Prime Minister Christopher Luxon

Prime Minister Christopher Luxon delivers State of the Nation speech

Kia ora (マオリ語） and good afternoon everyone. It’s wonderful to have the opportunity to speak with you all today.

Uh, can I just acknowledge Simon and all of the Oakland Chamber and for hosting us here today uh in partnership with Kiwi Bank. Uh, Simon, your advocacy on behalf of business here in in Oakland uh has absolutely been relentless.

uh you keep making the case and beating the drum uh for more productivity and more prosperity and I think the country is much better served by all your efforts. So thank you mate for what you do. Uh can I just also acknowledge National Party President Sylvia Wood who's here alongside our national ministers and national MPs that are here today.

Uh particularly Nicola Willis, uh Chris Bishop, Simeon Brown, Paul Goldsmith, Louise Upston, Judith Collins, Shane Reetti, Mark Mitchell, Simon uh Watts, and also Chris Pink. And can I acknowledge the Oakland based MPs that are here, Dan Bido, uh Paulo Garcia, Cameron Brewer, Carlos Chong, Melissa Lee, Greg Fleming, and Nancy Lou.

Welcome to 2026, it’s going to be a great year.

The economy is growing, the kids are almost back to school and, after a great summer break, just like Kiwis up and down the country, National is knuckling down and getting back to work.

I have one simple message for you today.

National is fixing the basics and building the future.

Today, I firstly want to speak about the progress we’ve made for New Zealanders so far.

Then I’ll spend a little bit of time speaking about the global backdrop, and National’s priorities heading into this year’s election, as we present our plan to build the future.

It’s been a challenging period for Kiwis and the New Zealand business community over the last five years.

Yes, we’ve made a lot of progress.

Inflation has fallen from over 7 per cent to just 3 per cent.

Interest rates have dropped considerably, with families re-fixing from mortgage rates starting with a 7, to those starting with a 4 or a 5.

Business confidence and consumer confidence has risen significantly, now translating into greater levels of investment and retail activity.

I know many of you will be frustrated that this recovery, now starting to blossom nationwide, has taken so long to get traction.

For many months it felt like the improving economic conditions at farm gates and on the main streets of Christchurch and Queenstown would never filter through to Queen Street, Newmarket and Lambton Quay.

And in the middle of last year, when emerging green shoots were rapidly cut down by tariff shocks and global uncertainty, it felt like we were back at square one.

That period was difficult, especially here in Auckland. But I remain of the view that we got the balance right.

There were calls at the time for a big fiscal stimulus and to open the immigration gates and pump up house prices.

As I spoke about last year, we can’t risk repeating the sugar-rush economics of the past.

Rapidly rising house prices and more borrowing might have felt good in the moment, but in the long-run those actions ultimately just make us poorer as a society.

I understand that’s been challenging in the near term, but it is encouraging a critical shift in the New Zealand economy, away from speculation and towards productive economic activity, supporting higher incomes and more jobs.

It was positive to see that in the latest GDP data published in December, it was manufacturing, exports and business investment underpinning the bounce back.

It’s been two years of hard work – in government, from businesses large and small, and from every New Zealander.

But I feel more confident than ever that the recovery has now arrived and Kiwis can look forward to a year which is brighter than the last few.

Just last week, NZIER’s latest survey showed business confidence at its highest level since 2014.

Business NZ’s PMI indicator released on Friday shows growth in manufacturing is stronger than at any time since December 2021 and higher many of our global peers.

And while last year there were pockets of optimism in the South Island and in the rural economy, conditions now seem to be improving nationwide.

According to Westpac, Auckland is now the strongest region for consumer confidence.

And in the construction industry, which has struggled through a period of high interest rates and financial pressure, a recovery also appears to be underway.

Building consents are rising, up around 20 per cent in the last six months. And according to Seek, job advertisements in construction have risen by around 30 per cent in the last year.

In short, there’s real cause for optimism. My focus now is translating that optimism into real results for New Zealanders in 2026: with more jobs, higher incomes, and the best possible shot at a better life.

Sensible spending and tight fiscal management is a critical part of our economic agenda.

At the half-year update in December, the Government confirmed a path back to surplus in 2028/29, supported by tight budgets in the coming years.

However, tight budgets have become standard practice for this government.

In just the last two years, our Minister of Finance, Nicola Willis, has delivered savings of around $11 billion per annum, equivalent to around $5,000 for every single household in the country.

I know generating those savings hasn’t been easy, but they have provided the necessary headroom to deliver tax relief, invest in the frontline services Kiwis rely on and maintain a path back to surplus over the forecast period.

New Zealand simply has to get its finances in order if it is to achieve a long-term improvement in its economic prospects.

That’s why there will be more savings in this year’s Budget and no room for extravagant election promises.

Let’s be straight up with each other.

Any party that wants to ramp up spending is being economically irresponsible.

Because the only way to spend more money is to borrow it or to raise taxes.

Borrowing more would lift our debt to dangerous levels, while raising taxes would snuff out the recovery and send Kiwis overseas.

So, National is going to campaign on being responsible managers of the economy, who make the right decisions to fix the basics and build our future.

We’ve had to also fix the basics on education too.

Like many of you in this room, I had an outstanding state education here in New Zealand that enabled me to work all over the world. 

As Prime Minister, I am determined to give that same shot in life to every child growing up in New Zealand today.

But, when we entered office,

§  more than half of our kids were not attending school regularly,

§  80 per cent of 13-year-olds were not where they should have been in Maths,

§  and half of them were not where they needed to be in Reading.

Now, in just two short years, we’ve achieved a huge amount.

Yes, we’ve banned mobile phones and mandated an hour a day of reading, writing and maths.

But thanks to Erica Stanford, we have also delivered a new structured approach to teaching literacy and numeracy and introduced whole new curriculums for Maths and English in primary schools.

Already, the number of new entrants achieving where they should be in phonics has gone from a dismal 36 per cent to 58 per cent. The number of students exceeding expectations has doubled.

There’s more to do, but no doubt about it we are fixing the basics in education.

And take law and order.

Alongside the economy, the extent of lawlessness throughout New Zealand was the issue Kiwis were most frustrated by at the last election.

Between 2017 and 2023, violent crime rose 30 per cent, gang membership increased by 50 per cent, retail crime doubled and ram raids quadrupled.

Many of the business owners in this room will have had their own stores robbed, or dairies and liquor stores in their communities ram raided or robbed at knife point.

So, thanks to the efforts of Mark Mitchell and Paul Goldsmith, we embarked on a programme of major reform to keep Kiwis safe at home, at work and in the community.

We have cracked down on gangs and banned their patches in public.

We have delivered tougher sentencing laws, so offenders do real time.

We have given more powers to Police, and put more of them out on the beat.

There’s more to do, especially in the Auckland CBD, where the Government and Auckland Council have agreed to focus more attention.

But the overall results have been exceptional – 38,000 fewer victims of violent crime, youth offending down by 16 per cent and ram raids down by 85 per cent. 

When it comes to violent and retail crime, we’re fixing the basics.

In short, we are in a stronger position as a country than we were just two short years ago.

But as positive as those results have been, just fixing the basics isn’t enough.

Yes, because we have an obligation to leave a lasting legacy of prosperity and opportunity for our children and our grandchildren. But also, because, in a more volatile and unstable world, we can’t afford to be complacent.

For 70 years now, smaller countries like New Zealand have been able to manage our relationships with other countries according to established rules.

At the same time, the rising tide of free and open trade has encouraged greater economic integration, dynamic new middle-classes in the Indo-Pacific and a wealth of new opportunities for New Zealand’s export industries.

Today, our global rules-based system is rupturing.

I’ve spoken previously about the three big shifts that make for challenging times ahead for our world.

First, we are seeing rules giving way to power. 

Previously, we could count on countries respecting the UN Charter, the Law of the Sea and the rules of global trade.

But in an age of sharper competition, we’re seeing a pattern of countries respecting international law only when it suits them and ignoring the rules when it does not. 

Second, we are witnessing a shift from economics to security. 

National security demands are expanding. Governments need to protect their people and assets against economic coercion, foreign interference, cyberattacks and terrorism.

In the Indo-Pacific, there’s a rising risk of a dangerous miscalculation. 

The bottom line is, a country can’t have prosperity without security, not least when the tools of commerce themselves require protection.

And third, efficiency is giving way to resilience. 

Our future prosperity can no longer be treated as an inevitable by-product of global rules and institutions. 

Trading arrangements are becoming less certain and less efficient, as businesses adapt to a world where tariffs and protectionism, once out of fashion, have made a raging comeback.

Against that shifting international backdrop, our Government has acted carefully and decisively.

It’s why, in concert with our friends and partners, we are using what agency we have to champion our values and interests on the world stage – supporting Ukraine to resist Russia’s illegal invasion and bringing the EU and CPTPP together to reinforce the rules of global trade.

It’s also why the Government has agreed to significantly lift defence expenditure in the coming years.

Despite decades of under-investment, the men and women of the New Zealand Defence Force do an outstanding job, keeping Kiwis safe and promoting peace and security in our region.

But in a more dangerous world, it would be reckless to continue that trend and keep banking the dividends of peace.

Lifting defence expenditure means New Zealand can keep doing our part contributing to regional security, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief efforts.

And in a more competitive and cut-throat world, it also supports New Zealand to develop our own defence industry here at home.

Finally, we are capitalising on the geopolitical moment by acting decisively to deepen our portfolio of relationships, particularly in the Indo-Pacific. 

In just the last two years, we’ve upgraded our partnerships with Singapore, Viet Nam, Korea, all the ASEAN countries and a range of other Asian friends. 

We have maximised the opportunities from the EU and UK FTAs, while also concluding new deals with the UAE and GCC.

And, just before Christmas, we finalised a new feature to our relationship with India, with its 1.4 billion people and rapidly growing economy.

When many said it was impossible, we got on with the job of concluding a landmark Free Trade Agreement with India in less than a year.

That agreement eliminates and reduces tariffs on 95 per cent of New Zealand’s exports, with almost 57 per cent duty-free on day one of the agreement coming into force – making our businesses more competitive, creating jobs, and lifting incomes.

We might live in volatile times, but this Government is nonetheless working at pace to position and secure New Zealand’s interests offshore.

We’re out hustling and talking to different partners, forging deeper defence and economic partnerships.

But New Zealand isn’t alone.

Every country is facing the same challenges.

And New Zealand, relative to other countries, is well positioned.

Virtually everybody wants to do more with New Zealand.

We have what the world wants, we’re a reliable partner, we have the values to which most of the world aspire and we’re an increasingly confident nation with ambition.

That’s ultimately good for our economy and our country’s future.

But a more volatile and uncertain world underscores the importance of controlling what we can.

The more we are building our economy at home and developing and diversifying those relationships abroad, the stronger New Zealand gets.

We can control the energy and ambition we bring to building a future for every single New Zealander here at home.

We can control the posture and confidence we bring to asserting our interests offshore, making the case for our values and our future. 

More than ever, now is the moment for decisive action.

Whether you’re driving trucks, making coffee, herding cattle or getting ready to take on the world, I want to unleash the extraordinary potential of this country so you can get ahead.

Higher incomes, more jobs and a better shot at the Kiwi dream.

Ultimately, that’s why I came to politics.

To leave a legacy of prosperity, ambition, hope and opportunity for our children and our grandchildren. 

So, kids growing up in Christchurch, like me, can see a real future for themselves here at home – raising a family, building a career, or starting a business.

For two years, National has been fixing the basics.

Now heading into the election this year, National will campaign on a bold plan to build the future and leave a legacy of prosperity and opportunity for future generations. 

That will include three big changes already partly underway: KiwiSaver reform, NCEA reform, and RMA reform.

Each represent a generational challenge facing the country and each have been put off for far too long by governments unable or unwilling to confront them.

But the country is impatient of waiting for a future, that without serious reform, may never arrive.

National has a vision – of a more prosperous, confident future, with more opportunity for every single New Zealander.

And we intend to make that vision a reality. 

First, KiwiSaver.

If we’re serious about building the future, we need to increase our level of ambition for retirement savings.

You might have seen last year, National launched its first election policy – to gradually increase employer and employee contributions over time, rising to 6 per cent each by 2032, and a combined contribution of 12 per cent, matching Australia.

It’s a policy driven by several objectives.

First, to support New Zealanders’ financial security, against a backdrop of an aging society and an inevitable lift in the retirement age.

Second, to establish a spine of national capital, sheltered from the winds of financial and political change offshore, and available to invest in the businesses and infrastructure here at home that we will need to become richer as a society. 

And third, to improve the returns from work and make New Zealand a more attractive place to build a career and raise a family, by closing the gap with Australia on superannuation contributions.

We have announced these changes early, so employers and employees have plenty of time to prepare, but over time we expect they will lead to much larger retirement balances.

For a 21-year-old earning $65,000, and making default contributions in line with the changes already delivered at this year’s Budget, they could expect to retire with around $1 million in their KiwiSaver account by the time they turn 65. 

Following National’s proposed changes, that same individual could expect their KiwiSaver balance to be around $400,000 larger – or around $1.4 million in total – assuming they increase their contributions to the planned higher default rates over time.

That’s a big change, it’s critical to our plan to build the future, and it will only happen with a National Government after this year’s election.

Second, is the proposed end of NCEA.

Education is a critical part of our plan to achieve a step-change in the New Zealand economy, enabling investment in digitalisation, technology and, ultimately, higher paying jobs that improve our collective quality of life.

And as I spoke about earlier, our Government’s education reform programme is already well underway in primary and intermediate schools.

When those students reach secondary school, the national qualification they ultimately receive should reflect the same high standards and ambition we expect throughout their earlier years of education.

In August last year, Erica Stanford and I announced our plans to do exactly that and replace NCEA.

The truth is that while NCEA was designed to be flexible, for many students that flexibility has encouraged a focus on just getting the qualification, coming at the cost of developing the critical skills and knowledge they need for future study, training or employment.

Consultation is now underway on the new qualification – which will come with clearer grades out of 100, stronger vocational pathways, and high standards for literacy and numeracy.

While Erica is working around the clock to make these changes a reality, they won’t be bedded in for some time.

The first cohort to sit the new qualifications are only starting high school in the coming weeks.

These are big changes that are critical to our plan to build the future. 

If you want education reform that gives your children the very best possible shot in life, then you need a National Government.

Third, resource management reform.

In two years, Chris Bishop has delivered more reform to the resource management environment than any other Minister has achieved in decades.

A suite of changes to national direction, enabling greater development of housing, renewable energy, aquaculture and mining.

Fast Track legislation, now consenting major projects, like the gold mine at Waihi, or the port expansion here in Auckland, in a matter of months rather than years.

And two new bills, designed to unshackle growth and development in this country, by replacing the Resource Management Act in its entirety.

Those bills are expected to pass later this year following a robust Select Committee process.

And once they do, we’re expecting immediate results with around half of all resource consents no longer required, promoting growth and development from day one.

But passing the legislation is just the start. 

Over time, more and more of the regime will be managed through national standards, setting out guardrails for the development of everything from agriculture to mining to apartment buildings.

I’ll be blunt.

I want – and you should want – National Ministers writing those rules, so we have a resource management regime which allows New Zealanders to build the future.

And the only way to build that future is with a National Government.

In conclusion, National is on a mission to fix the basics and build the future and we have made tremendous progress so far.

An end to the era of wasteful spending – supporting lower inflation and lower interest rates.

More visible policing, and a tougher stance on law and order, driving down violent crime, retail crime, ram raids and youth offending.

Stronger achievement in our classrooms, whether you’re just starting school or needing an opportunity to catch up. 

Now we’re building the future.

Growing the economy, to create more jobs and more opportunities for Kiwis, with rising exports, investment and productivity.

Spending your money carefully so we don’t burden our grandchildren with more debt.

Upgrading the roads, schools and hospitals you rely on, and delivering resource management reform that makes it easier for your businesses to get to construction sooner.

Supporting New Zealanders’ financial security for the long term, with greater levels of savings and investment.

More hope, more opportunity, more ambition, and ultimately greater prosperity – so that you, and your family, can get ahead.

Thank you.

PM Mark Carney addresses Australia’s parliament

PM Mark Carney addresses Australia’s parliament – March 5, 2026

Well, my friend Prime Minister Carney and Madame Fox , it is my great honor and an absolute pleasure to welcome you and all the members of your delegation to our parliament on behalf of the people of Australia. And I know that I speak for every member of this place when I say we are very much looking forward to your address.

It may help you to know that back in 1839, Britain sentenced 58 French Canadians involved in the rebellion in Quebec to be transported to New South Wales and put to work widening Paramea Road, which goes through my local electorate in Sydney and past Canada Bay in the electorate of the member for Reed. In 1854, it was a Canadian Henry Ross who stood in the center of the Eureka Stockade at Bellerat and raised a new flag, the iconic Southern Cross, a symbol of the miners struggle for justice.

In other words, Prime Minister, Canadian rebels with bold ideas have always been welcome here in Australia. [laughter] always a context. That is because our countries have always recognized something of ourselves in each other. We are two societies enriched by indigenous cultures and their love and connection to the beauty of our lands and our waters.

Commonwealth countries that have forged unique, proud and independent identities. democracies that did not just adopt the Westminster system. We made it fairer, stronger, and our own. Two nations that are at our very best when we look over our wide horizons. When we look out to the world and bring our values with us as we engage with it.

The first Australian prime minister to address a joint sitting at the Canadian Parliament was our great wartime Labour leader John Cirten. Standing in your House of Commons on the 1st of June 1944, just 5 days before Australians would help Canadians take and hold Juno Beach. Curtain looked to the future those brave men were fighting for.

How to secure a lasting peace worth the winning. How to build an economy and society worthy of the service, sacrifice and suffering of those who had kept it free. And the role that Australia and Canada had to play in this. Curtain said this. In a world where none of us is strong enough to stand alone, we shall discover how and by what means we can best stand with and for each other.

More than eight decades on, even in a new world order, that old test endures. Technology is changing the nature of conflict and heightening the risk and cost of escalation. And if ever nations such as ours had the luxury of imagining that distance alone kept us safe, those days are certainly gone. 

The same Iranian regime launching indiscriminate attacks on nations across the Middle East orchestrated anti-semitic terrorist attacks on a synagogue and a small business here in Australia in 2024.

For us as two democracies in an age of polarization, as two dynamic trading nations in a time of disrupted supply chains, and as two middle powers in an era of strategic competition, Australia and Canada must seek and create new ways to stand with and for each other. 

Prime Minister, for all the comfortable ties of old affection, what makes the friendship between Australia and Canada noteworthy is what we do not share.

We do not share a border, a region, a hemisphere, or any market smaller than the global one. Yet, this makes the connection between our countries more meaningful, not less. Because our cooperation, our partnership is a positive choice, not a necessity. When we work together, it is on the basis of our shared convictions, not mutual convenience.

And when we do, when we stand in solidarity with the brave people of Ukraine, when we work together to seize the economic opportunities of clean energy, when we strengthen our defense industry cooperation, including through Australia's biggest ever defense export, the worldleading over the horizon radar technology.

And when we face up to the urgent global challenge of climate change, because we know what it means for our unique environments, for our farmers and growers and producers and for our firefighters who for decades have traveled between our nations to help each other in the toughest of times and now face the prospect of their fire seasons overlapping because of climate change.

When we act together, we demonstrate to our citizens that government is not a passive institution. It is an instrument for positive change. And what's more, when we send a message to all those nations that look to us as equals, as peers, as neighbors, and as leaders. That they too have a choice, agency, and a part to play.

Because peace, security, and prosperity are not the preserve of the great powers alone. They are our common cause and our collective responsibility. 

Prime Minister, Australia and Canada are middle powers in a world that is changing. We cannot change it back, but we can back ourselves, back our citizens, and back each other.

