directed at Americans as a way of undermining trust in democratic alliances and institutions. Steven Kramer, the political consultant who admitted sending the fake Biden robocalls, said he wanted to send a message of the dangers deepfakes pose to the American political system. Kramer was acquitted last month of charges of voter suppression and impersonating a candidate. 'I did what I did for $500,' Kramer said. 'Can you imagine what would happen if the Chinese government decided to do this?' Scammers target the financial industry with deepfakes The greater availability and sophistication of the programs mean deepfakes are increasingly used for corporate espionage and garden variety fraud. 'The financial industry is right in the crosshairs," said Jennifer Ewbank, a former deputy director of the CIA who worked on cybersecurity and digital threats. 'Even individuals who know each other have been convinced to transfer vast sums of money.' In the context of corporate espionage, they can be used to impersonate CEOs asking employees to hand over passwords or routing numbers. Deepfakes can also allow scammers to apply for jobs — and even do them — under an assumed or fake identity. For some this is a way to access sensitive networks, to steal secrets or to install ransomware. Others just want the work and may be working a few similar jobs at different companies at the same time. Authorities in the U.S. have said that thousands of North Koreans with information technology skills have been dispatched to live abroad, using stolen identities to obtain jobs at tech firms in the U.S. and elsewhere. The workers get access to company networks as well as a paycheck. In some cases, the workers install ransomware that can be later used to extort even more money. The schemes have generated billions of dollars for the North Korean government. Within three years, as many as 1 in 4 job applications is expected to be fake, according to research from Adaptive Security, a cybersecurity company. 'We've entered an era where anyone with a laptop and access to an open-source model can convincingly impersonate a real person,' said Brian Long, Adaptive's CEO. 'It's no longer about hacking systems — it's about hacking trust.' Experts deploy AI to fight back against AI Researchers, public policy experts and technology companies are now investigating the best ways of addressing the economic, political and social challenges posed by deepfakes. New regulations could require tech companies to do more to identify, label and potentially remove deepfakes on their platforms. Lawmakers could also impose greater penalties on those who use digital technology to deceive others — if they can be caught. Greater investments in digital literacy could also boost people's immunity to online deception by teaching them ways to spot fake media and avoid falling prey to scammers. The best tool for catching AI may be another AI program, one trained to sniff out the tiny flaws in deepfakes that would go unnoticed by a person. Systems like Pindrop's analyze millions of datapoints in any person's speech to quickly identify irregularities. The system can be used during job interviews or other video conferences to detect if the person is using voice cloning software, for instance. Similar programs may one day be commonplace, running in the background as people chat with colleagues and loved ones online. Someday, deepfakes may go the way of email spam, a technological challenge that once threatened to upend the usefulness of email, said Balasubramaniyan, Pindrop's CEO. 'You can take the defeatist view and say we're going to be subservient to disinformation," he said. 'But that's not going to happen.'
Daily Mail
8 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Labour admits BREXIT is to thank for Britain securing a better US trade deal than Europe - as bloc's leaders hit out at their 'badly negotiated' agreement
Brexit is to thank for Britain securing a better trade deal with the US than Europe, Labour admitted yesterday. Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, said there was 'absolutely no doubt' that the UK was better off as a result of having its own trade policy. His comments came after Donald Trump announced he had agreed 'the biggest deal ever made' between the US and the European Union. The agreement will subject the EU to 15per cent tariffs on most of its goods entering America. It is lower than a 30per cent levy previously threatened by the US president - but worse than the UK's deal - and was quickly lambasted by European leaders. After a day playing golf in Scotland yesterday, Mr Trump met the president of the EU Commission Ursula von der Leyen to discuss the broad terms of an agreement. But Viktor Orban, the Hungarian PM, hit out: 'Donald Trump ate von der Leyen for breakfast'. 'This is what happened and we suspected this would happen as the U.S. president is a heavyweight when it comes to negotiations while Madame President is featherweight.' Former Belgian prime minister Guy Verhofstadt branded the deal 'scandalous' and 'badly negotiated', saying there was 'not one concession from the American side'. French prime minister François Bayrou said: 'It is a dark day when an alliance of free peoples, united to affirm their values and defend their interests, resolves to submission.' And Bernd Lange, the EU Parliament's trade chief, said: 'My first assessment: Not satisfactory. 'This is a lopsided deal. Concessions have clearly been made that are difficult to accept. Deal with significant imbalance. Furthermore lot of questions still open.' But Ms von der Leyen said the deal was 'huge', adding: 'It will bring stability. It will bring predictability. That's very important for our businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.' Mr Trump said the 'partnership' would 'bring us very close together'. He added: 'I think it's great that we made a deal today instead of playing games and maybe not making a deal at all.' Full details of the deal have not yet been confirmed, and a written text still needs to be agreed. But the agreement is worse than a similar deal struck between the UK and US, which will see tariffs of only 10per cent placed on British exports. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds this morning admitted that the UK's favourable deal was a direct benefit of Brexit. He told Sky News: 'All of the trade negotiations that we've got use the fact that we are not part of the customs union anymore, I'm absolutely clear of that. I think we can make the best of that.' Pressed on whether he would call it a Brexit benefit, he added: 'I'm absolutely clear, I've said in Parliament many times, this is a benefit of being out of the European Union, having our independent trade policy, absolutely no doubt about that.' When the UK and US signed a trade deal in June, it reduced tariffs on car and aerospace imports to the US. But agreement on a similar arrangement for Britain's steel imports was not reached, leaving tariffs on steel at 25per cent. American concerns over steel products made elsewhere in the world, then finished in the UK, are said to be among the sticking points. Sir Keir Starmer is expected to spend most of the day with President Trump on Monday, when he will have a chance to press the president on a steel deal. But Business Secretary Mr Reynolds suggested it may take more than a meeting between the two leaders to resolve the matter, telling BBC Breakfast: 'We were very happy to announce the breakthrough that we had a few months ago in relation to sectors like automotive, aerospace, which are really important to the UK economy. 'But we always said it was job saved, but it wasn't job done. There's more to do. The negotiations have been going on on a daily basis since then. There's a few issues to push a little bit further today. 'We won't perhaps have anything to announce a resolution of those talks, but there's some sectors that we still need to resolve, particularly around steel and aluminium, and there's the wider conversation about what the US calls its reciprocal tariffs.'
