logo
#

Latest news with #Landbridge

China gibes prove Coalition is out of step with diplomatic reality
China gibes prove Coalition is out of step with diplomatic reality

Sydney Morning Herald

time3 days ago

  • Politics
  • Sydney Morning Herald

China gibes prove Coalition is out of step with diplomatic reality

The accusations of Opposition Leader Sussan Ley and Nationals senator Bridget McKenzie that Anthony Albanese's trip to China has just been a shallow photo opportunity shows how little the Coalition has learnt from its own failures in the Morrison years (' Great photo ops, not a lot of tangible outcomes ', July 17). Julie Bishop, one of Australia's most successful foreign affairs ministers, realised that diplomacy involved both the establishment of warm relationships as well as engaging in hard negotiations. Under Bishop, our relationship with China prospered. It was no surprise that when Bishop was replaced by the less subtle Marise Payne, serving under the self-confessed 'bulldozer' Scott Morrison, our relations with China (as well as France) fell apart. The proof that a charm offensive works is evidenced by the fact that Australia's exports to China are booming again thanks to the expert way Anthony Albanese, Penny Wong and Don Farrell have played the diplomatic game. Mike Reddy, Vincentia No matter what we may think or report about China, history shows you do not get a reception like the one received by our PM unless you are highly regarded and respected (' China and Xi give Albanese a warm welcome ', July 16). Anthony Albanese has done his research and hit just the right behavioural and responsive notes to Chinese cultural sensitivities and expectations. No one since Whitlam has blazed this trail, and no one could have done better and accomplished more to recalibrate our relationship with the Middle Kingdom. Frederick Jansohn, Rose Bay After a rare private dinner with Xi Jinping, I see some media outlets going on and on about how Anthony Albanese has not met Donald Trump, as if this is a bad thing. What upside is there for him to meet Trump? Like other world leaders who have met him, Albanese is likely to be confronted with a series of questions and questionable facts from Trump, leaving him to accept what is said and be humiliated, or confront Trump and end up doing more harm than good. The next best time for an Australian PM to meet a US president will be in February 2029, after the next election. Christopher Noel, Cremorne Point Portly dispositions I am intrigued at how the federal opposition recently pressed Anthony Albanese to be transparent in his discussions with China's Xi Jinping when negotiating the return of the Port of Darwin, now in the hands of Chinese company Landbridge (' Albanese says Taiwan 'status quo' remains ', July 17). As it turned out, the issue was not raised between the two leaders. China's Premier Li Qiang, however, has expressed concerns about Albanese's commitment to end Landbridge's ownership of the port. It was Tony Abbott's government that set the ball rolling a few days before he was toppled by his own party in September 2015. The Northern Territory was encouraged to proceed with a 99-year lease of the Port of Darwin to Landbridge, owned by billionaire Ye Cheng, who has close links to the Chinese Communist Party, for the sum of $506 million. This agreement was strongly opposed by the Labor Party at that time. Neil James, a former executive director of the Australia Defence Association, called it 'an inexcusable stuff-up'. It is therefore clear that we would not be even having this conversation if the Coalition had not gotten us into this mess in the first place. The upshot is that there is no doubt the Chinese leadership will side with Ye Cheng, who has expressly stated the port is not for sale. Frank Carroll, Moorooka (Qld) Defence is theft In the argument about defence (Letters, July 17), President Dwight Eisenhower's speech about defence expenditure is often quoted. Perhaps we might reflect on his comments, made in 1953: 'Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.' Says it all, really. John Crowe, Cherrybrook Friends with PBS benefits I never thought I'd see the day when I'd appreciate something Donald Trump has done. But now, thanks to him, we have a rare moment of what I've long hoped for: both sides of parliament working consensually on an issue (' Trump's pharma threats unite Labor and Coalition ', July 17). It is so good to see the opposition shifting from its standard operating procedure of bagging the government to one of bipartisanship in defence of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, resulting in a rare moment of public unity. Of course, at the same time the opposition spokesman couldn't resist bagging the prime minister. And since that was for still not having secured a meeting with President Trump, we'd have to ask what on earth would that achieve for Australia, in light of all that we've seen about the outcomes of such meetings when other world leaders have met him, cap in hand. Anne Ring, Coogee Card sharks Your correspondent Stein Boddington makes good points about surcharges added to card users at point of sale (Letters, July 17). As a matter of principle, I do not apply card surcharge in my business (more than 95 per cent of turnover is paid by card). I regard the cost as a business expense and price my product accordingly. However, I have never understood why the alleged card service cost imposed by the bank is levied as a commission, or percentage on the sale. In what way is their cost tenfold for a $200 transaction compared with a $20 transaction? As for cash, clearly there are substantial costs in handling cash, with Armaguard being extended a further large lifeline to transport cash. Now we are also charged to deal with tellers at a bank. Card transactions or cash transactions, banks should just do their job, charge their customers appropriately and stop extorting them by charging commissions on card sales. John Affleck, Sydney Housing solution While Premier Chris Minns searches for new housing solutions following the Rosehill Metro collapse, developers' enthusiasm for Woollahra's potential as a transit-oriented development proves that stations attract investment (' Developers circle Woollahra ghost station ', July 17). As a qualified planner, I've repeatedly urged the Minns Cabinet (since opposition) to follow what became their own Metro West Review's recommendation to reopen the case for Lilyfield. As it stands, the completed Metro West tunnel now passes just north of Leichhardt Oval, and while that iconic ground shouldn't be sold, the surrounding suburb is ripe for a strategic upscale to medium and high-density apartments, as well as a new local centre, connected to neighbouring areas. A Lilyfield Metro West station could support such development, greatly increasing the chance of meeting inner Sydney housing targets. If a mere fraction of that $5 billion previously offered to Racing NSW for Rosehill were put toward completing and backfilling a basic station cavity in Lilyfield by the line's projected opening in 2032, then like Woollahra now, developers could handle the rest whenever the city was ready. One thing I'm sure of – in a century, no one will question such a decision. But the existing 4.5-kilometre gap between new stations in Five Dock and The Bays? The fact this was left unaddressed so close to the CBD in still low-rise, car-dependent suburbs will no doubt be condemned. Nathan English, Balmain Considering that all Chris Minns has achieved with his housing projects is to raise current house prices around all proposed 'transport orientated development' sites by 10 per cent, I don't know why the current residents of Woollahra would object to opening a train station and the subsequent developments that follow. Todd Hillsley, Homebush Tiny home, big potential While I applaud the effort to produce approval-ready plans for the state government's Housing Pattern Book, they completely missed a trick by not coming up with a proper definition of a 'tiny home' so that people could apply to build them legally, instead of having to work around the issue of non-approval by building them as a 'caravan' on a trailer. This method compromises the height and the room width, making them less habitable under National Construction Code standards. A carefully considered tiny home standard that would provide certainty for both DIY and factory builders of these gems would put affordable housing at the fingertips of many more people than the government's plan book ever will, and enable local councils to approve them as dwellings, not just as caravans. Then they could be used for permanent accommodation, not just temporary, which is the restriction for normal caravans. If you've never seen one, understand that tiny homes are nothing like a caravan, except they sometimes have wheels under them. Affordable? Yep! A really nice tiny home could be built for less than $150,000 on your own land or in a factory and towed to your land. Mark Walker, Kempsey Your correspondent David Rohr makes an excellent point regarding residential housing block infill in light of the state government's Housing Pattern Book initiative (Letters, July 17). Utilising even modest backyard space for granny flat-style homes would immediately add to the housing supply rather than sacrificing perfectly adequate structures in the name of newness. Many a backyard could benefit from such additions – it would just take a similar design initiative for modest one- and two-bedroom dwellings with the corresponding streamlining of the local government approvals process. Macquarie Street might also consider what incentives might be offered to homeowners and builders to encourage this repurposing of the traditional housing block — even in space-deprived inner-city suburbs. Mid- and high-rise projects should not be the only glittering answer to the housing crisis. Bradley Wynne, Croydon Credit to Husic Ed Husic deserves credit for joining the growing chorus of lawyers, academics and civil society voices warning against the overreach of the special envoy's report on antisemitism (' Former minister breaks ranks on antisemitism report ', July 17). By calling the report 'heavy-handed' and questioning the push to adopt the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition, Husic gives voice to a real concern: that this approach could narrow the space for legitimate criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza. We don't need laws that confuse moral clarity with hate. Fernanda Trecenti, Fitzroy (Vic) Lessons unlearned Dennis Bluth's suggestion regarding the final result for the seat of Bradfield, that 'we should leave it up to the court', is a fair one (Letters, July 17). However, this in no way proves that 'the usual pundits' who suggest the Liberal Party has a born-to-rule attitude are wrong. The born-to-rule attitude has always stained the Liberal and the National parties, and the current stances, for instance, of Angus Taylor and Michaelia Cash, who demand that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese follows their directions on relations with China and the crumbling USA, proves that their drubbing at the recent election has not altered this in the slightest. Ian Usman Lewis, Armidale Terror not the truth Ever since the awful Wolf Cree k movies, I have decried their contribution to the brutalisation of the beautiful outback, where the isolation is rendered as threatening, whereas in reality it is very affirming. Peter Falconio's murder in 2001 contributed to this fearful perception, but such events are very rare, especially when compared to our cities (' Killer's death brings no solace to victim's family ', July 17). Cinematic history is littered with examples of the fear of the wild unknown, of terror at the hands of redneck lunatics, with 1971's Wake in Fright setting the scene for many others. Walkabout, David Gulpilil's first movie in the same year, took a different tack, starting out with the fear factor dominating the young wanderers, who then discover its beauty and affirmation. I was at the real Wolfe Creek Crater a couple of weeks ago, and I am sitting on the Kimberley coast as I write this. The reality of the outback is that it is serenely beautiful, but any mention of Wolfe Creek Crater almost always brings out the sniggers and derogatory comments. The outback is also home to many First Nations people, who take umbrage at the brutalisation of their country. I, for one, won't be going to see Wolf Creek 3. Dick Clarke, Elanora Heights