And your visit reflects our shared ambition for Australia and Canada to do more together at a deeper level. To build on our shared strengths from our resources and critical minerals to defense technology to the investing power of our superanuation and pension funds. 

Prime Minister, in this decade where nearly every single challenge is indeed a global one, the distance between our two nations has never mattered less, and the closeness of our values has never mattered more.

Together, let us seize the opportunities that the world holds for us. You are very welcome here in our parliament today. >> [snorts] >> I thank you for your ongoing friendship and our regular dialogue. You'll be welcome in Australia always. 

Yeah![applause] 

>> I invite the honorable the leader of the opposition to support the remarks of the prime minister.

>> Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I commend Prime Minister Albanesi for his warm welcome for our guest of honor and his wife Diane. Mr. Speaker, I have a confession. I knew our guest of honor long before he became the prime minister of Canada. It was 1991. The Berlin Wall had fallen. The Cold War was all but over.  In that atmosphere, two young, somewhat idealistic students met in an economics post-graduate course at Oxford. The bond was immediate. Both from provincial backgrounds. Alberta famous for its cattle. Southern New South Wales famous for its sheep. Both from families who cherished the value of education. both quietly cynical about the pompous palms and the boisterous Yanks soldering saing around Oxford.

And despite our different politics today, we both shared a healthy distaste for Soviet sympathizers. There we were, a Canadian and Australian regularly sitting next to each other in class. You sporting black eyes from ice hockey, [laughter] me sporting bruises and cuts from rugby. Uh, but Mark's thesis was of great interest to the professors, whereas I wrote mine on the price of beer, [laughter] of far greater interest to our student friends. Back then, I don't think either of us imagined a life like this in politics. Uh, one of life's great joys is seeing old friends do well. So it gives me immense joy to see Canada led by an old friend, a man of the highest caliber, utterly devoted to his country. Prime Minister Carney, with your presence here today, we celebrate a remarkable bilateral relationship. And while our eyes are on the horizon, we also take this moment to look behind us. Uh, democracies are the gift of British inheritance. It was the pragmatic, enlightened, and accommodating nature of British stewardship that nurtured within our colonies self-identity, self-government, and ultimately sovereign nationhood.

With your presence here today, we acknowledge Canada and Australia's mutual inheritance and uh two great constitutional monarchies. Australia was fortunate to look to the example of the Canadian Confederation as we forged our own federation. Our federation debates were robust. One of our founding fathers said, "We shall find the Canadian Constitution is about the best basis that we can select.

"Another founding father had a very different view, saying, "In no regard can we look upon the example of Canada as one to be imitated." But whether Australia's founding fathers praised or criticized the Canadian model, they learned from Canada  and yearned for what Canadians had achieved. Prime Minister Carney, with your presence here today, we say with gratitude that Canada helped shape the Australian nation.

We are two great democracies that have successfully woven together the indigenous, colonial and migrant threads of our societies. Over the course of 125 years, our two nations have known a steadfast, stable, and mutually supportive partnership. In peace time and in wartime, in good times, and in tough times, as we've just heard, our two peoples have known a deep and abiding friendship.

11:13

Our partnership and friendship are testimony to the many achievements over many generations in trade and in business in sharing intelligence and sharing industriousness in fighting our enemies and fighting bushfires. Since you become Prime Minister of Canada, I've admired many of the decisions you've taken that are grounded in economic realism, removing the consumer carbon tax, getting immigration under control, and ensuring it's conducive to social cohesion, and a deregulation agenda that supports business and industry.

Your speech in Switzerland in January was a uh much needed wakeup call for middle powers of the West. uh you said, Prime Minister Carney said, "We're at a turning point. We must indeed stop invoking rules-based international order as though it functions as advertised."  I'd go further.  The rules-based international order has been exposed as wishful thinking of a bygone and benign era, especially in these times when autocratic regimes act with impunity.

And I wholeheartedly agree with you. In this brave new world, middle powers cannot simply build higher walls and retreat behind them. We must work together. We must act together closer than ever on defense, on secure supply chains and sovereign capabilities, on maintaining free trade. As you said, the strength of our values matter and the value of our strength matters.

It's that moral clarity that must guide us and protect our way of life. 

Prime Minister Carney, on behalf of the coalition and federal opposition, it's a privilege and a pleasure to welcome you to the Australian Parliament. And from one one old friend to another, it's great to see you, mate. [applause] 

Prime Minister Carney gives me great pleasure to invite you to address the House of Representatives.

13:35

Prime Minister Albanese, thank you. And to Jody for this warm welcome and for this great honor. Leader of the opposition Taylor, thank you for reminding me of the importance of beer and competition. And in terms of deflating the palms, I would note I would I would recall our meeting with Prime Minister Starmer uh our trilateral at a time of great consequence uh where it was around drinks and Prime Minister Albanazi brought four of Australia's finest tins which just happened to bear his name.[laughter] 

Mr. Mr. Speaker, President, honorable members and senators, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you for this warm welcome to myself, my wife, my colleagues to Australia. Let me also thank the Australian firefighters who are here in this chamber today. They came to my home province of Alberta when we faced record wildfires last summer, as is all too common.

But what is also common is that action, that heroism is just as Australian firefighters have done for Canadians over the years. And this is just one of the many testaments to the profound and practical friendship between our two nations. Friends, it is a distinct honor and privilege to address this parliament, one of the world's great chambers of democracy and a testament, as both previous speakers indicated, to our shared Commonwealth heritage.

Allow me a few words in Canada's other official language. Canada is confet. Period. Not collaborate. Mr. Speaker, the last time a Canadian prime minister stood here, it was a different era with different challenges.

2007, the eve of the global financial crisis. A crisis through which Australia and Canada sailed. We sailed through that storm because of the soundness of our banks, the proety of our public finances, and the resourcefulness of our people. And while much has changed since then, these qualities endure, as does the friendship between our nations.

17:12

Although we could not be further physically apart, Canada and Australia are strategic cousins. We may look to different skies, the North Star in our hemisphere, the Southern Cross in yours, but we have the same orientation. We share a common heritage, have developed a common perspective, and can build together a common future. Two sovereign nations, two proud democracies, the true north and the land down under, navigating with the same values. 

As the prime minister indicated, what makes our relationship rare is that it was not built by geography or by great power design. It was chosen repeatedly over centuries. In the mud of Flanders, on the shores of Normandy, in the hills of Korea and the valleys of Kandahar, Canadians and Australians have stood by each other when the hour was darkest and victory most in doubt. And we have done so

because we believe that people everywhere deserve to live freely, to govern themselves, and determine their own futures. and that these values are worth defending even at great cost. 

Together, we helped to build the post-war international system, to draft the UN charter, and to create a global economic order that pro brought prosperity to our peoples.

We helped write its rules from Basil to Brisbane. We were at the table when the G20 was formed, when the Trans-Pacific Partnership was negotiated, and when the standards governing trade, finance, and security were all set. 

Yes, that system was imperfect, but it functioned. Keeping sea lanes open, resolving disputes, growing trade and investment, and narrowing the gaps between rich and poor across the world.

19:27

With that global architecture now breaking down from consecutive crisis, I've come to Australia at your invitation to reaffirm our alliance and to suggest where it can go next. Because it's my fundamental belief as a result of optimism I've picked up from people from this great country that from this rupture we can build something better, more prosperous, more resilient, and more just.

It's often observed that we have much in common. The Westminster system, federalism, common law, the crown. Yet, the foundations of our relationship go much deeper. We intuitively understand how each other's systems work, how power is constrained, how our institutions functions, and the values that underpin them.

This is the product of decades, centuries of parallel development, common inheritance, and continuous exchange between our peoples. It's not something that can be replicated by a treaty or sustained by rhetoric. On this common foundation, we have built civic nations, societies held together not by blood or soil, not by a single faith or culture, but by something more demanding and durable. A shared commitment to live together, to accommodate our differences, and to pursue the common good. 

Canada's founding insight was that unity does not require uniformity. That we can share a country without conforming to a single identity. That our differences honestly acknowledged and respectfully navigated our source of strength.

Australia arrived at the same destination by its own path. Let us remember that Australia was the first nation in the world to give women the right to vote and to stand for parliament. 

>>Yeah

 Your example, your example has inspired the world ever since. And that act of democratic extension, choosing to widen the circle rather than guard its edges, is the fundamental instinct that drives our common civic nationalism.

Our two nations were built by risktakers, by voyagers, by drovers, adventurers, people whose families left everything behind to start again. They crossed oceans with uncertain prospects to bet on themselves and bet on each other. And that commitment, that commitment to building something together rather than resting on something inherited is bred in the bone of our national characters.

Of course, we are both nations still in the making. The important work of reconciliation with indigenous peoples is ongoing. We continue to strive so that everyone has equal opportunities regardless of gender, race, sexual orientation, or starting point in their lives. This work is not the sign of weakness, rather the product of a confidence and honesty that acknowledges when we fall short and relentlessly strives to do better.

Mr. Speaker, the institutional depth we share, our friendship forged by shared values and common battles creates a trust that is also a strategic asset. It is a source of power. And the question today for middle powers like us is whether we establish the conventions and help write the new rules that will determine our security and prosperity or let the hedgeimons dictate outcomes.

In the new global environment, the ability to form effective coalitions is becoming a central strategic capability. Great powers can compel, but compulsion comes with costs, both reputational and financial. Middle powers can convene. But not everyone can. In the postrupture world, the nations that are trusted and can work together will be quicker to the punch, more effective in their responses, and more proactive in shaping outcomes, and ultimately those countries will be more secure and prosperous. 

Mr. Speaker, middle powers like Australia and Canada hold this rare convening power because others know we mean what we say and we will match our values with our actions. This has been earned by those before us throughout our history.

And the question is now, what do we do with it? Canada is choosing to create a dense web of connections to build our resilience. We've adopted a new framework for engaging the world, variable geometry, creating different coalitions for different issues based on common values and interests for those issues. This is not a retreat from multilateralism. It is its evolution.

And to be clear, Canada's support for the United Nations, the Bretton Woods institutions, the multilateral system is like Australia's unwavering. But while we are committed to reforms of these institutions in order to better reflect today's world, we need coalitions now to address immediate challenges. 

And as those coalitions work, they will help demonstrate the power of multilateralism and reinvigorate it.

The fact is right now many countries are concluding that they must develop greater strategic autonomy. And this impulse is understandable. When the rules no longer protect you, you must defend yourself. Country that can't feed itself, fuel itself, or defend itself has few options. Then in the 21st century, the requirements for economic security and prosperity of our countries extend far beyond food, conventional energy, and defense.

As important as these are today, sovereignty requires reliable access to space-based communications and storage, vaccines, semiconductors, payment systems, and capital. Because governments and businesses went for decades prioritizing efficiency over resilience, we've developed supply chains and trading relationships that create dependencies on the great powers, sometimes even individual corporations. All of these affecting essential elements [clears throat] of our sovereignty. 

And as that integration is weaponized, this creates fundamental vulnerabilities. In response, Canada's strategic imperative is to build sovereign capabilities in these critical sectors at home and in coalition with trusted, reliable partners like Australia to ensure that integration is never again the source of our subordination.

And let me in the spirit of the leader of the opposition move from the theoretical to the practical. I'll give five examples of this variable geometry in practice. 

The first prime minister is in critical minerals. Canada and Australia are the world's two most reliable and like-minded mining giants. We are both committed to sustainability. We have each developed the most advanced extractive ecosystems. All the range from prospecting to engineering, logistics, and capital markets. We're blessed with abundance of foundational metals that power the batteries, the EVs, the smartphones, the AI systems of this century. 

Together, we produce one-third of global lithium, onethird of global uranium, 40% of iron ore. In fairness, that's largely you, [laughter] but we'll take credit for it. Uh, and we have a combined war chest. 

A combined war chest right now of $25 billion to fasttrack global projects. Globally, we're one and two in the most attractive m. We're one and two as the most attractive mining investment jurisdictions in the world. We are the world's critical mineral superpowers. Now in the old world, and even to a degree today, the te temptation would be to see each other as competitors. In the new world, we should, as Prime Minister Albanese has suggested, be strategic collaborators to boost investments, accelerate technological cooperation, enhance supply chain resilience, expand our domestic processing abilities, and to reinforce each of our strategic autonomy. Which is why earlier today we've signed a series of new agreements on critical minerals including with respect to the G7 critical minerals alliance, an alliance Prime Minister Albanase helped to launch in Canonascus in June. This is the largest group of trusted democracies with critical minerals reserves in the world. 

The second area is in defense. Both our countries are building up our capabilities so the next generation of drones, surveillance aircraft, cyber and artificial intelligence are created in Adelaide and Alberta. 

Canada has just announced our first ever defense industrial strategy. It will catalyze half a trillion dollars of investment in our security and resilience over the course of the next decade. This creates enormous opportunities for cooperation between our countries. As the prime minister rightly referenced, we are already cooperating with Australia on your world leading over the horizon radar and we will explore. We're actively exploring new opportunities to protect our vast territories together. 

Australia and Canada are core members of the coalition of the willing, which provides vital vital military and humanitarian aid to Ukraine in response to Russia's illegal, horrific war.

31:10

Mr. Speaker, the outcome of this war is not in doubt, although its duration is still uncertain. And when peace comes, and it will come, the coalition, including Canada and Australia, will provide robust security guarantees to support a just and lasting peace in Ukraine and Europe. 

As we have seen in this war in Ukraine, satellite communications are now a fundamental requirement for security.

A Canadian-based constellation of LEO satellites will launch next year, providing reliable and secure global communications. We're working with other like-minded partners who possess similar capabilities to build out a deep, resilient, sovereign system that we can all share, and we can each control in our territories.

Mr. Speaker, artificial intelligence is my third example. As AI begins to transform our economies and our lives, strategic autonomy will require sovereign intelligence infrastructure, including secure clouds, data, LLM models, enterprise applications. Canada can contribute here as well. In partnership, we're the number one global destination for masters and doctoral students. We produce some of the world's most renowned AI developers and are home to the leading AI institutes and many of the startups. But we know that is not sufficient. We know we must work with others who share our values to build sovereign AI capabilities so we are not caught between the hyperscalers and the hedgeimons. We're partnering with like-minded nations in Europe and we look forward today's agreements to work more closely in partnership with Australia and as well building on the announcement at the Apex summit in our trilateral AI initiative with India.

Fourth, on trade, our two nations are [clears throat] championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the European Union. Canada is already a member of both trading blocks. I hope soon you will be as well. 

Both of us know that the value of this is a global public good. Yes, it's market access, but it's a global public good because this is a block of one and a half billion people grounded in common standards, shared values, and is capable of anchoring a new rules-based trading system even as the old one falters. 

To be clear, this is an ad hoc co coalition. Variable geometry of middle powers that has a larger GDP than the United States, three times the trade flow of China, the largest combined financial balance sheets in the world, over 60 of the world's top universities, and the largest source of cultural exports globally.

It might not surprise you given my background that my final example is capital. Over the past two decades, access to capital has become increasingly weaponized. And in the coming period of global volatility, our financial systems will likely be tested once again. 

Canada and Australia retain the advantages of sound banking systems, the most sophisticated and reliable financial infrastructure. We have the ability that others might think they have but don't. We have the ability to sustain openness to crossber capital flows. 

Our pension funds and your supers constitute one of the largest pools soon to be the largest pools of capital in the world at present nearly 7 trillion under management. This is a strategic asset for our citizens and future generations particularly in a riskier world where where it will increasingly matter who owes whom and who owns what. The fact is we are currently underinvested in each other's economies and it's high time to modernize our bilateral tax and investment treaty and I welcome today's agreement to do exactly that. 

36:07

Mr Speaker, the connections, these new connections between Australia and Canada are greater than the sum of their parts. This is an alliance reaffirmed, a friendship strengthened, and a partnership to build greater prosperity and security in the Indo-Pacific and beyond. 

The fact is, Australia and Canada have never waited for others to write our futures.

We've written it ourselves through a century of choices, standing together in the darkest hours, building the post-war order with optimism and purpose, and now helping to create what comes next. 

Yes, the world will always be driven by great powers, but it can also be shaped by middle powers that trust each other and act with speed and purpose.

Australia and Canada have demonstrated that trust again this week. Every agreement signed, every coalition deepened, every commitment made is variable geometry in practice. And we do so, because we both understand the scale of the task ahead and because we have traveled together on this road before. Canada could not have a better partner than Australia.

And as one of my predecessors, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau said in the 70s, "Australia is a self-possessed and confident nation that believes in the future of mankind." Two nations under different skies with the same orientation. A friendship built over a century that is ready to build the century that awaits.

Thank you very much for this honor.

Press Briefing at the Pentagon Q&A

HEGSETH: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Right here? Go ahead.

QUESTION: Thank you for your time. What percentage of Iranian long-strike capabilities are still in the fight? And what is our exit strategy here, and when will it be deployed?

HEGSETH: Well, they — they have long range strike capabilities, which we are hyper-focused on. In the brief we got just this morning — Admiral Cooper knows exactly and precisely what kind of threat matrix he's looking at, the way they might change their techniques, and how we adapt to that.

So, we're making sure the theater commander has absolutely everything he needs. And one of the things the Chairman mentioned is for months and months, even before we built up, we ensured that we had the maximum defensive capabilities in theater to allow the President the decision space in the future. So even before this buildup in the last 30 days, we discreetly brought defensive assets in to make sure — understanding that — that there are Iranian capabilities.

As far as timeframe, I would never hang a timeframe from our perspective. The Commander-in-Chief sets the op tempo in terms of this fight. As I said, it's on his terms, and we'll make sure that Admiral Cooper and his team have everything that they need not just to defend — I mean, the best defense is a good offense.

And so, we are aggressively pushing into that airspace over that southern flank to ensure that we control it and we destroy anything that moves that would attempt to shoot us. Think of it as shooting the archer instead of the arrows. That's where we want to be.

And we have the kind of exquisite intelligence to get over the top, find that and destroy it. It won't happen overnight. This is a big battle space with a lot of capabilities. That's part of the reason why it's such a threat to us. That's why I talk about conventional umbrella to blackmail nuclear ambitions. They were building up this conventional arsenal in order to ensure that no one would ever block them from their ability to get nuclear weapons.

So we're — we're very clear-eyed about the nature of this Iranian threat and we are going to get after that.

I don't know if you have anything to add to that, Mr. Chairman.

CAINE:  ... thank you for the question. The only other thing I'll add is that unlike a — an operation, a single operation like Midnight Hammer or Absolute Resolve, we'll — it'll take some time for us to conduct battle damage assessment.

And the targeting cycle that CENTCOM will run will take those things into effect. Admiral Cooper will adjust his plan and fires accordingly to ensure that we're attriting that. He's focused on long-range strike capability coming out of the enemy, and – and that's a key and essential part of it.

QUESTION: But are there (ph) capabilities that still exist from the enemy front?

CAINE: Yeah, that's what I — I mean when I say we're still doing BDA. Normally — you know, normally, we'd be able to see a singular thing and we'd assess pretty quickly. He's doing offense and assessments simultaneously, so it'll take longer for us to assess than it would in a single operation.

QUESTION: Secretary Hegseth, thank you. Reagan Reese with the Daily Caller. Two questions for you.

The President said yesterday in his video message that we will leave Iran when we complete all of our objectives. What are our objectives and can you share more information on how the soldiers who were killed were killed?

HEGSETH: Well, I laid out the objectives as did the chairman they're — they're completely nested. I mean, Iran has an ability to project power against us and our allies in ways that we can't — we can't tolerate. So, whether that's ballistic missiles and drones, so offensive capabilities effectively their — their navy, which would attempt to set other terms and impose different costs, drone capabilities, which we — which we laid out there.

And ultimately though this, tying it back to midnight hammer, the President has been willing to make a deal. You can't have a nuclear bomb. Radical Islamists can't have a nuclear bomb that they wield against the world. He gave them every single opportunity. Then we precisely took it away. And even — even then after that, they
didn't have that. They didn't come to the table with a willingness to give it away.

So ultimately that those nuclear ambitions, which never ceased are something that had to be addressed as well. So that's a discreet sense of what's being addressed here, to ensure that they can't use that conventional umbrella to continue a pursuit of nuclear ambitions.

And then as — as it pertains to the U.S. casualties, the — that particular incident was, you know, you have air defenses and the lot's coming in and you hit most of it. And we absolutely do. We have incredible air defenders. Every once in a while you might have one. Unfortunately, we call it a squirter that, that makes its way through. And in that particular case it happened to hit a – a tactical operation center. That was — that was fortified. But these are powerful weapons.

So we are — we certainly, we will do, as I said, moments like that as we remember them and we take care of them and take care of their families only stiffen our resolve to ensure that we — we do this properly.

QUESTION: Thank you.

HEGSETH: Yep. Right here.

QUESTION: Thank you, Secretary Hegseth. I had two questions for you. First are there currently any American boots on the ground in Iran?

HEGSETH:  No, but we are not going to go into the exercise of what we will or will not do. I think it's one of those fallacies for a long time that this department or presidents or others should tell the American people this and our — and our enemies by the way. 

Here's exactly what we'll do. Here's exactly how we long we'll go. Here's exactly how far we'll go. Here's what we're willing to do and not do. It's foolishness. And so, President Trump ensures that our enemies understand. We'll go as far as we need to go to advance American interest. But we're not dumb about it. You don't have to roll 200,000 people in there and stay for 20 years. We've proven that you can achieve objectives that advance American interest without being foolish about it.

Now, will we be bold about it? Are we willing to be decisive about it? Do we put months and months of planning into what kind of effects we want to achieve? Absolutely. But going forward, why in the world would we tell you, you, the enemy, anybody what we will or will not do in pursuit of an objective. We fight to win. We fight to achieve the objectives the President of the United States has laid out and we will do so unapologetically.

Thank you.

QUESTION: Is there any significance to Israel carrying out this strike to kill the Ayatollah? And I wanted to know what was your immediate reaction to finding out about his killing?

HEGSETH: I think Israel did a great job in the conduct of that operation.

QUESTION: President Trump put a four-week timeline...

(CROSSTALK)

HEGSETH: Please.

QUESTION: ... are you saying that's wrong?

QUESTION: Yeah. Thank you. You — you mentioned during the briefing General Caine that there would be additional troops sent to the region. Could you say how many troops currently are involved in this operation and how many additional troops are planned to go in — in, in this next phase?

CAINE: I don't want to talk specifics because that would tip the enemy off. We — we have more tactical aviation flowing into theater just based on the time it took to get it out there. I think we're just about where we want to be in terms of total combat capacity and total combat power for Admiral Cooper.

One of the things though, that a commander, he'll consistently assess the trajectory of the campaign. Is he on or off trajectory? And then make an ask of the joint force, which we’ll then develop options for consideration by the Secretary and the President to either increase or in some cases decrease the amount of combat capability that we have over there.

HEGSETH: I heard the question about — about four weeks. It's the typical — typical NBC sort of got-you type question.

President Trump has all the latitude in the world to talk about how long it may or may not take four weeks, two weeks, six weeks. It could move up, it could move back. We're going to execute at his command, the objectives we've set out to achieve and what he's shown ability to do that other presidents can't quite seem to have the aperture to do. Well, I mean, Joe Biden didn't even know what he was doing. Is to look for opportunities and off ramps and escalations for the United States that creates new opportunities to execute what we need on our own timeline. So, you can play games about four weeks, five weeks. He — he has all of the latitude, and I'm glad he does because there's no better communicator than our President expressing those things...

QUESTION: ... to the Daily Mail...

HEGSETH: I've been in meetings with the President for the last two and a half days. We know exactly where his head — head space is, and he will communicate, as he should, exactly what he would like and we will follow those orders. And I think he – everything he's said on that is right down the middle.

QUESTION: Mr. Chairman, did you have evidence that...

HEGSETH: Yes, right there? Yes, sir?

QUESTION: ... strike first?

QUESTION: Thank you very much, Secretary. I left my hometown of (inaudible) in Iranian Kurdistan in 1996. Can you promise that I will be able to return home safely this year?

And I have a follow-on question too, please.

HEGSETH: Well, I appreciate the question. I — I'm not here to place guarantees on that, but I think the message the President has given has been clear. To the people of Iran, this is your moment. There were — the world was seized by these crowds and then seized by the reality of this regime killing tens of thousands of innocent protesters. So, we saw the nature of the regime yet again exposed. We saw many, many of the Iranian people seek a change there. This is their moment to take advantage of it, for sure.

QUESTION: You served in Iraq. I know that no American soldiers were killed in Kurdistan. The Kurdish people are very pro-American. Will you continue protect Kurdistan and Peshmerga as loyal ally of the United States? Why I am asking this question, because no Kurdistanis under attack by Iranian drones and by proxies in Iraq and on the region.

HEGSETH: I think I can speak to the allies generally in the region, who we've been in constant communication with. We have been standing shoulder to shoulder with them and we appreciate their capabilities, absolutely.

Yes, right here?

QUESTION: Hi, thank you. Cameron Arcand with the Daily Wire. My question is about some of the domestic threats, if any, (inaudible) this right now. Have there been any concerns about Iranian sleeper cells? And kind of what has the Trump administration been doing to kind of monitor these threats?

HEGSETH: Well, across the interagency, in full coordination — of course we're paying attention to any eventualities there. There — this is a former regime — a regime that seeks to export that ideology and try to sow terror. Our — we're ready for that. We've — we've seen these types of folks before, and the American
people can rest assured that we're — we're vigilant on that.

Right here?

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: ... kind of a follow-up on that last question, there was just this — what appears to be a terrorist attack in Austin yesterday. How — does that change the operation at all? What effect does that have? And I — I...

HEGSETH: It doesn't change the operation at all, and I know the authorities are — are executing exactly the way they should.

QUESTION: Secretary Hegseth, and — and one for Chairman Caine as well. I understand to your point here that you don't want to broadcast everything for our adversaries to hear, but the American people also want to know what they're sending their men and women to war for. Are — is there a concern of this spiraling into a longer war?

And then one for the Chairman when you're done.

HEGSETH: Did you not hear my remarks? I mean, we're ensuring the mission gets accomplished, but we are very clear-eyed, as the President has been, unlike other presidents, about the foolish policies of the past that recklessly pulled us into things that were not tethered to actual, clear objectives.

So we do — we know — we have plans; we have generals; we have chairmans; we have commanders — CENTCOM commanders; Admiral Cooper, who's executing very deliberately to ensure outcomes that I laid out
are accomplished.

But we would never, in front of a press pool, lay out how long that may take. Our — the mission for our warfighters, which is what matters to us, is very, very clear, and they're executing it right now violently.

QUESTION: And just for the Chairman...

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: ... just for the Chairman, you said this is not a one-night operation, it will take time to achieve the goals. What would be the — the goal line here for you?

CAINE: I think the Secretary laid out the military objectives, and that's what we execute against, is the military objectives.

HEGSETH: Last one, right here?

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Thank you, sir. As you've said, there are a large amount of U.S. service members that are in harm's way right now. What is your prayer for them?

HEGSETH: First of all, my prayer for them is that I do pray for them. My wife prays for them, our family prays for them, our Cabinet prays for them. None of this is done on a whim. Having been in their boots, having been in their shoes, having been in their flight suits, I think we — I mean, I know we think about them with every decision that we make and every recommendation that we make to the President of the United States.

Those — those recommendations are made prayerfully. And when I pray every day for them and for this mission, I pray simply for the biblical wisdom to see what is right and the courage to do it. It's going to take courage to follow through on this. There's going to be a lot of noise. And we pray for that, and we hope all of you do too — do as well.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Press Briefing at the Pentagon

Secretary of War and CJCS, Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, Hold a Press Briefing at the Pentagon.

Hegseth 140wpm

SECRETARY HEGSETH:  

１．Well, good morning.　We just finished an update with Admiral Brad Cooper, the CENTCOM commander across the CENTCOM AOR; our leadership and troops, as you would expect, doing a fantastic job.

Two days ago, under the direction and direct orders of President Donald J. Trump, the Department of War launched Operation Epic Fury, the most-lethal, most-complex and most-precise aerial operation in history.

For 47 long years, the expansionist and Islamist regime in Tehran has waged a savage, one-sided war against America. They didn't always declare it openly, except for their constant chants of "Death to America"; they did it through the blood of our people, car bombs in Beirut, rocket attacks on our ships, murders at our embassies, roadside bombs in Iraq and Afghanistan, funded and armed by Iranian Quds Force and IRGC killers. My generation of veterans carried the names of brothers who never came home, brothers butchered by Iranian-backed roadside bombs and well-armed militias, thousands of our own.

＊イランの Quds Force（クッズ部隊） は、イラン革命防衛隊（IRGC）に属する対外工作・特殊作戦部隊 で、イランの軍事・外交戦略の中核を担う組織です。

２．We didn't start this war, but under President Trump, we are finishing it. Their war on Americans has become our retribution against their ayatollah and his death cult. It took the 47th president, a fighter who always puts America first, to finally draw the line after 47 years of Iranian belligerence. He reminded the world, as he has time and time again, being an American means something unbreakable. If you kill Americans, if you threaten Americans anywhere on Earth, we will hunt you down without apology and without hesitation and we will kill you.

President Trump has also been very consistent. Crazy regimes like Iran hell-bent on prophetic Islamist delusions cannot have nuclear weapons. It's common sense. Many have said it, but it takes guts to actually enforce it, and our president has guts.

Iran's stubborn and self-evident nuclear pursuits, their targeting of global shipping lanes and their swelling arsenal of ballistic missiles and killer drones were no longer — are no longer tolerable risks. Iran was building powerful missiles and drones to create a conventional shield for their nuclear blackmail ambitions. Let me say that again: a conventional shield for their nuclear blackmail ambitions, our bases, our people, our allies, all in their crosshairs. Iran had a conventional gun to our head as they tried to lie their way to a nuclear bomb.

It almost worked under Obama and his terrible deal, but not under this president. Turns out the regime who chanted "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" was gifted death from America and death from Israel.

This is not a so-called regime-change war, but the regime sure did change, and the world is better off for it.

3．Today, in their desperation, the enemy is unmasked. As Iranian missiles and drones rain down indiscriminately on the hotels, airports, apartments and other civilian targets of their neighbors, cowardly terrorist tactics - from a regime that for decades has trafficked in cowardly terrorist tactics, lies, death and destruction to this day.

The Iranian leadership has built nothing except proxies and missiles and drones and deeply-buried nuclear factories and facilities. Peaceful nuclear ambitions do not need to be buried underneath mountains.

Last June, Operation Midnight Hammer obliterated their nuclear program to rubble. Afterward, we told them plainly, "That's it. Now make a deal." They arrogantly refused. We said, "Rebuild it and we'll stop you again, this time, far worse." Well, President Trump, Secretary Rubio, Steve Witkoff, Jared Kushner, they bent over
backwards for real diplomacy, offering pathway after pathway to peace. I watched it. I was there. They tried over and over and over again, earnest attempts at peace. The former regime had every chance to make a peaceful and sensible deal. But Tehran was not negotiating; they were stalling, buying time to reload their missile stockpiles and restart their nuclear ambitions. Their goal: Hold us hostage, threatening to strike our forces.

４．Well, President Trump doesn't play those games, and as Secretary Rubio said after the Maduro raid, "If you don't know, now you know." President Trump puts America and Americans first. He doesn't hesitate, and neither do our troops. The mission of Operation Epic Fury is laser-focused: Destroy Iranian offensive missiles, destroy Iranian missile production, destroy their navy and other security infrastructure and they will never have nuclear weapons. We're hitting them surgically, overwhelmingly and unapologetically.

With every passing day, our capabilities get stronger and Iran's get weaker. We set the terms of this war, from start to finish. Our ambitions are not utopian; they are realistic, scoped to our interests and the defense of our people and our allies.

Speaking of people, we hope the Iranian people take advantage of this incredible opportunity. President Trump has been clear: Now is your time.

To Iranian security forces, choose wisely. President Trump has also been clear about your fate in either direction.

5．To the media outlets and political left screaming "endless wars," stop. This is not Iraq. This is not endless. I was there for both. Our generation knows better and so does this President. He called the last 20 years of nation building wars dumb, and he's right. This is the opposite.

This operation is a clear, devastating, decisive mission: destroy the missile threat, destroy the navy, no nukes. Israel has clear missions as well for which we are grateful, capable partners, as we've said since the beginning, capable partners are good partners, unlike so many of our traditional allies who wring their hands and clutch their pearls, hemming and hawing about the use of force.

America, regardless of what so-called international institutions say, is unleashing the most lethal and precise air power campaign in history. B-2s, fighters, drones, missiles, and of course classified effects. All on our terms with maximum authorities. No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win, and we don't waste time or lives.

6．As the President warned, an effort of this scope will include casualties. War is hell and always will be. A grateful nation honors the four Americans we have lost thus far and those injured, the absolute best of America.

May we prosecute the remainder of this operation in a manner that honors them. No apologies, no hesitation, epic fury for them and the thousands of Americans before them taken too soon by Iranian radicals.

Before I turn it over to General Caine for the operational update, let me speak straight to you, the Joint Force, our warriors on the front lines. This is your moment. This is the generational turning point America has waited for since 1979 and since the rudderless wars of hubris, my generation, our generation endured, don't listen to the noise, just stay focused. Our commander-in-chief is steady at the wheel. We face a determined enemy, but you are better, but we must prove it every single day. History doesn't care if we're tired, if we're scared, or if the fight feels big. It demands warriors who rise anyway.

7．Peace through strength, the warrior ethos, lethality, unity of purpose, those are not slogans. They're the beating heart of what it means to wear the uniform, that uniform. You think clearly under fire, you act decisively in chaos, you uphold the constitution and you uphold our country without hesitation. We are not defenders anymore. We are warriors, trained to kill the enemy and break their will. History is watching. Be the force you swore an oath to be focused, disciplined, lethal, and unbreakable.

We will finish this on America-first conditions of President Trump's choosing, nobody else's as it should be. And know this above all, President Trump and I have your back always, through fire, through criticism, through fake news, through everything, we unleash you because you are the best, most powerful, most lethal fighting force the world has ever seen.

May Almighty God watch over you and his providential arms of protection extend over you. Godspeed warriors and keep going.

General Caine, over to you.

12:00

GENERAL DAN CAINE: Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And, good morning, everyone. The purpose of my portion of the briefing today is to update you and the American people on the actions taken thus far.

The briefing will discuss the preparation, the planning, setting the force, the early operations, and how we're assessing the progress thus far. So, let's get started.

On Saturday 28 February, at 0115 Eastern Standard Time, 9:45 a.m. local Tehran time, on the orders of the President of the United States, U.S. Central Command under the command of United States Navy Admiral Brad Cooper commenced Operation Epic Fury.

As I said, I'm going to walk you through the initial phases of the operation, but first, I want to express my deep condolences and the condolences of the Joint Force to the Department of War personnel killed and wounded in actions thus far. As the secretary said, they're heroes and represent the best of — our nation has to offer. They're true examples of what selfless service means. Our deepest and heartfelt condolences are with their families, their friends and their units. We grieve with you, and we will never forget you.

Additionally, I stand here before you today grateful for each servicemember, planner, logistician, operator across our Joint Force, for our Department of War civilians, our intelligence community teammates, our interagency teammates who continue to stand in harm's way alongside us. I am proud of all of you as you take the fight to the enemy, and we are the best in the world at integrating, period.

I want to extend my personal gratitude to the dedicated commanders and senior enlisted leaders and the enlisted members of the Joint Force who are fighting this fight across the CENTCOM AOR. In addition to Admiral Cooper and Fleet Master Chief Compton, I want to highlight a few today:  U.S. Army Central Command Commander Lieutenant General Pat Frank who, along with his team, are fighting the counter-missile and counter-drone fight; United States Navy Central Command Commander Vice Admiral Curt Renshaw and his team, who are engaged with the Iranian Navy and projecting American naval combat power from the seas; and United States Air Force Central Command Commander Lieutenant General Derek France and his leadership team, who are crushing Iranian targets from the air.

I want to highlight the support to the CENTCOM fight from other combatant commands who are directly involved with this effort, to include USSPACECOM, USSCYBERCOM and USEUCOM.

I also want to specifically call out United States Transportation Command and USSTRATCOM for their contributions to this fight. We cannot project American combat power at the time and place of our choosing without both.

And finally, I want to express how deeply thankful I am for the continued service and sacrifice of the entire Joint Force and their families. Their unwavering commitment and dedication are the cornerstones of this effort.

So let me start with a few details. First, to be clear, as the secretary said, this is not a single overnight operation. The military objectives that CENTCOM and the Joint Force have been tasked with will take some time to achieve, and in some cases, will be difficult and gritty work. We expect to take additional losses, and as always, we will work to minimize U.S. losses. But as the secretary said, this is major combat operations.

So let me talk about the preparation and the planning. On February 28th, the full strength of America's armed forces came together in a unified purpose against a capable and determined adversary. The United States Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Space Force, Coast Guard and our reserve components integrated across our combatant commands and began coordinated operations with the Israeli Armed Forces of an unprecedented scale.

As the secretary laid out, our military objectives are clear: Our mission is to protect and defend ourselves, and together with our regional partners, prevent Iran from the ability to project power outside of its borders, and be ready for follow-on actions, as appropriate. Across every domain, land, air, sea, cyber, the U.S. Joint Force delivered synchronized and layered effects designed to disrupt, degrade, deny and destroy Iran's ability to conduct and sustain combat operations.

On the U.S. side, this marked the culmination of months, and in some cases, years of deliberate planning and refinement against this particular target set. From precision strikes against key military infrastructure, to persistent intelligence and targeting integration, to the close coordination of the components across vast distances, this operation again demonstrated America's reach, readiness and professionalism, and that of our joint united force. It was historic not only in the operational scope, but in the level of joint integration displayed across every element of the Joint Force, and as I said earlier, this work is just beginning and will continue.

So now, to talk a little bit about setting the force and setting the theater. On the order of the secretary of war, over the last 30 days to reinforce deterrence and provide the president with credible options, should action be required, the Joint Force began to systematically reposition assets and personnel across the region. These movements ensured that U.S. forces remain postured, protected and ready to respond decisively for any emerging threat. This deployment included thousands of servicemembers from all branches, hundreds of advanced fourth- and fifth-generation fighters, dozens of refueling tankers, the Lincoln and Ford Carrier Strike Group and their embarked air wings, sustained flow of munitions fuel, supplies, all supported with command-and-control, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance network, and the flow of forces continues today. In fact, Admiral Cooper will receive additional forces even today.

This rapid build-up of forces demonstrated the Joint Force's ability to adapt and project power at the time and place of our nation's choosing. I want to highlight a couple specific cases for you.

The Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group, which many of you know was down in the Western hemisphere, redeployed across the Atlantic to set the theater. The ship, her crew, their families and the entire strike group took a deep breath, and as they always do, began planning to conduct combat operations. The integrated Reserve and National Guard Forces have continued to demonstrate the value of America's Reserve Forces, including the Wisconsin Army National Guard operating in Kuwait and Iraq and Air National Guard
units from a variety of states, to include Vermont and Virginia. In the case of the Vermont Air National Guard and the 158th Fighter Wing, they were mobilized for Operation Absolute Resolve and then were tasked to take their F-35As across the Atlantic instead of going home, to be prepared to support this operation. The same is with our Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Command Tanker and Mobility Forces, who stepped right out of their civilian jobs to deploy and to protect the region.