Anthony Albanese defends Darwin Port stance from Great Wall of China, Australian businesses won't be iced out
Anthony Albanese defends Darwin Port stance from Great Wall of China, Australian businesses won't be iced out

West Australian

time4 days ago

  • Business
  • West Australian

Anthony Albanese defends Darwin Port stance from Great Wall of China, Australian businesses won't be iced out

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has dismissed suggestions Australian businesses could be iced out of the Chinese market over the Government's decision to put the strategic port of Darwin back into Australia's hands. Chinese objections to Labor's election promise to overturn the awarding of a 99-year lease of the port to the Beijing-owned Landbridge group have loomed over Mr Albanese's red carpet reception in China this week, with state media repeatedly highlighting the controversy. Mr Albanese on Wednesday confirmed that the sale of the port had not been raised directly with him in talks with Premier Li Qiang or Chinese President Xi Jinping, who offered a rare lunch invitation to the Prime Minister and fiancee Jodie Haydon. Mr Li continued the charm offensive at a roundtable of Chinese and Australian business leaders in the imposing Great Hall of the People on Tuesday but alluded to the point of contention by urging Australia to create a 'non-discriminatory business environment.' 'We hope that the Australian side will treat Chinese enterprises visiting Australia fairly and properly solve the problems encountered by enterprises in market access, investment review, and other aspects,' Mr Li said. The Global Times, a state-run media outlet, was more direct. 'At present, there are specific issues between China and Australia that need to be discussed, such as the lease of Darwin Port and the expansion of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement,' it said. 'There are also practical obstacles, especially the tendencies toward 'pan-politicisation' and 'pan-securitisation,' as well as interference from third parties,' it continued in an otherwise glowing account of Mr Albanese's trip so far. Asked during a press conference on the Great Wall of China on Wednesday if he was prepared for Australia to be put back into the deep freeze on the issue, Mr Albanese responded with a straight, 'the answer is no.' The Prime Minister's six-day trip has been centred on repairing business and trade ties after a diplomatic spat under the Morrison government triggered a series of damaging import bans on key commodities, which have since been lifted. Labor has stressed, however, that it will not budge over the cancelling of the Landbridge lease for national security reasons. Mr Albanese told reporters that this was a long held position 'shouldn't come as any surprise.' However, Chinese officials have long protested over changes made to the Foreign Investment Review Board under the previous Government after the port lease was awarded to a Chinese-state owned operator by the Northern Territory authorities. That decision was viewed by many at the time, including in Washington, as a strategic mistake that compromised national security. The Government has rejected Beijing's suggestions that Chinese companies are now being unfairly targeted by rules requiring greater scrutiny in sensitive investment areas. Ahead of Mr Albanese's trip, the Government indicated it would not be prepared to ease restrictions or to accede to Chinese requests for greater cooperation on artificial intelligence capabilities. 'We have a case by case issue when it comes to foreign investment,' said Mr Albanese. 'It is viewed not on the basis of any one country, but on the basis of an objective assessment of our national interest.' He added, 'One of the things that I emphasise - I say the same thing in Beijing as I say in Bankstown, which is that the Australian Government supports free and fair trade. It's in the interests of the world to have free and fair trade, and we'll continue to engage that way.' The Prime Minister also revealed Communist Party Chairman Zhao Leji had agreed to an invitation to lead a National People's Congress delegation to Australia. 'It is very clear that it is in our national interest for us to have a positive relationship with China, where there are differences, to talk about them, but not be defined by them,' he said.