Lastly, I want to highlight the unsung heroes of warfare, our American Logisticians and Sustainment Force, those who quietly work every day behind the scenes to project and sustain America's combat power. Our leaders from World War II were right when they said, "Professionals do logistics."

As regional tensions rose, the Joint Force elevated our force protection measures on the order of the secretary and repositioned discretely civilians and non-essential personnel designed to ensure the safety and security of our Joint Force. By the time operations began, only essential forces remained on our bases and in theater, all ready, capable to respond.

So now, let me move to H-Hour. At 15:38, 3:38 P.M., on Friday, February 27th, the United States Central Command, through the secretary of war, received the final go order from President Trump. The president directed, and I quote, "Operation Epic Fury is approved. No aborts. Good luck," - close quote.

In the region, every element of the Joint Force made their final preparations. Air defense batteries readied themselves, checking their systems to respond to Iranian attacks. Pilots and crews rehearsed their strike packages for the final time. Air crews began loading their final weapons, and two carrier strike groups began to move towards their launching points.

Across the globe, our operations centers came alive in Tampa, Florida, here at the Pentagon, and of course, forward in the Central Command AOR. As always, operational security was paramount as we sought to maintain and sustain the element of surprise. This operation was highly classified so that at H-Hour, the enemy would see one thing: speed, surprise and violence of action.

The first movers were USCYBERCOM and USSPACECOM, layering non-kinetic effects, disrupting and degrading and blinding Iran's ability to see, communicate and respond. At H-Hour, the beginning of major combat operations, 01:15 local Eastern Daylight Time, 9:45 local A.M. Tehran time, as dawn crept up across the Central Command AOR, the skies surged to life. More than 100 aircraft launched from land, sea, fighters, tankers, airborne early-warning electronic attack, bombers from the States and unmanned platforms forming a single, synchronized wave. This was a daylight strike based on a trigger event conducted by the Israeli Defense Forces, enabled by the U.S. Intelligence Community.

The first shooters at sea were Tomahawks unleashed by the United States Navy, closed in on Iranian naval forces, and began to conduct strikes across the southern flank in Iran. On the ground, forces fired precision standoff weapons, measured, deliberate, precise, and lethal. This was a massive, overwhelming attack across all domains of warfare, striking more than 1,000 targets in the first 24 hours.

We are now roughly 57 hours into the operation. In the initial phase, CENTCOM's focus was systematic targeting of Iranians' command and control infrastructure, naval forces, ballistic missile sites, and intelligence infrastructure designed to daze and confuse them. Coordinated space and cyber operations effectively disrupted communications and sensor networks across the area of responsibility, leaving the adversary without the ability to see, coordinate, or respond effectively.

The combined impact of these strikes, swift, precise, and overwhelming, has resulted in the establishment of local air superiority. This air superiority will not only enhance the protection of our forces but also allow them to continue the work over Iran.

Over the course of the last two days, the Joint Force has launched hundreds of missions from land and sea and delivered tens of thousands of pieces of ordinance. The effort continues to scale. This included American B-2 bombers, which, again, similar to Midnight Hammer, flew a 37-hour roundtrip sortie from the continental United States, dropping precision penetrating munitions on Iranian underground facilities across the southern flank and slightly deeper.

Additionally, Israel has separately executed hundreds of sorties against hundreds of targets.

Beyond Air Force and Navy, aircraft strike packages, coordinated salvos of precision standoff weapons from across the region, have neutralized hundreds of pre-planned targets. As I mentioned earlier, in support of these kinetic operations, USCYBERCOM and SPACECOM have continuously layered effects to disrupt, disorient, and confuse the enemy.

I will note that this operation had several combat firsts, which I'll allow at some point in the future Admiral Cooper to talk about since he owns the AOR.

While we've prosecuted a relentless offensive campaign, our defense has been equally important. Across the theater, operations have remained steady and disciplined. Once again, our integrated air and missile defense network is performing exactly as it's intended. U.S. Patriot and THAAD batteries along with ballistic missile defense-capable Navy destroyers continue to coordinate and execute intercepts with precision and  consistency.

I wish that every American could hear the voice communications like I have as these joint operations centers remain calm, focused, and cool while executing under fire over and over again. Collectively, these systems have intercepted hundreds of ballistic missiles targeting U.S. forces, our partners, and regional stability.

The threat from one-way attack UAVs has remained persistent. Our systems have proven effective in countering these platforms, engaging targets rapidly. Each intercept represents hundreds of hours of training, readiness, and technology all coming together to work as designed. We will remain vigilant in the counter-UAV fight.

And the defense of the region is not ours alone. As the threat grew, our partners surged in beside us. Air defense batteries in Qatar, the UAE, Kuwait, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia joined the fight, proof positive that years of training, trust, and hard-earned integration pay off.

I am aware of the loss of three U.S. Air Force F-15Es overnight in the region. I am grateful for the safety of the crews, and we know that this was not from hostile enemy fire. As this matter's under investigation, I'll not comment further on this.

Let me close. Operations will remain active across the theater and across the globe. The U.S. forces are postured not only to maintain pressure but to respond and adapt as required. Operation Epic Fury stands as a reminder of what the United States military uniquely delivers, the ability to project power on a global scale
with speed, surprise, precision, and overwhelming force when and where our nation requires it.

What we've demonstrated over the past several days reflects years of investment in readiness, joint integration, and professionalism of the Joint Force. As major combat operations continue across CENTCOM, we remain engaged globally.

America's Joint Force retains a credibility, capacity, and flexibility to respond to any contingency anywhere in the world at any time. To those who would test our resolve or threaten the United States, our allies, or our interests, understand clearly we can reach you, we can sustain the fight, and we can scale the fight, and we will prevail.

To the American people, your Joint Force remains steady, frosty, calm, and focused. Your service members are trained, disciplined, and determined. We understand the risks of this mission and the weight of the responsibility that we carry. We also recognize that our families also shoulder the burden at home. You are a part of this, too.

I am proud today as I am every day to stand as a member of America's Joint Force. There is no mission too complex, no distance too great, and no adversary too determined for the men and women who wear our nation's uniform.

We mourn our fallen, we honor their families, and we continue our mission with focus, unity, and strength.

And now I'm happy to take any questions.

 70％捕捉率・コーピング同時通訳（日本語）
１．「おはようございます。
先ほど、ブラッド・クーパー海軍大将――CENTCOM全域を統括する司令官――から最新状況の報告を受けました。現地の指揮官も部隊も、期待どおり素晴らしい働きをしています。
2日前、トランプ大統領の指示のもと、国防総省は“エピック・フューリー作戦”を開始しました。史上最も致死性が高く、複雑で、精密な空爆作戦です。
47年間、テヘランの拡張主義的・イスラム主義政権は、アメリカに一方的な戦争を仕掛けてきました。『アメリカに死を』という叫びだけでなく、ベイルートの爆破、艦船への攻撃、大使館での殺害、イラクやアフガンでのIEDなど、我々の血を流す形で行われてきました。イランの革命防衛隊やクッズ部隊が資金と武器を与えてきたのです。
私の世代の退役軍人は、帰らなかった仲間――イラン支援勢力の爆弾や武装民兵に殺された仲間――何千人もの名前を胸に刻んでいます。」

２．「この戦いを始めたのは私たちではないが、今の政権の下で終わらせようとしている。アメリカ人への攻撃には必ず報いがあり、どこであっても脅威を加えれば追跡し、ためらわずに対処するという姿勢を示した。
また、過激な体制が核を持つことは許されないという立場を一貫して示してきた。多くが口にしてきたが、それを実際に守るには強い決断が必要だとされている。
イランの核開発、航路への攻撃、弾道ミサイルやドローンの増強は、もはや容認できない脅威とみなされていた。彼らは核による圧力を守る“通常戦力の盾”を築こうとしており、米軍や同盟国が標的にされていた。
過去の合意では抑えられなかったが、今回は状況が変わり、体制にも変化が生じ、世界はより安全な方向に向かっていると述べられている。」

どのように編集したか（3つの操作）
1. 情報の削減（30％カット）
原文の主張・例示・強調表現のうち、
•     具体的なレトリック
•     重複する強調
•     感情的な語彙
•     同じ意味の繰り返し
を削りました。
例：原文の“If you kill Americans… we will hunt you down… without apology and without hesitation…”
→ 「アメリカ人を脅かせば、必ず対処する姿勢を示した」に圧縮。

2. 意味の統合（複数文を1つの論旨にまとめる）
原文は政治的レトリックが多く、同じ主張を複数の角度から繰り返します。
これを 1つの意味の塊（チャンク）に統合 しました。
例：
•     “America first”
•     “draw the line”
•     “being American means something unbreakable”
→ 「強い姿勢を示した」 に統合。

3. 論旨の再構成（流れを保ちながら短く）
70％捕捉では、
•     原文の論理の流れ
•     因果関係
•     主張の骨格
を残しつつ、短い日本語で自然に通るように再構成します。
例：イランの核開発・ミサイル・航路攻撃などの列挙
→ 「核開発や攻撃行動は容認できない脅威だった」にまとめ、流れを維持。

実際に行った編集の具体例（Before → After）
原文“They were building missiles and drones to create a conventional shield for their nuclear blackmail ambitions…”
70％捕捉
「核による圧力を守る“通常戦力の盾”を作ろうとしていた。」→ 比喩は残しつつ、説明部分を圧縮。

原文“It almost worked under Obama and his terrible deal, but not under this president.”
70％捕捉
「過去の合意では抑えられなかったが、今回は状況が変わった。」
→ 人物名・評価語を削除し、事実関係だけ残す。

編集基準（クラスの訓練目的に合わせたもの）
•     意味の骨格（主張・因果・評価）を残す
•     例示・レトリック・繰り返しは削る
•     日本語として自然に流れるように再構成
•     政治的評価語は中立化（通訳訓練のため）
•     Chuchotageの息継ぎと処理速度を意識して短文化

3．敵は追い詰められ、本性を現した。イランのミサイルやドローンが周辺国のホテルや空港、住宅などを無差別に攻撃しており、長年続けてきた破壊的な戦術が再び表れている。
イラン指導部は、代理勢力やミサイル、ドローン、そして地下深くの核施設以外には何も築いてこなかった。平和目的の核開発なら山の下に隠す必要はない。
昨年6月の“ミッドナイト・ハンマー作戦”で核計画は壊滅し、その後「これで終わりだ。合意に応じろ」と伝えたが、彼らは拒否した。再建すればさらに強い措置を取ると警告したうえで、外交的な道も何度も提示されたが、テヘランは交渉ではなく時間稼ぎをしていた。目的はミサイルを再び整え、核計画を再開し、米軍を脅す力を取り戻すことだった。

70％捕捉率：削った部分と残した部分の構造
70％捕捉では、
•     論旨の骨格（主張・因果・結論）＝残す
•     レトリック・例示の羅列・感情語・繰り返し＝削る
という基準で編集しています。

1. 敵の攻撃について
■ 原文の主張
•     敵が追い詰められ、本性を現した
•     イランがミサイル・ドローンで民間施設を無差別攻撃
•     長年の破壊的戦術が続いている
■ 削った部分（レトリック・重複）
•     “in their desperation, the enemy is unmasked”
•     “cowardly terrorist tactics… cowardly terrorist tactics…”（重複）
•     “lies, death and destruction to this day”（感情語の羅列）
■ 残した部分（70％）
•     敵が追い詰められ、無差別攻撃を行っている
•     長年続く破壊的な戦術が再び表れている

2. イランの軍事構造について
■ 原文の主張
•     イランは代理勢力・ミサイル・ドローン・地下核施設を作ってきた
•     平和目的なら地下に隠す必要はない
■ 削った部分
•     “built nothing except…”（強い断定）
•     “Peaceful nuclear ambitions do not need to be buried underneath mountains.”（比喩的強調）
■ 残した部分
•     イランは軍事力と地下核施設を拡大してきた
•     平和目的ではないと示唆される

3. ミッドナイト・ハンマー作戦後の交渉
■ 原文の主張
•     核計画は破壊された
•     「合意しろ」と伝えたが拒否
•     再建すればさらに強い措置と警告
•     外交努力は何度も行われた
•     テヘランは交渉ではなく時間稼ぎをしていた
■ 削った部分
•     “obliterated to rubble”（強い破壊表現）
•     “That’s it. Now make a deal.”（逐語的な引用）
•     人名の羅列（外交努力の主体としては不要）
•     “I watched it. I was there.”（語り手の個人的強調）
•     “over and over and over again”（強調の繰り返し）
■ 残した部分
•     核計画は壊滅した
•     合意を求めたが拒否された
•     外交的な道は何度も提示された
•     テヘランは時間稼ぎをしていた

4. イランの目的
■ 原文の主張
•     ミサイル再整備と核計画再開
•     米軍を脅すための力を取り戻すことが目的
■ 削った部分
•     “Hold us hostage”（比喩）
•     “threatening to strike our forces”（繰り返し）
■ 残した部分
•     ミサイルと核計画を再開し、米軍を脅す力を取り戻そうとしていた

 全体の編集方針
•     主張・因果・結論は残す
•     レトリック・感情語・重複は削る
•     例示の羅列は1つの意味に統合
•     日本語として自然な語順に再構成
•     政治的評価語は中立化（通訳訓練のため）

４．以下は、提示された英文について 「70％捕捉率の同時通訳（Chuchotage）」で実際にどこを削り、どこを残すべきか可視化してみました。
 

① レトリック・比喩・強調表現 → 削除

原文には政治的レトリックや強い比喩が多く、70％捕捉では 意味の核を壊さずに削る対象 になります。

削る部分の例

• “doesn’t play those games”
• “If you don’t know, now you know.”
• “laser-focused”
• “surgically, overwhelmingly and unapologetically”
• “with every passing day”
• “incredible opportunity”
• “choose wisely”
• 人名の列挙（Rubio, Witkoff, Kushner）

残す部分

• 大統領は迷わず行動する
• 作戦の目的は明確
• 攻撃は継続している
• イラン側は弱体化している
• イラン国民と治安部隊に選択を促している

② 例示・列挙 → 統合して短縮

原文は「ミサイル破壊」「生産破壊」「海軍破壊」など列挙が多い。
70％捕捉では 1つの意味にまとめる。

削る部分

• destroy offensive missiles
• destroy missile production
• destroy their navy
• destroy security infrastructure

残す部分（統合）

• イランの軍事能力を無力化する作戦である

③ 主張・因果関係 → 必ず残す

70％捕捉でも、論旨の骨格は絶対に残す。

残す部分

• アメリカ優先の姿勢
• 作戦の目的
• アメリカ側は強化、イラン側は弱体化
• 戦争の主導権はアメリカ側
• イラン国民への呼びかけ
• イラン治安部隊への警告

④ 個人的強調・語り手の感情 → 削除

• “President Trump doesn’t play those games”
• “He doesn’t hesitate, and neither do our troops.”
• “Now is your time.”
• “choose wisely.”

これらは 感情的強調 なので削除。

2. 原文 → 70％捕捉版（どこを削るか　対照）

原文の意味の核

• 大統領は迷わず行動する
• 作戦の目的はイランの軍事力を破壊し、核を持たせないこと
• アメリカ側は強化、イラン側は弱体化
• 戦争の主導権はアメリカ
• イラン国民に変化の機会を示す
• イラン治安部隊に選択を迫る

70％捕捉版

「大統領はアメリカを最優先し、迷わず行動している。作戦の目的はイランの軍事能力を無力化し、核を持たせないことにある。攻撃は継続し、アメリカ側は優位を保ち、イラン側は弱体化している。戦いの主導権はアメリカが握っており、目標は自国と同盟国の防衛にある。イラン国民には変化の機会があり、治安部隊には進むべき方向を選ぶよう促している。」

５．「70％捕捉率の同時通訳（Chuchotage）」で実際にどこを削り、どこをの残すか 　可視化（※政治的主張の評価ではなく、純粋に「通訳編集技法」の説明です。）

1. 原文の意味構造（大枠）

原文は次の4つの主張で構成されています。

1. 「これはイラク戦争のような“終わらない戦争”ではない」
2. 作戦の目的は明確で、イランの軍事能力を破壊すること
3. アメリカは強力な空爆能力を行使している
4. 不要な制約や国家建設は行わず、勝つために戦う

この「論旨の骨格」は 必ず残す部分 です。

2. 削る部分（レトリック・比喩・感情語）

70％捕捉では、以下のような 感情的・修辞的・繰り返し表現 を削除します。

• “stop.”（命令的レトリック）
• “I was there for both.”（語り手の個人的強調）
• “dumb, and he's right.”（評価語）
• “capable partners… unlike traditional allies who wring their hands…”（他者への揶揄）
• “clutch their pearls, hemming and hawing”（比喩）
• “regardless of what so-called international institutions say”（感情的対立）
• “most lethal and precise air power campaign in history”（強い誇張）
• “no stupid rules of engagement”（侮蔑語）
• “no politically correct wars”（政治的レトリック）

これらは 論旨に直接関係しない修飾 なので削除。

3. 統合する部分（列挙 → 1つの意味にまとめる）

原文には列挙が多いため、70％捕捉では 1つの意味に圧縮 します。

原文の列挙

• destroy missile threat
• destroy missile production
• destroy navy
• destroy security infrastructure

→ 「イランの軍事能力を無力化する作戦」 に統合。

原文の列挙

• B-2s
• fighters
• drones
• missiles
• classified effects

→ 「多様な戦力を用いた空爆能力」 に統合。

4. 残す部分（論旨の骨格）

以下は 絶対に残すべき意味 です。

• この作戦は「終わらない戦争」ではない
• 目的はイランの軍事力と核能力を阻止すること
• アメリカ側は主導権を握り、強力な空爆を行っている
• 不要な制約や国家建設は行わない
• 目標は勝利と自国の防衛

5. 70％捕捉率の日本語

「これは過去の長期的な戦争とは異なり、目的が明確な作戦だと説明している。作戦はイランのミサイル能力や海軍などの軍事力を無力化し、核を持たせないことに焦点を当てている。アメリカは強力な空爆能力を行使し、主導権を握って作戦を進めている。国家建設のような長期介入ではなく、自国と同盟国の防衛のため、効率的に戦う姿勢を示している。」

６．「70％捕捉率の同時通訳（Chuchotage）」で実際にどこを削り、どこをの残すか 　可視化

1. 原文の意味構造（残すべき“骨格”）
このパッセージの論旨は次の4点に集約されます。
•     作戦には犠牲が出るが、国は彼らを称える
•     残りの作戦も彼らを敬意をもって遂行する
•     前線の兵士に向けた激励（歴史的転換点であり集中せよ）
•     敵は強いが、アメリカ軍はそれ以上であり、日々証明し続ける必要がある
この「論旨の骨格」は 必ず残す部分 です。

2. 削る部分（レトリック・比喩・感情語）
70％捕捉では、以下のような 感情的・修辞的・詩的表現 を削除します。
•     “War is hell and always will be.”（比喩）
•     “the absolute best of America.”（感情語）
•     “epic fury for them…”（強いレトリック）
•     “let me speak straight to you”（語り手の演出）
•     “This is your moment.”（鼓舞のレトリック）
•     “generational turning point America has waited for since 1979”（歴史的誇張）
•     “rudderless wars of hubris”（比喩＋評価語）
•     “don’t listen to the noise”（比喩）
•     “steady at the wheel” （比喩）
•     “History doesn’t care if we’re tired…”（詩的表現）
•     “rise anyway.”（詩的強調）
これらは 論旨に直接関係しない修飾 なので削除。

3. 統合部分（列挙 → 1つの意味にまとめる）
原文には「鼓舞」「称賛」「歴史的意義」などの重複が多いため、
70％捕捉では 1つの意味に圧縮 します。
原文の列挙
•     tired
•     scared
•     fight feels big
→ 「困難があっても」 に統合。
原文の列挙
•     moment
•     turning point
•     since 1979
•     since rudderless wars
→ 「重要な局面」 に統合。

4. 残す部分（論旨の核）
以下は 絶対に残すべき意味 です。
•     作戦には犠牲が出ており、国は彼らを称える
•     残りの作戦も彼らを敬意をもって遂行する
•     前線の兵士に向けて、集中し続けるよう呼びかける
•     敵は強いが、アメリカ軍はそれ以上であり、日々証明する必要がある

5. 70％捕捉率の日本語（完成版）
上記の「削る／残す／統合する」を踏まえた要約がこちらです。
「作戦には犠牲が出ており、国は亡くなった人々と負傷者を称えている。残りの作戦も彼らに敬意をもって遂行すべきだと述べている。前線の部隊に対しては、今が重要な局面であり、雑音に惑わされず集中を保つよう呼びかけている。敵は手強いが、アメリカ軍はそれ以上であり、その力を日々示し続けなければならないと強調している。」

７．「70％捕捉率の同時通訳（Chuchotage）」で実際にどこを削り、どこをの残すか 　可視化

1. 原文の意味構造（残すべき“骨格”）
このパッセージの論旨は次の4点に集約されます。
•     軍人の精神性（強さ・使命感・統一性）はスローガンではなく本質
•     軍人は混乱下でも判断し、国を守る存在である
•     作戦は大統領の条件で進み、軍は支援されている
•     最後に宗教的な祈りと、司令官への引き継ぎ
この「論旨の骨格」は 必ず残す部分 です。

2. 削る部分（レトリック・比喩・感情語）
70％捕捉では、以下のような 感情的・修辞的・詩的表現 を削除します。
•     “Peace through strength, the warrior ethos… those are not slogans.”（強いレトリック）
•     “the beating heart of what it means to wear the uniform”（比喩）
•     “think clearly under fire, act decisively in chaos”（詩的表現）
•     “We are not defenders anymore. We are warriors…”（強い対比レトリック）
•     “History is watching.”（象徴的表現）
•     “focused, disciplined, lethal, and unbreakable.”（形容詞の羅列）
•     “through fire, through criticism, through fake news, through everything”（繰り返し強調）
•     “the best, most powerful, most lethal fighting force the world has ever seen”（誇張）
•     “May Almighty God watch over you…”（宗教的祈願の修辞）
•     “Godspeed warriors and keep going.”（詩的激励）
これらは 論旨に直接関係しない修飾 なので削除。

3. 統合部分（列挙 → 1つの意味にまとめる）
原文には「軍人の資質」「支援」「強さ」などの列挙が多いため、
70％捕捉では 1つの意味に圧縮 します。
原文の列挙
•     focused
•     disciplined
•     lethal
•     unbreakable
→ 「集中し、規律を保ち、任務を遂行する」 に統合。
原文の列挙
•     fire
•     criticism
•     fake news
•     everything
→ 「どんな状況でも支援する」 に統合。

4. 残す部分（論旨の核）
以下は 絶対に残すべき意味 です。
•     軍人の精神性は重要であり、任務遂行の姿勢が求められる
•     作戦は大統領の条件で進む
•     指導部は軍を支援している
•     最後に祈りと引き継ぎが行われる

5. 70％捕捉率の日本語
「軍人としての精神や使命感は単なる言葉ではなく、混乱の中でも判断し、国を守る姿勢が求められると述べている。作戦は大統領の方針で進められ、指導部は軍を支援していると強調する。どんな状況でも任務に集中し続けるよう呼びかけ、最後に部隊の安全を祈り、司令官へ引き継いでいる。」

EVS はどう変化するか（70％捕捉率の場合）

70％捕捉率で同時通訳（Chuchotage）を行う場合、EVS（Ear–Voice Span：耳→口の時間差）も必ず短くなります。
理由は、70％捕捉では「情報を削りながら訳す」ため、原文を最後まで聞く必要がなく、意味の塊を早めに処理できるからです。

● EVSは短くなる（1〜3秒が中心）

70％捕捉では、

• レトリック
• 例示の羅列
• 感情語
• 修辞的な強調
  を削るため、意味の核だけを聞いた瞬間に訳し始められる。

そのため、EVSは通常の逐語的通訳より短くなる。

70％捕捉率の EVS の特徴

1. 意味の核を聞いた瞬間にスタートできる

例：“Peace through strength, the warrior ethos, lethality, unity of purpose…”
→ 70％捕捉では「軍人としての精神は重要であり…」
とすぐに訳し始められる。→ 列挙を全部聞く必要がないため、EVSが短くなる。

2. チャンク単位で処理するため、待たない

例：“We are not defenders anymore. We are warriors…”
→ 70％捕捉では「軍人には強い姿勢が求められる」
とまとめて訳す。→ 原文の対比表現を全部聞く必要がない。

3. 長い修辞は“聞き流して”次の意味核を待てる

例：“History doesn’t care if we’re tired, if we’re scared…”
→ 70％捕捉では「困難があっても任務を遂行する必要がある」
と圧縮。→ 詩的部分を聞き切る必要がないため、EVSが短く保てる。

EVS の目安（70％捕捉率）

捕捉率	EVSの長さ	特徴
100％	4〜7秒	逐語的、情報量が多い
80％	3〜5秒	意味優先、やや短い
70％	1〜3秒	早く訳し始められる、負荷が低い
50％	0〜2秒	ほぼ要約、瞬発的

70％は 「同時通訳の中で最もバランスが良いEVS」 と言われるレベル。

通訳者の“心の使い方”を鍛えるための武芸的フレーム

通訳という仕事は、単に言語を置き換える作業ではありません。
話者の意図を読み取り、情報を整理し、構造をつかみ、最適な言葉に再構成し、
さらに場の空気を壊さずに届ける——
これは武芸における「心の使い方」と同じ構造を持っています。
私の所属する武蔵一族のために 五段心法（心核・心分・心昇・心枠・心伝） という修行システムを構築しました。“心の働き”を五つの段階に分けて整理したものです。
この五段は、通訳者が現場で行っている認知プロセスと一致します。

五段心法を“通訳の稽古”として落とし込んだ体系はウィスパリング研究会では５Tier Integration Practice Methodという名称にしました。

五段心法 × 5 Tier Practice で、通訳は「技」から「芸」へ

五段心法は、通訳者の内側にある“心の筋肉”を鍛えるための哲学です。
5 Tier Practice は、その筋肉を実際に動かすための稽古です。
両方が揃うことで、通訳は単なる言語作業ではなく、心術・技術・存在が一体となった「芸」へと変わります。そしてこの芸は、「静けさ」「構造」「意図」「無心」を扱う武芸の系譜にあります。

Coping 技能養成に向けたFive-Tier Integration Practice（以下５ティア演習まはた五層構造式演習）

MECE × Coping × 情報処理 × 抽象化 × 瞬間判断 × 構造化 を同時に鍛えるには、
これらを「別々のスキル」として扱うのではなく、ひとつの統合プロセスとして訓練するのが効率的でより効果的です。

• 抽象化
• 儀式言語的再構成
• メタ言語
• 構造化
• 同時処理
  を最大限に活かすために、5層構造のトレーニングシステムとして設計します。

５ティア演習の狙い

• 削る → 分類 → 抽象化 → 再構成 → 儀式言語
  という一連の流れを“自動化”していく

• どんな分野（経済・安全保障・観光）でも同じ型で処理できる

• 同時通訳の負荷が下がる

• 聴衆に合わせた語りの調整が容易

• 学習者の強み（抽象化・儀式言語）を最大化する

5ティア（5層構造式）演習法

第1層：情報の“核”を抜き出す（情報処理の基礎）

ここでは、どんな文でも 主語・動詞・因果だけを抜き出す。

目的

• どれだけ複雑な文でも「核」を瞬時に見抜く

• 削除判断のスピードが爆発的に上がる

トレーニング法

• 1文につき「主語・動詞・因果」だけ書き出す

• 形容詞・副詞・背景・例示はすべて無視

例　“Inflation rose sharply due to supply issues.”
→ Inflation / rose / due to supply issues

第2層：MECEで情報を整理する（構造化の基礎）

核を抜いた後、原因・要素・列挙を2〜3分類する。

目的

• 情報を「重複なく・漏れなく」整理

• Coping の“まとめる力”が強化される

トレーニング法

• 列挙を2〜3カテゴリーに分類

• 因果の原因側をMECEで整理

• 「大きく分けて〜と〜です」でまとめる

例　inflation, supply issues, labor shortages→ 経済要因 / 供給要因

第3層：抽象化（上位概念化）で情報を圧縮する

MECEで分類した情報を、ひとつ上の概念にまとめる。

目的

• 細部を削らずに“吸収”できる

• Coping の負荷が劇的に下がる

トレーニング法

• 3つの要素 → 1つの上位概念

• 固有名詞 → 役割

• 数字 → 概念

例　energy, food, housing→ 「生活コスト」

第4層：メタ言語テンプレで再構成（Copingの核）

抽象化した情報を、メタ言語テンプレで“枠”に入れる。

目的

• 原文の複雑さを“型”で吸収

• 聞き手にわかりやすい構造を提示

使用テンプレ

• 要するに

• 背景には

• 全体としては

• ポイントは

• 大きく分けて

例「ポイントは、生活コストと供給の二つです。」

第5層：瞬間判断 × 結論先出し × 儀式言語（実戦）

最後に、聞きながら即座に構造化して出力する。

目的

• 同時通訳レベルの瞬発力

• 儀式言語での再構成能力

• 聴衆に合わせた“語りの型”を作る

トレーニング法

• 30秒スピーチ → 10秒でCoping

• 結論先出し

• 儀式言語で整える

例「全体としては、国際と供給の二つの流れが、現状を形づくっております。」

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

1. ビジネス × サステナビリティに特化した統合演習

この領域の英語は、列挙、因果、評価語、抽象概念、数字が多く、Coping と MECE の相性が非常に良い構造です。

課題　5層を1セットとして演習をおこなってください。

　① 情報の核抽出（主語・動詞・因果）

　② MECE分類（原因・要素・列挙を2〜3分類）

　③ 抽象化（上位概念化）

　④ メタ言語テンプレで構造化

　⑤ Coping版 → 儀式言語版へ変換

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

レベル1：核抽出（基礎）

課題：　主語・動詞・因果だけ抜き出す。

1. Companies are facing rising energy and material costs.
2. Consumer demand is shifting toward sustainable products.
3. Regulations are tightening due to environmental concerns.
4. Supply chains are disrupted by extreme weather events.
5. Investors are prioritizing ESG performance.

解答例

「主語・動詞・因果だけを抜き出す」模範解答を、構造化して示します。
この段階はコーピング統合システムの“第1層（核抽出）”にあたり、最も重要な基礎です。
1. Companies are facing rising energy and material costs.
•     主語（S）：Companies
•     動詞（V）：are facing
•     因果（C）：rising energy and material costs（＝原因・対象）

2. Consumer demand is shifting toward sustainable products.
•     主語（S）：Consumer demand
•     動詞（V）：is shifting
•     因果（C）：toward sustainable products（＝方向性・理由に近い要素）

3. Regulations are tightening due to environmental concerns.
•     主語（S）：Regulations
•     動詞（V）：are tightening
•     因果（C）：due to environmental concerns（＝原因）

4. Supply chains are disrupted by extreme weather events.
•     主語（S）：Supply chains
•     動詞（V）：are disrupted
•     因果（C）：by extreme weather events（＝原因）

5. Investors are prioritizing ESG performance.
•     主語（S）：Investors
•     動詞（V）：are prioritizing
•     因果（C）：ESG performance（＝対象・理由の核）

 この段階で身につく力
•     文の“核”だけを瞬時に見抜く
•     形容詞・副詞・背景説明を自動的に無視できる
•     後の MECE・抽象化・メタ言語処理が圧倒的に楽になる

レベル2：MECE分類（2〜3カテゴリー）

課題：2〜3分類し、「大きく分けて〜と〜です」で構造化。

1. energy costs, material costs, logistics costs
2. carbon emissions, waste generation, water usage
3. consumer awareness, regulatory pressure, investor expectations
4. renewable energy, recycling programs, sustainable sourcing
5. climate risks, market risks, operational risks

1. energy costs, material costs, logistics costs
MECE分類
•     コスト要因（エネルギー・素材・物流）
ポイント
すべて「コスト」に統合できるため、1カテゴリーで MECE。

2. carbon emissions, waste generation, water usage
MECE分類
•     環境負荷（排出・廃棄・水使用）
ポイント
環境負荷の三要素として完全に MECE。

3. consumer awareness, regulatory pressure, investor expectations
MECE分類
•     社会的要因（消費者）
•     政策要因（規制）
•     市場要因（投資家）
ポイント
ステークホルダー別に3分類すると最もMECE。

4. renewable energy, recycling programs, sustainable sourcing
MECE分類
•     環境対応（再エネ・リサイクル・持続可能調達）
ポイント
すべて「サステナビリティ施策」に統合可能。

5. climate risks, market risks, operational risks
MECE分類
•     外部要因（気候・市場）
•     内部要因（オペレーション）
ポイント
2分類にすると構造が明確になる。
 

この段階で身につく力
•     列挙を「2〜3の箱」にまとめる
•     情報を重複なく整理する
•     後の抽象化・メタ言語処理が圧倒的に楽になる
•     Coping の「まとめる力」が一気に強化される

レベル3：抽象化（上位概念化）

課題：上位概念にまとめ、「全体としては〜です」で構造化。

1. solar, wind, hydro → 再エネ
2. floods, heatwaves, storms → 気候リスク
3. recycling, reuse, repair → 循環型
4. training, recruitment, retention → 人材
5. emissions, pollution, waste → 環境負荷

1. energy prices, food prices, housing prices
抽象化：生活コスト
•     3つとも「生活に必要な支出」
•     経済学でも “cost of living” として統合される
メタ言語構造化
「全体としては、生活コストの上昇です。」

2. geopolitical tensions, sanctions, military exercises
抽象化：国際要因（地政学的圧力）
•     3つとも「国際関係の緊張」
•     MECE的にも“国際要因”で一括可能
メタ言語構造化
「全体としては、国際要因の緊張です。」

3. digital tools, cloud services, automation systems
抽象化：デジタル技術（デジタル基盤）
•     すべて“デジタル化を支える技術群”
•     ビジネス文脈では “digital capabilities” に統合される
メタ言語構造化
「全体としては、デジタル技術の活用です。」

4. floods, heatwaves, storms
抽象化：気候リスク（異常気象）
•     すべて“気候変動による極端現象”
•     サステナ領域では “climate risks” として統合される
メタ言語構造化
「全体としては、気候リスクの拡大です。」

5. recruitment issues, training gaps, staff turnover
抽象化：人材課題（人材マネジメントの問題）
•     採用・育成・定着の3要素
•     HR領域では “talent management challenges” に統合される
メタ言語構造化
「全体としては、人材面の課題です。」

この段階で身につく力
•     細かい情報を「ひとつの概念」にまとめる
•     Copingで“削らずに吸収する”技術が身につく
•     MECE分類 → 抽象化 → メタ言語の流れが自然になる
•     儀式言語への変換が容易になる

レベル4：メタ言語テンプレで再構成

課題：・要するに

・背景には

・全体としては

・ポイントは
のいずれかで構造化。

1. The company is expanding sustainable product lines while reducing emissions.
2. Governments are increasing incentives for renewable energy adoption.
3. Consumers are demanding more transparency in supply chains.
4. Climate risks are affecting production and logistics.
5. ESG reporting requirements are becoming stricter.

1. The company is expanding sustainable product lines while reducing emissions.
メタ言語構造化「全体としては、持続可能な製品拡大と排出削減の両方を進めています。」
ポイント
•     2つの動き → 「全体としては」で統合
•     “while” の対比を吸収して1文にまとめる

2. Governments are increasing incentives for renewable energy adoption.
メタ言語構造化「背景には、再生可能エネルギーの普及を後押しする動きがあります。」
ポイント
•     政府の行動 → “背景には” が自然
•     “incentives” を抽象化して「後押し」

3. Consumers are demanding more transparency in supply chains.
メタ言語構造化「要するに、供給網の透明性を求める声が高まっています。」
ポイント
•     消費者の要求 → “要するに” で結論先出し
•     “more transparency” を抽象化して「透明性」

4. Climate risks are affecting production and logistics.
メタ言語構造化「ポイントは、気候リスクが生産と物流に影響していることです。」
ポイント
•     影響範囲が2つ → “ポイントは” が適切
•     “affecting” を「影響している」に再構成

5. ESG reporting requirements are becoming stricter.
メタ言語構造化「全体としては、ESG報告の基準が厳しくなっています。」
ポイント
•     単一の動き → “全体としては” で自然にまとめる
•     “stricter” は評価語なので削除しつつ意味を保持

この段階で身につく力
•     原文の複雑さを「型」で吸収できる
•     Coping の負荷が劇的に下がる
•     抽象化 → メタ言語 → 儀式言語の流れが自然に接続される
•     聴衆に合わせた“語りの枠”を自在に作れる

レベル5：Coping版 → 儀式言語版（上級）

課題：段落を日本語で1文にまとめる練習。

以下のプロセスを経て、最終的に儀式言語版（日本語で1文にまとめてください。）

1. 抽出

2. MECE分類

3. 抽象化

4. メタ言語

5. Coping版

6. 儀式言語版

例題 ①

原文　“Companies are investing heavily in renewable energy and sustainable materials. At the same time, regulatory pressure is increasing, and consumers are demanding more environmentally responsible products.”

例題②
原文　“Climate change is accelerating, leading to more frequent extreme weather events. Governments are implementing new regulations, and companies are investing in sustainability initiatives.”

例題③
原文　“Digital transformation is reshaping industries. Automation, AI, and cloud technologies are driving efficiency, but they also require new skills and organizational changes.”

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

例題①解答例
原文　“Companies are investing heavily in renewable energy and sustainable materials. At the same time, regulatory pressure is increasing, and consumers are demanding more environmentally responsible products.”

① 核抽出
•     投資：renewable energy / sustainable materials
•     圧力：regulatory pressure
•     需要：consumer demand for responsible products

② MECE分類
•     企業側の動き（再エネ・持続可能素材への投資）
•     外部要因（規制・消費者の要求）

③ 抽象化「企業のサステナ対応」と「外部からの圧力」

④ メタ言語構造化「全体としては、企業の取り組みと外部の圧力が同時に強まっています。」

⑤ Coping版「企業の取り組みと外部の圧力が同時に強まっています。」

⑥ 儀式言語版「企業の取り組みと外部からの要請という二つの流れが、サステナビリティの動きを一段と加速させております。」

例題②解答例
原文　“Climate change is accelerating, leading to more frequent extreme weather events. Governments are implementing new regulations, and companies are investing in sustainability initiatives.”

① 核抽出
•     気候変動の加速
•     異常気象の増加
•     政府の規制
•     企業の投資

② MECE分類
•     環境要因（気候変動・異常気象）
•     政策要因（政府の規制）
•     企業要因（サステナ投資）

③ 抽象化「環境・政策・企業の三つの動き」

④ メタ言語構造化「ポイントは、環境・政策・企業の三つの動きが重なっていることです。」

⑤ Coping版「環境・政策・企業の三つの動きが重なっています。」

⑥ 儀式言語版「環境・政策・企業という三つの要素が重なり、持続可能性への取り組みが一層進んでおります。」

例題③解答例
原文　“Digital transformation is reshaping industries. Automation, AI, and cloud technologies are driving efficiency, but they also require new skills and organizational changes.”