Chinese Premier Li Qiang issues veiled warning on Chinese business treatment as Albanese says Darwin Port not discussed with President Xi
Chinese Premier Li Qiang issues veiled warning on Chinese business treatment as Albanese says Darwin Port not discussed with President Xi

Sky News AU

time4 days ago

  • Business
  • Sky News AU

Chinese Premier Li Qiang issues veiled warning on Chinese business treatment as Albanese says Darwin Port not discussed with President Xi

Chinese Premier Li Qiang has sent a thinly veiled warning to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese after he held back from raising the politically charged Darwin Port issue with President Xi Jinping. Chinese Premier Li Qiang has delivered a thinly veiled warning to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese over treatment of Chinese businesses in Australia. His comments come after the Albanese government committed to reviewing Chinese firm Landbridge's 99-year lease of the Port of Darwin. At a meeting attended by Mr Albanese and business leaders, Premier Li urged Australia to 'treat Chinese enterprises fairly' and 'properly resolve the issues of market access'. 'I trust Australia will treat Chinese enterprise fairly and properly resolve issues regarding market access and investment review,' he said. 'Economic globalisation has encountered headwinds. Trade frictions continue to increase. 'We hope that you will embrace openness and co-operation, no matter how the world changes. 'You should be promoters of economic and trade co-operation so that our two countries will better draw on each other's strengths and grow together.' Mr Albanese declared during the federal election campaign that Landbridge must sell the port voluntarily or it would be forcibly acquired by government. The issue has upset the Chinese government—and Ambassador to Australia Xiao Qian said it would be an 'ethically questionable' move by the Albanese government. However, Mr Albanese confirmed during his press conference that the Port of Darwin issue was not raised during his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping. 'No, it wasn't raised. I can't be clearer than that… I don't need to (raise it),' Mr Albanese told reporters in Beijing. 'I've had the same position for a decade, since the Liberal Government chose to provide an incentive to the Northern Territory Liberal Government to flog off an asset.' The Prime Minister's blunt response came amid sustained domestic pressure over whether the federal government intends to intervene in the lease. The lease was granted by the NT government to Landbridge in 2015, but has remained politically sensitive over the past decade due to concerns about Chinese influence. — Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) July 15, 2025 Australia, which regards the United States as its major security ally, has pursued a China policy of 'cooperate where we can, disagree where we must' under Mr Albanese. Mr Albanese's six-day, three-city visit comes as a major test case for Beijing's attempts to capitalise on US President Donald Trump's global trade war. China has since sought to respond to President Trump's tariffs by presenting itself as a stable and reliable partner. President Xi called on both countries to safeguard free trade in a readout of his meeting with Mr Albanese published by state media. While Mr Albanese repeatedly voiced his support for free trade and more dialogue with China, the first day of senior meetings ended without any new major trade deals. 'Dialogue is how we advance our interests, how we manage our differences and we guard against misunderstanding,' Mr Albanese said on Tuesday night. He also said a decade-old free trade agreement with China, Australia's largest trade partner, would be reviewed. The two countries agreed to a new Policy Dialogue on Steel Decarbonisation that will give Australia insight into Chinese government planning. They also signed agreements on tourism, customs inspections, and agriculture, the statement said.

How lobsters help us start to make sense of Donald Trump's trade chaos
How lobsters help us start to make sense of Donald Trump's trade chaos