① 核抽出
•     デジタル化が産業を変えている
•     技術（AI・自動化・クラウド）が効率を押し上げる
•     新しいスキルと組織変革が必要

② MECE分類
•     技術要因（AI・自動化・クラウド）
•     組織要因（スキル・組織変革）

③ 抽象化「技術と組織の二つの側面」

④ メタ言語構造化「大きく分けて、技術と組織の二つの側面があります。」

⑤ Coping版「技術と組織の二つの側面があります。」

⑥ 儀式言語版「技術と組織の二つの側面から、産業構造の変化が進んでおります。」

参考　五段心法の修行法　

『五段心法の修行システム』

Hillary Clinton speaks to reporters

Hillary Clinton speaks to reporters after closed-door House deposition on Epstein

Hilary: Hello everybody. Good evening. Well, I have just finished testifying. I answered every one of their questions as fully as I could. based on what I knew and what I knew is what I said in my statement this morning. I never met Jeffrey Epstein. Never had any connection or communication with him. I knew Gallaine Maxwell, casually as an acquaintance but whatever they asked me, I did my very best to respond.

Um it was disappointing that they refused to hold a public hearing, so I wouldn't have to be out here characterizing it for you. You could have seen it for yourself. We had asked for that. We think it would have been better for the committee and its efforts to gather whatever information they are seeking. We had a bit of a challenge in the beginning because we had agreed upon rules based on the fact it was going to be a closed hearing at their demand, and one of the members violated that rule, which was very upsetting because it suggested that they might violate other of our agreements. So we had that cease the hearing for a period of time until we could get assurances that no rules would be broken going forward, and we returned to answer questions repetitively, literally, over and over again.

I don't know how many times I had to say I did not know Jeffrey Epstein. I never went to his island. I never went to his homes. I never went to his offices. Uh, so it's on the record numerous times. Uh It then got at the end. quite unusual because I started being asked about UFOs. and a series of questions about Pizza Gate.

One of the most vile, bogus conspiracy theories that was propagated on the internet. that was serving as the basis of a member's question to me. so I can only say that the best exchange that I had came at the very end. when contrary to every other deposition they have. taken No Republican member asked any questions about Jeffrey Epstein or Delaine Maxwell to anyone else they have deposed and in fact the Republican members didn't even show up. for the deposition of less Wexner. and when I said that I had to point out that the only questions that any Republican member asked. of any of the people they deposed was of former Attorney General Bill Barr when Chairman Comer asked him. about the allegations in his view about Russia's involvement in my election in 2016.

So at the very end of this hearing after I made that point. I want to commend Chairman Comer for raising a series of significant questions that I responded to about the nature of the investigation and the areas that I thought should be explored. Uh, so I appreciated that. I uh want to see the truth come out, uh, so that was uh a reassuring way to end a very long repetitive, uh, deposition.

Jornalist: Madam Secretary, you spoke in your opening remarks about how a heartbroken you have been for the Epstein survivors as these files have come out. Can you talk to us a little bit about how you have processed and reacted to, uh, the fact that the former president, your husband Bill Clinton is reference to the Epstein files numerous times, including in some photos, uh, featuring women and how have you been personally preparing for the deposition that is coming tomorrow. Are you 100% confident that there isn't anything that the former president knows about Epstein's runs?

Hilary: I am, and I think the chronology of the connection that he had with Epstein Epstein ended years, several years before anything about Epstein's criminal activities came to light and that he was charged and sadly given a sweetheart deal which, as I said in my statement, had that not happened, perhaps his predatory behavior could have been stopped earlier, but I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of people who had contact with him before his criminal pleas in 08, uh, we're like most people, they did not know what he was doing, and I, I think that that is exactly what my husband will testify to tomorrow.

Madam secretary, madam secretary, madam secretary.

Do you believe that this was a fair-

Madam secretary, why was Ghislaine Maxwell-

 Journalist: Madam Secretary, Do you believe this was a fair hearing, and do you still want to testify publicly even though you did this deposition? 

Hilary: IWell, I'm not going to do it again, you know, they had a chance to do it in public, and I wish they had done it in public, and I think they're making the wrong decisions avoiding doing it in public Um I thought it was very repetitive. I thought that they asked literally the same questions over and over again, which didn't seem to me to be very productive. Uh, and then, as I said, toward the end, you know, there were other questions that were totally off off subject. Uh. So if, if they are going to fulfill their responsibilities to literally investigate the investigations, which is what they originally said was the scope of their work. I think they could have spent the day more productively. 

Jornalist: Madam Secretary, what was your reaction that President Trump wasn't called? What is the-

James Mathews :

Madame secretary, can I ask? James Mathews from Sky News. Can I ask, why was Ghislaine Maxwell invited to your daughter, Chelsea Clinton's wedding in 2010? She'd already been mentioned in a civil lawsuit by Virginia Dupree before that. Jeffrey Epstein had already been convicted before then.

Hillary:

She came as the plus one, the guest of someone who was invited.

Journalists :

Madam Secretary, can we have your reaction please-

Hillary:

Thank you, all.

Journalists :

... to the photos of your husband in the hot tub in the swimming pool?
What message does it send that President Trump was not called to testify?

Hillary :

I don't know when the video will be out. I don't know when the transcript will be out. We've asked that they be out as quickly as possible and then you can see everything. Thank you.

Journalist : Madam secretary, what was your reaction to your husband's photos in the hot tub? We heard from Bill Gates' concerns about Epstein trying to blackmail him.

抽象化（上位概念化）で頻出する表現

よく使われる“上位概念化”のための表現（機能別）

1) カテゴリー化（分類）を示す表現

• 〜の一種
• 〜に属する
• 〜のカテゴリーに入る
• 〜の範疇（はんちゅう）
• 〜のタイプ
• 〜のグループ
• 〜の系統

用途：具体例 → 上位カテゴリーへまとめるときに最も使いやすい。

2) 抽象的な性質・特徴へ引き上げる表現

• 〜という性質をもつ
• 〜という特徴に集約される
• 〜に共通する本質は〜
• 〜に内在する概念は〜
• 〜を核とする
• 〜に還元できる

用途：複数の事例を「性質」レベルでまとめるときに有効。

3) 目的・機能で抽象化する表現

• 〜を目的とした行為
• 〜を達成するための手段
• 〜に資する活動
• 〜を促す仕組み
• 〜を可能にするプロセス

用途：行動・制度・ツールを「目的」や「機能」で上位化する。

4) 関係性・構造で抽象化する表現

• 〜の一部／構成要素
• 〜を構成する要素のひとつ
• 〜の枠組みの中に位置づけられる
• 〜の構造に組み込まれている
• 〜の文脈で理解される

用途：個別要素を「全体構造」へ引き上げるときに便利。

5) メタレベルへ引き上げる表現（Coping 的抽象化に強い）

• 〜という現象として捉えられる
• 〜というパターンに属する
• 〜という概念操作の一例
• 〜という枠組みで再解釈できる
• 〜という抽象レベルで統合できる

用途：通訳・教育・分析で「メタ構造」を示すときに最適。

抽象化の方向別テンプレート（訓練向け）

A) 具体 → 上位カテゴリー

「A は B の一種であり、より広くは C というカテゴリーに属する。」

「手裏剣術は、武器術の一種であり、さらに広くは武芸全体に属する。」

B) 具体 → 性質・特徴

「A に共通する本質は B であり、これは C という性質に還元できる。」

「忍者の移動術に共通する本質は“静かに・速く・気づかれない”であり、これは“隠密性”という性質に集約される。」

C) 行動 → 目的・機能

「A は B を達成するための手段であり、C という目的に基づく行為である。」

「忍術の“変装”は、敵地での情報収集を可能にする手段であり、“潜入成功率を高める”という目的に基づく。」

D) 個別要素 → 全体構造

「A は B を構成する要素のひとつで、C という枠組みの中に位置づけられる。」

「“気配を消す”技術は、忍者の隠密行動体系を構成する要素であり、“察知回避”という構造の中に位置づけられる。」

E) メタレベル抽象化

「A は B というパターンの具体例であり、C という概念操作として理解できる。」 

「忍者の“気配察知”は、“環境情報の微細変化を読む”というパターンの具体例であり、“知覚のメタ操作”として理解できる。」
「“無駄な争いを避ける”という忍者の行動原則は、“生存と任務遂行を最優先する”という価値観の表れであり、“最小の力で最大の成果を得る”という世界観に根ざしている。」

抽象化で効く万能語彙（頻出コア語）

どの分野でも抽象化の軸として使えるため、Coping 的な瞬時抽象にも強い語彙群。

• 概念 / 構造 / 仕組み / 枠組み / プロセス / 性質 / 特徴 / 本質 / 目的 / 機能 / 文脈 / 系統 / 範疇 / パターン / 原理 / メカニズム

通訳用の瞬時抽象化カード

通訳の瞬時抽象化で最も重要なのは、複数の具体語を一撃で“上位概念”に束ねるための即応ラベルを、分野ごとに手札として持っておくことです。
 

経済（Economy）

よく出る具体語 → 上位概念ラベル

• energy, food, housing → 生活コスト / 生活必需コスト
• wages, prices, interest rates → マクロ経済指標
• exports, imports, tariffs → 貿易政策 / 通商関係
• startups, innovation, R&D → 産業競争力 / イノベーション基盤
• banks, markets, capital → 金融システム
• inflation, unemployment, inequality → 経済課題 / 経済リスク

即応テンプレート

• 「A・B・C はまとめて 〜全般」
• 「A・B・C は 〜を構成する要素」
• 「A・B・C は 〜という経済領域」

安全保障（Security）

よく出る具体語 → 上位概念ラベル

• army, navy, air force → 軍事力 / 防衛能力
• cyber, space, intelligence → 新領域安全保障
• alliances, treaties, joint exercises → 安全保障協力 / 同盟関係
• terrorism, extremism, organized crime → 非伝統的脅威
• missiles, drones, satellites → 戦略兵器 / 先端防衛技術
• sanctions, deterrence, diplomacy → 対外戦略 / 安全保障政策

即応テンプレート

• 「A・B・C は 安全保障上の主要要素」
• 「A・B・C は 脅威全般」
• 「A・B・C は 防衛態勢の構成要素」

サステイナビリティ（Sustainability）

よく出る具体語 → 上位概念ラベル

• solar, wind, hydro → 再生可能エネルギー
• recycling, waste reduction, circularity → 循環型社会 / 資源循環
• biodiversity, conservation, ecosystems → 自然保全 / 生態系保護
• emissions, carbon pricing, offsets → 気候対策 / 脱炭素政策
• ESG, CSR, responsible sourcing → 持続可能な経営 / サステナブル経営
• water, food, energy → 環境資源 / 持続可能な資源管理

即応テンプレート

• 「A・B・C は サステイナビリティの主要領域」
• 「A・B・C は 環境負荷に関わる要素」
• 「A・B・C は 持続可能性の中核分野」

3分野共通：瞬時抽象化の“万能ラベル”

• 〜全般（例：安全保障全般、経済全般）
• 〜領域（例：環境領域）
• 〜基盤（例：経済基盤、エネルギー基盤）
• 〜システム（例：金融システム）
• 〜政策（例：気候政策）
• 〜課題（例：経済課題、環境課題）
• 〜リスク（例：安全保障リスク）

3分野を横断する「瞬時抽象化テンプレート」

• 「A・B・C は、まとめて 〜という上位概念にあたる。」
• 「A・B・C は、〜の主要構成要素として扱われる。」
• 「A・B・C は、〜という政策領域に含まれる。」
• 「A・B・C は、〜という課題の一部を形成している。」

金融（Finance）

金融分野は項目が細かく散らばりやすいため、制度・市場・リスクの3軸でまとめると瞬時に抽象化できます。

具体語 → 上位概念ラベル

• banks, markets, capital → 金融システム
• loans, bonds, equities → 金融商品 / 資金調達手段
• interest rates, inflation, liquidity → マクロ金融環境
• fintech, digital payments, blockchain → 金融イノベーション
• regulation, supervision, compliance → 金融規制 / 監督体制
• credit risk, market risk, systemic risk → 金融リスク

即応テンプレート

• 「A・B・C は 金融システム全体に関わる要素」
• 「A・B・C は 資金循環の主要構成要素」
• 「A・B・C は 金融リスク領域」

エネルギー（Energy）

エネルギーは供給源・インフラ・政策の3つに集約すると扱いやすい。

具体語 → 上位概念ラベル

• oil, gas, coal → 化石燃料
• solar, wind, hydro → 再生可能エネルギー
• grid, pipelines, storage → エネルギーインフラ
• efficiency, conservation, demand response → 省エネ / 需要管理
• pricing, subsidies, taxation → エネルギー政策
• security of supply, diversification → エネルギー安全保障

即応テンプレート

• 「A・B・C は エネルギー基盤」
• 「A・B・C は エネルギー政策領域」
• 「A・B・C は 供給安定性に関わる要素」

気候外交（Climate Diplomacy）

気候外交は排出削減・国際枠組み・資金支援の3軸で抽象化すると瞬時にまとめられる。

具体語 → 上位概念ラベル

• emissions, carbon pricing, offsets → 気候対策 / 脱炭素政策
• Paris Agreement, COP, NDCs → 国際気候枠組み
• climate finance, adaptation funds, technology transfer → 気候資金 / 気候協力
• mitigation, adaptation, resilience → 気候行動の主要領域
• diplomacy, negotiation, alliances → 気候外交戦略

即応テンプレート

• 「A・B・C は 国際気候枠組みの主要要素」
• 「A・B・C は 脱炭素政策全般」
• 「A・B・C は 気候外交の中核領域」

ビジネス（Business）

ビジネスは組織・市場・価値創造の3軸でまとめると通訳で強い。

具体語 → 上位概念ラベル

• strategy, operations, HR → 企業経営 / 経営機能
• marketing, branding, sales → 市場戦略
• innovation, R&D, product development → 価値創造プロセス
• supply chain, logistics, procurement → サプライチェーン管理
• ESG, governance, compliance → 企業統治 / サステナブル経営
• startups, SMEs, corporates → 企業セグメント

即応テンプレート

• 「A・B・C は 企業経営の主要領域」
• 「A・B・C は 市場戦略全般」
• 「A・B・C は 価値創造のプロセス」

4領域共通：瞬時抽象化の“万能ラベル”

• 〜全般（例：金融全般、気候外交全般）
• 〜領域（例：エネルギー領域）
• 〜基盤（例：ビジネス基盤）
• 〜政策（例：脱炭素政策）
• 〜システム（例：金融システム）
• 〜課題（例：エネルギー課題）
• 〜リスク（例：金融リスク）

4領域横断の「瞬時抽象化テンプレート」

• 「A・B・C は、まとめて 〜という上位概念にあたる。」
• 「A・B・C は、〜の主要構成要素として扱われる。」
• 「A・B・C は、〜という政策領域に含まれる。」
• 「A・B・C は、〜という課題の一部を形成している。」

通訳での使い方　（初級受講者向け）

• 具体語を聞いた瞬間に「どの上位ラベルに吸収できるか」を即決する
• ラベルは短く・中立的・政策文脈に耐える語を選ぶ
• 迷ったら「〜全般」「〜領域」「〜課題」で安全にまとめる

Gov. A Spanberger Democratic response 176wpm

Gov. Abigail Spanberger delivers Democratic response to Trump's State of the Union

Governor Abigail Spanberger :

1. Good evening and welcome to historic Williamsburg. We are gathered here in the chambers of the House of Burgesses. In 1705, the people of the Virginia Colony gathered here to take on the extraordinary task of governing themselves. Before there was a Declaration of Independence, a Constitution, or a Bill of Rights, there were people in this room. The people who served here ultimately dreamed of what a new nation, unlike anything the world had ever seen could be. The United States was founded on the idea that ordinary people could reject the unacceptable excesses of poor leadership, band together to demand better of their government and create a nation that would be an example for the world.
And this year, as we celebrate 250 years since America declared our independence from tyranny, I can think of no better place to speak to you as we reflect on the current state of our union. Tonight, as we watched our nation's lawmakers gather for a joint session of Congress, we did not hear the truth from our president. So, let's speak plainly and honestly. And let me ask you, the American people watching at home, three questions. Is the president working to make life more affordable for you and your family? Is the president working to keep Americans safe, both at home and abroad? Is the president working for you?

2. As I campaigned for governor last year, I traveled to every corner of Virginia and I heard the same pressing concern everywhere, "Costs are too high in housing, healthcare, energy, and child care." And I know these same conversations are being had all across this country because since this president took office last year, his reckless trade policies have forced American families to pay more than $1,700 each in tariff costs. Small businesses have suffered. Farmers have suffered, some losing entire markets. Every day Americans are paying the price. And even though the Supreme Court struck these tariffs down four days ago, the damage to us, the American people, has already been done. Meanwhile, the president is planning for new tariffs, another massive tax hike on you and your family.
And Republicans in Congress, they remain unwilling to assert their constitutional authority to stop him. They're making your life harder, they're making your life more expensive. They're even making it more difficult to see a doctor. Rural health clinics in Virginia and across the country are already closing their doors, thanks to the so-called One Big Beautiful Bill, championed by the president and Republicans in Congress. And tonight, the president celebrated this law, the one threatening rural hospitals, stripping healthcare for millions of Americans and driving up costs in energy and housing, all while cutting food programs for hungry kids. But here in Virginia, I am working with our state legislature to lower costs and make the Commonwealth more affordable.
And it's not just me, Democrats across the country are laser focused on affordability in our nation's capital and in state capitals and communities across America. In the most innovative and exceptional nation in the history of the world, Americans deserve to know that their leaders are focused on addressing the problems that keep them up at night, problems that dictate where you live, whether you can afford to start a business or whether you have to skip a prescription in order to buy groceries.
So, I'll ask again. Is the President working to make life more affordable for you and your family? We all know the answer is no. I grew up in a house of service.

3. My mother was a nurse and my father was a career law enforcement officer. I began my career by following in my father's footsteps as a federal agent, working money laundering and narcotics cases. I worked side-by-side with local and state police to keep our community safe and to uphold and enforce the law. Law enforcement officers across the country know that it is a unique responsibility to do the serious work of investigating crimes, comforting victims and making arrests. It's about building trust and that requires an abiding sense of duty and commitment to community. And yet, our president has sent poorly-trained federal agents into our cities where they have arrested and detained American citizens and people who aspire to be Americans and they have done it without a warrant.
They have ripped nursing mothers away from their babies, they have sent children, a little boy in a blue bunny hat, children to far-off detention centers, and they have killed American citizens in our streets and they have done it all with their faces masked from accountability. Every minute spent sowing fear is a minute not spent investigating murders, crimes against children or the criminals defrauding seniors of their life savings. Our president told us tonight that we are safer because these agents arrest mothers and detain children. Think about that. Our broken immigration system is something to be fixed, not an excuse for unaccountable agents to terrorize our communities.
After working in law enforcement, I continued my career of service as a CIA officer, working undercover to protect the United States and our allies from global threats, terrorism, nuclear weapons and the aggression of adversarial nations around the globe. But as the president spoke of his perceived successes tonight, he continues to cede economic power and technological strength to Russia, bow down to China, bow down to a Russian dictator and make plans for war with Iran.

4. Here's the truth. Over the last year through DOGE, mass firings and the appointment of deeply-unserious people to our nation's most serious positions, our president has endangered the long and storied history of the United States of America being a force for good. So, I'll ask again. Is the president working to keep Americans safe, both at home and abroad? We all know the answer is no.
In his speech tonight, the president did what he always does, he lied, he scapegoated and he distracted, and he offered no real solutions to our nation's pressing challenges, so many of which he is actively making worse. He tries to divide us. He tries to enrage us, to pit us against one another, neighbor against neighbor, and sometimes he succeeds.
And so, you have to ask who benefits from his rhetoric, his policies, his actions, the short list of laws he's pushed through this Republican Congress? Somebody must be benefiting. He's enriching himself, his family, his friends. The scale of the corruption is unprecedented. There's the cover-up of the Epstein files, the crypto scams, cozying up to foreign princes for airplanes and billionaires for ballrooms, putting his name and face on buildings all over our nation's capital. This is not what our founders envisioned, not by a long shot.
So, I'll ask again, is the president working for you? We all know the answer is no, but here's the special thing about America. On our 250th anniversary, we know better than any nation what is possible when ordinary citizens, like those who once dreamed right here in this room, reject the unacceptable and demand more of their government. We see it in the determination of students organizing school walkouts all across the country whose voices are becoming so powerful that the governor of Texas seeks to silence them. We see it in the bravery of Americans in Minnesota standing up for their communities from peacefully protesting in sub-zero temperatures, to carpooling children to school, so that their immigrant parents are not ripped away from them in the parking lot. As a mother of three school-aged daughters, I am inspired by their bravery, but I am sickened that it is necessary.
And Americans across the country are taking action. They are going to the ballot box to reject this chaos. With their votes, they are writing a new story, a more hopeful story. In November, I won my election by 15 points and we won 13 new seats in our state legislature because voters decided they wanted something different. 

5. Our campaign earned votes from Democrats, Republicans, Independents, and everyone in between because they knew, as citizens, they could demand more, that they could vote for what they believe matters and that they didn't need to be constrained by a party or political affiliation. This is happening across the country. New Jersey elected Mikie Sherrill as governor in a double-digit victory. Democrats flipped state legislative seats in places like Georgia, Iowa, Mississippi and Texas. The list goes on and on.
Ordinary Americans are stepping up to run in the spirit of our forefathers. They are running to demand more and to do more for their neighbors and communities. I know the story well. I first ran for office in 2018, alongside dozens of other Democrats who did the seemingly impossible, flipping 41 seats in Congress. In my case, I was the first Democrat elected in 50 years, swinging our district 17 points. Those who are stepping up now to run will win in November because Americans, you at home, know you can demand more. And that we are working to lower costs, we are working to keep our communities and our country safe, and we are working for you.
In his farewell address, George Washington warned us about the possibility of "cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men rising to power." But he also encouraged us, all Americans, to unite in a common cause to move this nation forward. That, is our charge once more and that is what we are seeing across the country. It is deeply American and patriotic to do so, and it is how we ensure that the state of our union remains strong, not just this year, but for the next 250 years as well, because the people have the power to make change. The power to stand up for what is right, the power to demand more of our nation.
May God bless the Commonwealth of Virginia and may God bless the United States of America.

 70％捕捉の日本語訳
1. こんばんは。歴史あるウィリアムズバーグへようこそ。
私たちは今、かつてバージニア植民地の人々が1705年に集まり、自らを統治するという前例のない試みに挑んだ、バージェス議会の議場にいます。独立宣言も、憲法も、権利章典もまだ存在しなかった時代、この部屋には新しい国の姿を思い描いた人々がいました。
アメリカは、普通の人々が不適切な指導を拒み、より良い政府を求めて団結し、世界の手本となる国をつくれるという理念の上に築かれました。今年、独立から250年を迎えるにあたり、今の国家の姿を考える場所として、ここ以上にふさわしい場所はありません。
今夜、議会の合同会議に集まった議員たちを見ましたが、大統領から真実は語られませんでした。だからこそ率直に話しましょう。そして、国民の皆さんに三つの問いを投げかけます。
大統領は、あなたと家族の生活をより負担の少ないものにしようとしているでしょうか。
大統領は、国内外でアメリカ人の安全を守ろうとしているでしょうか。
大統領は、あなたのために働いているでしょうか。

2. 昨年、知事選のためにバージニア州のあらゆる地域を回りましたが、どこでも同じ声を聞きました。「住宅、医療、エネルギー、子どもの保育——あらゆる生活費が高すぎる」と。これは全国でも同じ状況です。現大統領が就任して以来、拙速な通商政策によって、アメリカの家庭は1世帯あたり1,700ドル以上の追加負担を強いられ、中小企業や農家も大きな打撃を受けました。最高裁が数日前にこれらの関税を無効としましたが、国民への影響はすでに広がっています。それにもかかわらず、大統領はさらに新たな関税、つまり国民への増税を計画しています。
一方、議会の共和党はこれを止めるための憲法上の権限を行使しようとせず、結果として国民の生活をより苦しくし、医療へのアクセスも難しくしています。大統領と共和党が推進した法律の影響で、バージニアを含む各地の農村医療施設は閉鎖に追い込まれています。それにもかかわらず、大統領は今夜その法律を称賛しました。エネルギーや住宅費を押し上げ、何百万人もの医療を奪い、子どもの食料支援まで削減する法律です。
しかしバージニアでは、私は州議会と協力し、生活費を下げ、暮らしやすい州にするための取り組みを進めています。全国の民主党も同様に、生活の負担を減らすことに集中しています。世界でも最も革新的な国に生きるアメリカの人々は、指導者が日々の不安——住む場所、事業を始められるか、薬を買うために食料をあきらめなければならないか——に向き合っていると感じるべきです。
だから改めて問います。大統領は、あなたと家族の生活をより手の届くものにしようとしているでしょうか。答えは明らかです。私は奉仕の精神を持つ家庭で育ちました。

3. 私は奉仕の精神に満ちた家庭で育ちました。母は看護師、父は長年の法執行官でした。私自身も父の道を追い、連邦捜査官として資金洗浄や麻薬事件に携わり、地域の安全と法の執行に努めてきました。犯罪捜査や被害者の支援、逮捕といった仕事には、強い責任感と地域への献身が欠かせません。
しかし大統領は、十分に訓練されていない連邦職員を都市に送り込み、令状もなく市民や移民希望者を拘束してきました。母親が子どもから引き離され、子どもたちが遠くの施設に送られ、市民が命を落とす事態まで起きています。恐怖を広げる時間は、本来取り組むべき殺人事件や児童被害、高齢者を狙う詐欺の捜査を遅らせるだけです。それでも大統領は、こうした行為が安全につながると主張しています。しかし移民制度の問題は、説明責任のない職員が地域を脅かす理由にはなりません。
その後私はCIA職員として、テロや核兵器、敵対国の脅威から米国と同盟国を守る任務に就きました。それにもかかわらず、大統領は経済力や技術力を他国に譲り渡し、ロシアや中国に屈し、イランとの対立を深めるような姿勢を続けています。

4. 事実を述べます。過去1年、大量解雇や不適切な人事によって、大統領はアメリカが長く担ってきた「善の力」としての役割を危うくしています。だから改めて問います。大統領は国内外でアメリカ人を安全にしているでしょうか。答えは明らかです。
今夜の演説でも、大統領はいつものように虚偽や責任転嫁で国民の注意をそらし、深刻な課題への解決策を示しませんでした。彼は国民を分断し、怒らせ、互いを敵対させようとします。そして時に成功してしまいます。
では、彼の言動や政策で誰が利益を得ているのでしょうか。大統領自身とその家族、友人たちです。汚職の規模は前例がありません。エプスタイン関連文書の隠蔽、暗号資産の不正、外国の王族や富豪との癒着、首都の建物に自分の名前を掲げる行為——どれも建国の理念とはかけ離れています。
だから再び問います。大統領はあなたのために働いているでしょうか。答えは「いいえ」です。しかしアメリカには特別な力があります。独立250年を迎える今、かつてこの部屋で未来を思い描いた人々と同じように、普通の市民が「受け入れられないものを拒み、より良い政府を求める」力を持っていることを私たちは知っています。
その力は、全米で学校ストを組織する学生たちの行動に現れています。テキサス州知事が彼らの声を封じようとしているほどです。またミネソタでは、極寒の中で平和的に抗議し、移民の親が突然拘束されないように子どもを送り迎えする市民の勇気にも表れています。三人の娘を持つ母として、私はその勇気に励まされる一方、それが必要な現状に心を痛めています。
そして全国の有権者は行動を起こし、この混乱を選挙で拒否しています。票を通じて、より希望ある新しい物語を書き始めているのです。私が昨年の選挙で15ポイント差で勝利し、州議会で13議席を獲得できたのも、有権者が「別の未来」を選んだからです。

5. 私たちの選挙運動は、民主党・共和党・無党派、そしてその間にいる多くの有権者から支持を得ました。人々は、自分たちにはもっと良いものを求める力があり、政党に縛られず信じるものに投票できると理解していたからです。こうした動きは全国で広がっています。ニュージャージーではミッキー・シェリルが大差で知事に当選し、ジョージア、アイオワ、ミシシッピ、テキサスなどでも民主党が議席を獲得しました。
普通の市民が、建国の精神を受け継ぎ、地域のために立ち上がっています。私自身も2018年に初めて立候補し、他の多くの候補者とともに下院で41議席をひっくり返しました。私の選挙区では50年ぶりに民主党が勝利し、17ポイントの差をつけました。今立候補している人々も、11月に勝利するでしょう。国民が「もっと良いものを求められる」と知っているからです。私たちは生活費を下げ、地域と国の安全を守り、国民のために働いています。
ジョージ・ワシントンは退任演説で、「狡猾で野心的で原則を持たない者が権力を握る危険」を警告しました。同時に、国を前進させるために団結するよう国民に呼びかけました。今まさに、その使命が再び求められています。これはアメリカ的であり、愛国的な行動です。そして、今だけでなく、これから250年先まで国家を強く保つための道でもあります。変化を起こす力は国民にあります。正しいことのために立ち上がり、より良い国を求める力があるのです。
バージニア州、そしてアメリカ合衆国に神の祝福がありますように。

Secretary Scott Bessent Speaks At Economic Club

Secretary Scott Bessent Speaks At Economic Club

（Dallas, whose leadership and commitment made it possible to bring the secretary to Dallas for this important conversation. On behalf of everyone here, I would like to thank the secretary for his）leadership, his service, and for spending time with us. It's a privilege to welcome him today. 

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent：

Good afternoon and thank you. I'd like to thank Ray Washburn, Michael Levy, and the entire leadership of the Economic Club of Dallas for hosting me today. And as the business leaders of this community, you all know better than anyone that Dallas is a city built by risktakers, created by a hydrocarbon base now stacked with Fortune 500 headquarters, and sustained by the simple conviction that prosperity follows production. Texas reflects what　a diversified economy looks like with strengthened sectors ranging from advanced manufacturing to technology to finance. We need to look no further than Yall Street to see that parallel prosperity is alive and well right here in Dallas, one of the fastest growing financial hubs in the country. In many respects, Texas embodies what this administration is working to build nationally, economic security rooted in production, resilience, and long-term, durable growth.

And in that sense, Texas can serve as a model for the rest of the United States. Economic security is the foundation that allows a country to fulfill its most basic obligation of safeguarding its people. safeguarding its people. For a nation to be economically secure, it must possess the productive capacity to withstand shocks, deter adversaries, and deliver rising prosperity to its citizens.

Unfortunately, past administrations lost sight of this fundamental truth, allowing faux efficiency gains and shortsighted profit obsession to eclipse security resilience and long-term value. President Trump saw the points of failure decades ago, and he has made clear that we cannot compromise on economic sovereignty, accept structural vulnerabilities, or allow strategic industries to erode as a result of outdated or misguided assumption.

At President Trump's direction, our administration has therefore made economic security the centerpiece of our economic policy. Today I will share our strategy for putting America first by rep prioritizing economic security which rest on three pillars. First industrial and techn technological dominance. Second investment in America.

Third, preparedness. From the earliest days of the republic, our founding fathers understood that independence required economic security. The ability to produce essential goods, sustain public credit, and foster domestic industry was seen as the foundation of sovereignty by Alexander Hamilton, and it still is. After the world wars, the United States made deliberate concessions in trade and industrial policy to help allies rebuild and defend against the threat of communist expansion.

Those decisions contributed to decades of global stability and growth, but with a trade-off. As markets became freer, they did not become fairer. With the China shock of the 21st century, strategic industries were hollowed out, supply chains consolidated overseas, and we became wholly dependent on single foreign suppliers within certain sectors.

In just over a decade, between 1999 and 2011, the United States lost nearly 6 million manufacturing jobs. that led to not only employment loss and wage depression but also to diminish productive capacity and importantly resilience. A nation that cannot produce the critical goods and resources to sustain itself is exposed and vulnerable to coercion.

The COVID 19 pandemic fully exposed these vulnerabilities on the world stage for our own people, our adversaries to witness. This administration is encouraging American companies to reduce single points of failure by diversifying their production and importantly bringing critical outputs back to the United States.

Our policies have compelled firms to reassess their sourcing strategies and pour trillions in new investment back into American manufacturing and strategic sectors. Historic trade agreements have begun resetting the global trade paradigm and over time diversified supply chains also reduce inflationary volatility by lowering the risk of sudden disruption.

One year into the president's second term, we are already seeing and will continue to see results. Industrial might and technological dominance are mutually dependent and reinforcing which is why the US must maintain its technological edge. The global economy is undergoing a period of rapid transformation with tech with breakthrough advances in AI, quantum computing and advanced manufacturing.

The countries that adopt and deploy these technologies most effectively will shape the next era of growth. And the world is counting on America to lead as we always have. For 250 years, American innovation has been our decisive advantage. We are in an existential battle to maintain and accelerate technological dominance.

The production and development of AI infrastructure will be crucial to both economic growth and national security in this next industrial revolution. Beyond production, leadership in AI adoption is another crucial component of economic security. At Treasury, through this financial stability oversight council, we are working with regulators and industry leaders to further responsible AI usage in the financial system.

We are optimizing regulation for growth, moving away from a posture solely focused on constraint toward one that recognizes that failure to adopt productivity enhancing technology is itself a risk. Stable coins represent another area where leadership matters. A well- reggulated dollar-based stable coin market can reinforce the global role of the US dollar and extend its network effects into emerging digital payment systems.

The Genius Act provides Treasury with oversight tools to ensure transparency and confidence in this sector. Industrial capacity, technological leadership, and a strong dollar policy taken together form the backbone of US economic sovereignty, which is why they are all fundamental to our strategy. To deliver industrial, technological, and currency strength requires competence and capital, which brings us to pillar two, investment in America.

The United States holds a unique position in the global economy with the dollar as reserve currency, a key factor in enabling economic security. Reserve currency status anchors our borrowing cost, deepens our capital markets, and strengthens sanctions actions and reinforces American leadership in global finance. This rest on our confidence in our institutions and critically in the health of the US Treasury market.

The Treasury market is the foundation of the global financial system as the benchmark risk-free asset serving as collateral across markets and the channel through which global capital flows into the United States. Preserving the strength, liquidity, and credibility of that market is central to economic security and is not something that can be taken for granted.

Investment in America also means ensuring that capital flows to sectors that enhance long-term productivity and strategic resilience. To do so, we are focused on tailoring fitforpurpose regulation. Over the next six months, Treasury will engage industry, academia, and national security experts to evaluate how supervisory frameworks can better mobilize capital toward sectors critical to national strength, advanced manufacturing, energy infrastructure, semiconductors, and defense innovation.

Economic security also depends on broader participation in wealth creation. Almost 40% of Americans today have no exposure to the US equity market. This means they participate in the world's greatest economy as workers and producers, but not as owners. Trump accounts represent a fundamental rewriting of that arrangement.

Under this initiative, every eligible American child will receive a $1,000 Treasuryfunded seed investment at birth invested in a diversified index tied to the long-term growth of the US economy. Additional contributions can come from philanthropists, families, employers, and state governments. The objective is simple.

Give every child a stake in the American dream from day one. Texas has already demonstrated leadership in advancing this vision. In fact, Texas Senator Ted Cruz authored the precursor to the Trump Accounts provision in the One Big Beautiful Bill. And Texas natives Michael and Susan Dell led the way in philanthropic giving with their historic 6.25 billion with a B donation to top up Trump accounts for 25 million American children. The president has called on business leaders and philanthropists all around the country to get involved in the initiative and today I'm calling on the men and women in this room to do the same. Everything is bigger in Texas and that should also be true for Trump accounts because economic security is strongest when it is broadly shared.

The final pillar is preparedness. Economic security requires not only strength but resilience in the face of disruption, which means pro-active measures to limit disruption from occurring in the first place. The 1973 Arab oil embargo is a cautionary tale and historic lesson. A geopolitical decision thousands of miles away triggered drastic energy shortages, inflation, economic chaos, and market turmoil.

Here at home, American consumers felt that that shock acutely when the price of oil jumped by nearly 300% before the embargo lifted. Equally significant as the pocketbook effect was the geopolitical reckoning. The fact that a foreign power could so fundamentally disrupt the US economy with a stroke of a pen.

This is the very very definition of a single point of failure. Today in my opinion there are two significant risk frontiers. The first is a major cyber incident disrupting banks, payment systems, or other financial market infrastructures. The second is that even despite reshoring efforts, more than 90% of advanced chips are still manufactured in Taiwan.

Creating physical and digital safeguards therefore underpins economic security by preventing geopolitical or operational shocks from mutating into economic disequilibrium and a broader loss of competence. In today's environment, preparedness must also include deterrence. Preparedness means ensuring that no adversary believes it can hold the American economy hostage or disrupt the well-being of American citizens.

Geopolitical risk must be a key factor considered in policym across agencies and not treated as an afterthought. Economic statecraftraft remains central to our strategy. As our administration has reinforced repeatedly, America first does not mean America alone. Our economic security is strengthened when the Western Hemisphere is aligned around free market principles and the rule of law.

We are deepening cooperation with partners committed to these principles while working constructively with longstanding allies such as the UK, Japan, and the EU as they modernize regulatory frameworks and pursue growth. As the US hosts the G20 this year, we reject the premise of weakened global growth and intend to advance a resultsoriented growth and economic security agenda promoting deregulation, competitiveness, and reciprocal opportunity.

This will further our own economic security and we stand ready to support allies who share these goals. On the eve of our great nation's 250th anniversary, we recognize that economic security is foundational to our ability to thrive for the next 250 years. Under President Trump's leadership, we are restoring industrial capacity, reinforcing technological leadership, expanding economic opportunity, and strengthening resilience.

We are fundamentally resetting the framework in which the United States participates in the global economy. Recognizing that economic security above all else is the foundation of sovereignty and thus the grantor of prosperity. Treasury's mission is clear to act swiftly and decisively to put America and America's security first. I would also like to take a moment to address today's Supreme Court ruling and I would note that I did not change a single word in my speech the post the ruling.

President Trump will always put our national security and Americans first and as I have said before the president has multiple tools in his toolbox. Let's be clear about what today's ruling was and what it wasn't. Despite the misplaced gloating from Democrats, ill-informed media outlets, and the very people who gutted our industrial base, the court did not rule against President Trump's tariffs.

Six justices simply ruled that IPA authorities cannot be used to raise even $1 of revenue. This administration will invoke alternative legal authorities to replace the AIPA tariffs. We will be leveraging section 232 and section 301 tariff authorities that have been validated through thousands of legal challenges. Treasury's estimates show that the use of section 122 authority combined with potentially enhanced section 232 and section 301 tariffs will result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026. And with that, I look forward to chatting with Ray Washburn and taking your questions. Thank you. 

16:28 

Host>> Please welcome Ray Washburn to the stage. 

Ray Washburne: 

Scott, well, Scott, first of all, thank you for coming. I I want to thank Harlon Crow and Michael Levy for hosting us here today cuz you're always so generous in uh hosting here today and so uh what a beautiful room.

Bessent>> No, I feel like this is the warm-up for the State of the Union. 

Ray Washburne>> Yeah. Well, come walking through these doors. Um kind of before we get started, let's talk about Yall Street real quick with Dallas JP Morgan's huge operation here. Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, we had the now the Texas Stock Exchange, New York State, NASDAQ. What's the chance we can get Treasury to move here? 