ABC News

time4 days ago

  • Politics
  • ABC News

How lobsters help us start to make sense of Donald Trump's trade chaos

Cognitive dissonance is now part — particularly for Australia — just of being in the world. For evidence, it's not necessary to peer very far back into history. Yesterday will do. Consider the epic weirdness of the diplomatic task yesterday presented for Anthony Albanese, an Australian prime minister welcomed warmly to Beijing by the leaders of a "people's democratic dictatorship" who five years ago had banished us comprehensively into the snow. On the agenda for enthusiastic, open discussion: our common interest in clean energy! Our mutually beneficial trade relationship! (Now defrosting before a crackling fire.) Not for discussion: America's public demands, issued as Albanese boarded for Beijing, to know for sure whose side we'd be on in any war with China. (These were delivered by Elbridge Colby, who is the American under-secretary for defence and not, as you might have assumed, a serially-overlooked suitor from a Jane Austen novel) Also off the agenda: Australia's stated intention to yank back control of the Port of Darwin, leased to the Chinese company Landbridge 10 years ago for $500 million in a NT government decision for which no-one, these days, is capable of summoning polite language. This pair of awkwardnesses would be tricky enough to navigate on a quiet day. But yesterday was not a quiet day. It was yesterday. Which apart from being Harmony Day in Beijing was also Day Three of Exercise Talisman Sabre, a joint US-Australian military exercise involving approximately 35,000 defence personnel from 19 supportive nations (not including China), and the literal loading of US military vehicles on and off ships at the Port of Darwin. (For anyone pulling focus at this juncture owing to the lurid nomenclature of "Talisman Sabre": Please, be grateful for small mercies. Its predecessor — launched in 1996 by John Howard and Bill Clinton — was called "Operation Tandem Thrust". I think we can move on with gratitude.) So, yeah, to summarise: yesterday involved a thunderously large joint display of military might with our biggest defence partner (whose president won't meet with us) in which we essentially role-played being at war with our biggest trade partner (whose president hosted us for lunch). It's often said that diplomacy requires the ability to walk and chew gum at the same time, but let's take a moment to recognise that yesterday involved a lot of walking. And a lot of gum. Forming defence ties with like-minded democracies while pursuing trade relationships with dictatorships has never been a particularly comfortable proposition. And it would be difficult even if you could rely on an international rules-based order to keep politics out of trade, a fantasy to which just about everyone has now wearily cancelled their subscription. What we have now is a shifting, kaleidoscopic landscape of allegiances and actions that blur our formal ideas about friends and foes. We've had a free trade agreement with the United States for 20 years now, and with China for 10. Both were the product of hard graft and negotiation. Neither has protected us from trade decisions that are all about politics, or inoculated our shop-front from the dizzying proliferation of knock-on effects from regional conflicts, climate change, economic sanctions and theatrical-trade-wars-to-which-we-are-not-directly-a-party. Maybe the best way to comprehend just how genuinely chaotic these intersecting systems have become is to stop trying to think about them at a country-by-country level, and just pick a product. Lobsters! Let's go with lobsters. Lobsters are a luxury item. A live lobster, regardless of whether it's caught in the waters of South Australia or Nova Scotia or Stonington, Maine — the largest lobster port in America — owes its international travel opportunities explicitly to the existence of affluent consumers. China has — over the past decade, thanks to its burgeoning middle class — accounted for much of the increased global demand for this shy, spiny, exoskeletal creature. Lobsters are a victim of their own deliciousness. This is clear. But their further misfortune, in matters of global trade war strategy, is that they tend to be caught and sold by a highly specialised workforce, prone to industrial unity and nostalgic hunter-gatherer sentiment. This makes lobster a popular go-to product when trade wars get hot. When China instituted its diplomatic revenge in 2020 against the Morrison government's call for an investigation of its links to the COVID-19 virus, the Australian lobster industry was a primary victim; more than 90 per cent of its product went to China, and the import ban announced in that year (the official reason was suspected heavy-metal contamination, a classic of the pseudo-scientific justification genre) decimated the Australian industry, taking sales to China from US$316 million in 2020 down to $19 million in 2021. This was terrible news for Australian lobsterfolk. But it was better news for American lobster exporters. They'd been in a slump since the first Trump trade war with China back in 2018, in which Beijing slapped a 25 per cent tariff on the American delicacy. By 2019, US lobster exports to China had dived by around 85 per cent. This US-specific lobster tariff from China exacerbated the US's threat from regional lobster export giant Canada, which in 2017 had cemented a deal with the European Union zeroing out tariffs on Canadian lobster imports. (This development enhanced an unrelated windfall for Canadian lobsterfolk: boom-level productivity gains from the waters around Nova Scotia, warming thanks to climate change). The Trump administration freaked out and quickly haggled a "mini-deal" with Brussels: American lobster would enjoy the same access to EU markets as their Canadian brethren, in return for America halving its tariffs on a truly random array of EU imports, including prepared meals, crystal glassware and cigarette lighters. This deal expires in about a fortnight — July 31. Bookmark this thought. Canadian lobster exports to China, meanwhile, exploded in 2020 after the import ban on the Australian product. In three years, the Canadian export market to China doubled to just over USD$1bn. But in March this year, Beijing hit Canadian lobster with a 25 per cent tariff, in retaliation for Ottawa's duties on Chinese electric vehicles. One thing to remember: the US and Canadian lobster industries are hopelessly entwined. Canada is better at processing lobster than America is; four out of 10 lobsters caught in Maine are sent over the border to Canada for processing, which is why the Trump administration's announcement earlier this year of a blanket tariff on Canadian imports was so upsetting for the lobstermen of Maine. A lobster caught in Maine, then sent to Canada for processing, then returned to the US — and this is not an uncommon trajectory — would collect a comedic tax burden if both countries stood their ground. Maine lobstermen are a politically powerful group, too. The Second Congressional District of Maine is one of only 13 congressional districts at last year's presidential election to vote for Trump in the presidential stakes, while returning a Democratic congressional representative; this explains the lengths to which the first Trump administration went to preserve their access to the European market. Just this past weekend, President Trump has announced — summarily — a 30 per cent blanket tariff on imports from the European Union. The EU's prepared list of revenge tariffs includes multiple hits on American lobster, among other iconic products like bourbon and motorcycles. (Are tariffs rational? No, mesdames and messieurs, they are not. They rarely are. They are designed to kick recipient nations in their softest and most indulgent parts) The special EU deal on American lobster expires on July 29. For the first time in forever, Australian lobsterfolk find themselves – what are the odds? – in a curiously advantageous position. The Chinese market has reopened like a lotus. In January this year, southern rock lobster exports to China from SA reached 60 per cent of the annual all-time high in 2019. Canadian and American lobster exporters are multi-directionally trussed by real and potential tariff complications. As the Council on Foreign Relations recently put it: 'The irony is that the country best poised to benefit from the US-EU-China lobster war is Australia. Let that sink in. Australia does not claim to have any leverage and does not even see itself as being involved in this fight. But its lobstermen could steal market share, and guard it jealously.'Life is complicated, of course. And as Kyriakos Toumazos – a South Australian lobster industry stalwart – explains, the relief of operating without calamitous and random market restrictions is one thing. The current marine heatwave in South Australia is another. For months now, rising ocean temperatures have delivered grotesque scenes of dead sea creatures washing up on SA beaches. A resultant algal bloom chokes aquatic life. 'We're seeing things we've never seen before,' says Toumazos, who has fished SA waters for 30 years. "Mature lobster stocks are doing okay. But what does this phenomenon mean for the future? "The reality is, we don't really know.'

Albanese walks trade-security tightrope before Xi meeting
Albanese walks trade-security tightrope before Xi meeting

The Age

time6 days ago

  • Business
  • The Age

Albanese walks trade-security tightrope before Xi meeting

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese says Australia is not for turning on its decision to take the Port of Darwin out of Chinese hands, as mining billionaire Andrew 'Twiggy' Forrest warns that an overemphasis on security risks posed by China is hurting the $312 billion in annual trade between the two nations. As Albanese prepares for a grand welcome at his meeting with Xi Jinping in Beijing on Tuesday, the final day of his two-day stop in Shanghai was centred on Australia's financial ties with its biggest trading partner. Trade will be central to Albanese's talks with Xi and Chinese Premier Li Qiang – who famously referred to Albanese as a 'handsome boy' in 2023 – on Tuesday. But disagreements are likely to make the agenda, including China's frustration with Australia's decision to force a Chinese firm to end its lease over the Port of Darwin due to security concerns. Albanese said his government would not be deterred when asked if he believed China might retaliate against the move, Chinese-owned firm Landbridge having leased the asset since 2015. 'The answer to that is no,' the prime minister said at a press conference in Shanghai's Peninsula Hotel. Loading 'We had a very clear position that we want the port to go into Australian ownership. We've been very clear about it … and we will go through that process.' On the economic front, the prime minister said Donald Trump's trade war might benefit Australia because Asian nations hit by tariffs might turn their attention from the US to Australia. Albanese said he was solely focused on his trip to China when asked if he was closer to securing a meeting with Trump, noting that previous Liberal prime ministers Tony Abbott and Malcolm Fraser had met with Chinese leaders before seeing their US counterparts.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store