Bessent >> Well, I the you know I I I wouldn't mind coming for the the next 18 months because they're building the ballroom next to my office. 

Ray>> Okay. Yeah. Out of construction. 

>> And and one one thing I I can guarantee you is it's going to come in on time. It's going to come in under budget, but that means starting at 6:00 a.m. and going to midnight. Uh but look, it it it's I'm an economic historian, not an economist. And movements of capital, capital goes where it's treated the best. And we got to face it. I I had 30 great years in New York. Then I moved back to my home state of South Carolina. You you could see Texas has the most uh by numbers new residents coming.

South Carolina has highest as a percent of the population just because low cost of living, the low low taxation, pro business environment and um as an economic historian many of you would remember the first bank of the United States was in Philadelphia. Philadelphia was the economic capital of America and it moved to New York. So things can change. Florida. I I think 2009 2012 I moved to Miami. Everybody said, "Oh, you've gone to the beach." And I said, "No, I just didn't want to pay any state income tax.

Ray>> right?" 

Bessent>> And you know, now everyone's in Florida now. Florida now has more assets under management than Connecticut. So, I I think um I think it'd be good for Dallas and Texas just to take in productive private capital rather than government agencies.

Ray >> All right. Well, good. Well, we said pay property taxes and so um well, this morning we all woke up and came in and and you just address it on the tariffs. It was a 63 vote. What when you initially saw that, were you surprised? Were you is that something you were anticipating that the vote would go the way it did or I I know you mentioned a lot of things that they didn't vote on, but is it did it kind of go the way you thought?

Bessent>> I I I was a little surprised because I I I was in the Supreme Court hearing mercifully. I am not a lawyer. When people say, "How do you like DC?" I said, "There too many lawyers." Um but u I I think that what we saw was just a very narrowing of the definition of a president's ability to use AIPA powers.

So for those of you who saw the president earlier or have been following this closely and I I always found when I was in the private sector in my uh investment business. t was very good separate signal from noise and a lot of the noise is what Trump tariffs defeated. 

>> The only thing that was defeated is the ability for IPA to collect even a dollar of revenue. President and I I I was at the hearing and the justices agreed and even the plaintiff agreed that under AIPA the president can install a full embargo. He just can't collect a dollar of revenue. So, as I said before, there are 232 and 301 tariffs that have withstood more than 4,000 lawsuits since the first Trump term.

Uh there is something called section 122, which grants the president 5 months to install uh to put a global tariff on. So president announced today he's going to put a global tariff of 10%. And then u the number of a number of 232 and section 301 uh tariff investigations will be started. Those take a number of weeks and months to uh implement. Uh so I I can tell you that the total amount of revenue that Treasury will collect this year will be little change if changed at all. 

Ray>> So you've already collected around 175 billion or something. 

Bessent>> Well, well that's since that's under the tariffs.

Ray >> But is that going to be in dispute? Like who gets it back or what? 

Bessent>> Yeah, it's it's in dispute. Supreme Court did not rule on that today. they pushed it back down to the international uh tax and trade court and you know my sense is that could be dragged out for weeks, months, years. Uh so you know we we'll see what happens there but the look forward uh no one should sus expect that the tariff revenue will go down, and roughly last year the existing revenues you know under the 232s under the 301's and and some other collection mechanisms were roughly equal to the tariffs. 

22:20

Ray>> So, it's going to be a food fight going after that $175 billion is it, so...

Bessent>>I I got I got a feeling the the American people won't see it. 

Ray>> Yeah. Okay. Well, let's let's shift real quick and talk about, you know, kind of the shadow banking economy that's that's happened cuz in in in the country right now, Blue Owl, people like that that have come along that there are a lot of commercial bankers in here that are now having to compete with unregulated capital out there. What's kind of your view on how that's grown so much in really the last five or five really last five years or so? and that's unregulated outside of your bruise.,so... 

Bessent>> yeah, so it's it's really been about 10 years and I I think a lot of it and again I I was also a financial institutions analyst in the early part of my career.

So I followed the regulated banking system uh the the insurance companies SNLs when there were were SNLs. Um and I think private credit developed as a regulatory arbitrage because post DoddFrank the regulatory straight jacket around our reg our our regulated institutions was so tight m making loans became very difficult the the big got bigger we lost more than 50% 50 of our small and community banks because it went from too big to fail to too small to succeed.

>> And you know I I think this this growth outside the the system at Treasury we have been pushing for loosening of the regulatory straight jacket. 

Tom Oliver Wyman's words uh not treasuries uh they believe that our changing changes in regulation uh that I don't change the regulations I got guide them uh through a convening mechanism as the chair of the financial the stability and oversight council, but OC control of the currency FDIC and the Fed that that's probably created 2.5 trillion ion of new borrowing capacity. 

Ray>H,hum

>> So 2.5 trillion of new borrowing capacity for the regulated industry. So now private credit has a competitor. What we what we are concerned about and or what our focus is doesn't have to be a concern is what what is the relationship between private credit and the regulated sector.

So you know it are private credit funds borrowing from the regulated sector. You know you saw there was a transaction yesterday where Blue Owl um sold a trunch of their loan portfolio to three pension funds and a captive insurance company.

Ray>H, Hum

Bessent >> So that's moving it into the regulated industry. And you see almost every one of the private credit companies has a regulated entity.

So now Treasury gets involved. So we we are concerned I am concerned with watching how does this get to uh the reg the regulated financial system. I I as maybe some people uh in this room did successfully predicted, and unfortunately successfully predicted the uh subprime crisis that then turned into a banking crisis and you you could see like these codos and exotic instruments on bank balance sheets.

So our our job is to make sure uh that the reg the regulated system is not affected by uh private credit and you know we we'll see u I I think the private credit has been an exciting new feature. I think it bridged the gap, especially during the tough and tight regulatory times. I I think that they were there during COVID when some of the banks were frozen and I hope that they've been prudent in their loan port 

Ray>> but a lot of the private funds are doing extend and pretend we see that a lot in the real estate industry you know where a commercial bank would have to call a loan and they're pushing out and then even in the private equity side the continuation funds that they have that aren't suns setting they continue them on, isn't that just kind of pushing problems off into the future that as a you know secretary of the treasury you kind of have to look at and go what what is really going on behind the curtain that you don't really get a chance to look at.

27:13

Bessent>> Well, we have the ability to peel back the curtain and ...

Ray>> even on a private equity deal. 

Bessent>> Oh, sure. They 

Ray>> be careful. A lot of them are out here, don't they? Yeah. Yeah. 

Bessent>> So, when you get a call, the secretary of the treasury wants to come and see you, you can return the call. Um 

Ray> Yeah

Bessent>> and uh but but again that we want to gauge could it have any uh effects on the overall economy? This thus far it's been very additive.

 Uh but again um how does it affect the regulated system and you know we we want to prevent contagion. The the other thing that I I would say and every everyone in private credit, private assets uh should listen to this because at Treasury, we are part of the rulemaking process for private assets going into retail. And this administration led by Treasury that is committed that the individual investors will not become the dumping ground for residual. And 

Ray>> you're talking about the 401k plans. 

Bessent >> The 40 the 401k plans specifically 

Ray>> Right

Bessent>> that this like it that it if if there is something rotten, it is not going to be handed to the individual investors. And we we are 100% with my colleagues at the Department of Labor uh committed to that. And look, it it's it's to everyone's advantage that uh should individual investors be able to diversify into private assets? Definitely. But if the timing is bad, if there are a set of mal actors, if intentions are bad, then it will be one of these things that it it will be blocked for a generation. So we want to do it in a safe, sound, and smart way both for the private equity firms and most importantly for the American investing public.

29:25

Ray>>Well, well, Wall Street's looking at this at trillions of dollars going to be unleashed into things that normally they weren't able to invest in real estate and things like that. So, there is a a thought that valuations in hard assets are going to go up because now people have access small dollar investors can go in there. But you're right, is are the fees laid on it so heavy by the big firms and and things like that. But you can't really regulate that. 

Bessent>> Well, we can't regulate that. But what we can think about some things to think about perhaps private investors shouldn't get a continuation fund. 

>> Like if you weren't in the original fund, then a private equity firm shouldn't put 401ks into a continuation fund. 

Ray>>Mhm.

 Bessent>> If there's a credit that's already in your private equity business and you do a follow- on loan, then maybe that's not appropriate. May maybe just denovo loans to new entities would be more appropriate. 

Ray>> Right. But..

Bessent>>So I again uh we want to make sure that that the the 99% of good actors do not get polluted by a couple of bad actors that it seems to happen every couple of decades. 

Ray>> So let's go back to banks for a second. And I I've served on the board of some smaller regional banks here, and so many have been in the past have been rolled up, and then really mergers in the until the Trump administration came along have pretty much died for four years and people doing denovo banks that's kind of gone away in the sense. What's your view on the banking system in the United States of do you feel like it should consolidate around a few very very large banks or do we need to have a lot of regional community banks that really have kind of built the country.

Bessent>> Uh yes and be that 

Ray>> okay 

Bessent>> what what's happened again I I I think the regulatory morass just got too big to fail too small to succeed. One one of the things that the I I've been working on and it it's both s both sides of the both sides of the aisle and it's Senator Hagerty from the Tennessee uh Senator also broke from Maryland um are pushing for a small and community banks to be able to have an enhanced non-interestbearing account. Each depositor could have one and you know where there's a much higher level of deposit insurance. Let's pick a number cuz it seems like $10 million right now because what 

Ray>> where is it today? Sorry. 100,000 

Bessent>> 250 

Ray>> 200. you want to take 250 to 10 million for a single account?

Bessent>> For for a single account non-interest bearing and you know I'm informed by this by what happened with the deposit volatility during 2023 when the the three we had the second third and fourth largest bank failures despite Senator Warren's regulatory morass you know I always say she's a financial agorophobic like h how do you not get hit by a car and never come out of your house? Um but like this this this high level of regulation, you know, don't make any loans, you'll never lose money. But somehow with all these regulations, all all this the overbearing supervision, we we had these bank failures, but what happened during those bank failures was the the money ran to the very largest banks.

And I I I'm saying like even US Bank Corp, which I think is the fifth largest bank, lost deposits to JP Morgan. So like this moral moral hazard of the biggest banks or the public believing that the biggest banks have unlimited insurance in a crisis and then the small the money leaves the smallest banks. And the money that leaves the smallest banks, for any of you who have small businesses, for any of you who they are on the boards or own smaller community banks, it's usually a payroll account and it could be a lawn service company. It could be a restaurant, but payroll account can be several million dollars. And that moves to let's pick on it moves to Wells Fargo because they believe that uh government would not let anything happen to Wells Fargo and payroll account then ends up there and Wells Fargo are smart bankers. So they said well why don't you we don't like just having the payroll account bring your other accounts over and then all of a sudden a community bank that's had the same client for a hundred years it's gone. 

Mhm.

>> So we we think that this is a very smart and effective way to allow the small banks to retain bis business borrowers or high net worth individual or depositors uh over a long period of time. And these small banks are important that I um up until December 12th I I was a farmer. I was involved in the agriculture business and I I had to divest my holdings and that sometimes Saturday morning I turn on farm radio and you you listen to farm radio and I remember listening after all all the bank the the the bank failures in 2023 and it's exactly as you would expect all the these farmers are saying look these out of state bankers they they don't go to your church they don't play little league baseball with your son. They don't play softball with your daughter. They they don't you didn't go to high school with them.

They're not in the local community. And I I I think there's nothing like these local community banks that they they drive the I think it's 70% of real estate lending. They drive a lending. They drive small business lending. And when when you think you know Wall Street versus Main Street, it's really time for Main Street to do better.

And I and I think Main Street can only do better when the small banks do better.

36:01

Ray >> Well, we're fortunate. You're probably the first Treasury Secretary we ever had that listens to farm radio. So, I very much appreciate you understand what's going on the rest of the country. Now, real quick, this is a subject we could have had the entire hour to talk about, but I'm going to break it into two parts, and that's AI.

One is the investment in AI and the other is the effect of AI. And so I'm going to start first with the effect of AI, and the kind of slow fire, slow hire we're going through in this country right now. Cuz if you're graduating from college, the biggest unemployment bubble right now is kind of 19 to 28 year olds really not being able to find a job. And then people are holding on to people longer wondering what the effect of AI. So that's kind of I think a lot of people in this room our businesses are like, what is this AI really going to do? And then secondly maybe we can talk about the this huge investment that's going into AI by Oracle and these companies that different than the internet time when money went into stuff like Pets.com that really didn't have a market. I mean these are real companies putting money up. So you can take either one of those you want. 

Bessent>> Yeah. So I'll I'll take both of them. is one I I think it's very hard to disagregate what's the effect of AI and what's the effect of the the covid, employment trends holdover 

Ray>>okay 

Bessent>> because you know I'm sure any anyone in this room employee retention during COVID was dire I mean my my firm we started paying quarterly or midyear bonuses for the first first time ever for employee retention mentionvwhen when I left just over a year ago, we'd stopped that. But I I think uh that as you said, slow to fire, slow to hire. I I am very optimistic about the overall labor market right now. I'm very optimistic about the economy that um historically when when I used to have to analyze economic data to make market bets um I always found that you were going to see an acceleration in the employment market when the temporary staffing companies did well and tempor temporary staffing companies are now uh saying are now reporting very good earnings very good demand and historically that morphs into long-term demand. We've also seen about a 12 or 14% capex boom in 2025. Traditionally, capex booms were followed by labor booms. So, um you know, we we'll see what the effects are for of you know, of AI. you'll be able to probably be able to figure out who I'm talking about. When I I give the breakdown.

I had a major credit card company at Treasury about a month and a half ago and I asked the CEO, "What is the effect of AI on your business?" And he said, "Well, on on our collections and billing department, we're definitely taking down employees, but we're moving them all to the travel department." So, it may be a reallocation. Ray>>Mhm.

Bessent>> Um and and may maybe in a different world travel would have been hiring. So, but there I just with that particular anecdotal example, the the employment's flat. 

Ray>> How about on the investments? Does that worry you at all? This big massive amount of capital that's being allocated to that? Because if you look at as part of our GDP, it's a massive percentage, probably more so than any other industry that's as a startup in history.

Bessent>>Well, I I I I think very good way to frame it is every approximately every $300 billion is 1% of GDP.  So, every time when you read that there's going to be 600, make it easy on me, 600 billion of AI, that that's too 

RAY>> is that a disproportionate share? 

Bessent>> If you if you go back and you look at railroads, electrification, no.

um internet um it's probably more compressed. 

Ray>> Mhm. 

40:17

​​​​​​​Bessent>> And I think the reason it is more compressed is the the hyperscalers with Google, Microsoft, Oracle, Meta, probably leaving out a couple Open AI. Well, that's a denovo company. Um but you're that the these are big companies with big balance sheets 

Ray>>Hhm

​​​​​​​Bessent>> and they've for them to do big capex doesn't strike me as speculative like for for Microsoft even for Microsoft $120 billion check is a big check, but they've got the balance sheet they can they can hold the leverage.

40:59

Ray>>Okay. Well, we have about five minutes left, so you were gracious to take a couple questions from the audience. So, um, anybody, we have the microphone here. Rob Walters over here. I want to ask you about our national debt. 

Speaker 1, Rob>> Um, I think the received wisdom is there are three ways out. Growth, austerity, inflation. I'm no economic historian, but I don't think there's ever been a nation that has grown their way out of very high national debt. Austerity , I can tell Republicans elected officials are not too enamored of austerity is a way out. Is inflation the only way out? And my question is how where does that fit within our hierarchy of priorities? And is inflation the only way out? 

​​​​​​​Bessent>> Uh sure. So I I I I do think there is the ability to grow our way out but I think it has to be a combination of A and B and I would add there is a D repudiation but that's not on the table. um that um that so ju just to put some some real life numbers around things in 2024 the the deficit to GDP was the highest it had ever been when we weren't at war or weren't in a recession and that was one of the reasons that I came out from behind my desk I I'd known the Trump family a long time went went to see candidate Trump then told I wanted to be on the economic team because I was worried that the other side wanted to go into a kind of European style economic malaise. Higher debt, higher taxes, lower growth, lower growth, higher taxes, more debt. And you rinse and repeat go into that that doom cycle which we're seeing in some of the European countries right now. So 2024, 7, 6.97% deficit to GDP. 2025 by restraining spending and growing the economy uh 5.4% deficit to GDP. I I've stated that I would like to get back down to 3% deficit to GDP by the time the president leaves office. And at that point, not only is the debt stable, but you start reducing the debt to GDP. So that you know it it is possible that if you restrain spending and grow the denominator uh then you do delever.

Um and I think we've seen that for the American people inflation is not an option. Ray>> Yeah. But the entitlement programs too. We got to get that. 

​​​​​​​Bessent>> I I think this administration needs to get current spending under control and then the entitlement programs. You got to do the short term before you can do the long term.

>> Okay. Um yeah, right here.  

Speaker 2>>Mr. Secretary,  

Ray>>Hang on just a sec because they're recording this. If you can get 

Speaker 2>> Sorry, Mr. Secretary. The AI has been the topic of this conversation and most conversations about the future. You talked about the several uh effects of AI. Give us your view of the macro impact on our economy.

​​​​​​​Bessent>> I I think we don't know yet. I I I think that I I think you got to have an open mind that you know I my three AI whisperers all called me within the past 10 days and said that the acceleration with AI agents from December to February had been the same that so in two months had been the same that it was in the past 2 years. So the the capabilities it's really when you think about a hockey stick I don't even know what this this would look like and you know I I I I have an open mind and I I I think obviously productivity growth and we'll we'll see what the implementation is and then I think we also don't understand what it means for the US vis-a-vis the rest of the world that that's why in my talk that imagine a world where the US is so far ahead of AI.

There's China, there's US and then there's everybody else with with AI. What's a data what's a call center in India worth? What what what are um what are other countries going to do if we have this productivity boom? Because keep keep in mind European Union and the US 2000, 2005 we have the same size GDP now we we are the more than 50 I don't know whether it's 100% bigger than than the EU.

So I mean we we've just passed them. So could could you see the US pull away? Maybe. 

Ray>> So the secretary is going to have to leave. He is a uh going to a rally for Trump accounts which he spoke about earlier and I don't know how much y'all took of that but I went to the uh kickoff in DC about I don't know 3 weeks ago or something when they kicked it off but it really is amazing that you know the Dell family stepped up for as you said 6 and a4 billion dollars to help fund these things at $1,000 and employers can match it and so any of you with a company that want to match it with your employees that's something as he said is uh I'm doing a sales pitch for you here. But it uh it really is an interesting deal. I didn't know anything about it till I went to DC and saw it. But I think that's going to be a major for President Trump major legacy.

Bessent>> Look, I I I I think when when we see like Mayor Mandami in New York, part of that is dis disaffected mostly younger people who have given up on the the system.

And when when you see the exact numbers, 38% of American households have no exposure to the equity market. So for the next four years, every child born is going to get a Trump account, $1,000 from Treasury. It's going to go into an S&P fund. Uh it is locked up for 18 years. We're going to do a ton of um financial literacy, but I I think more importantly, it's going to be a real time experiment because now every family is going to be able to look on their phone and they will care what the stock market's doing.

Is it going up or down? Is it? And all all those accounts can be topped up. Any child under age 18 family can open one. they won't get the $1,000. But Susan and Michael Dell are actually giving the money to the bottom 80% of income zip codes and it's for the kids who aren't getting the $1,000. So I I think it's going to I mean it's it's an amazing amount. When when the president announced it, he he looked at Michael and said, "You know, Michael, 250 million is a lot, but you did six billion 250 million."  And so it's about $250 for every child in America who is not in the top 20 a top 20% zip code. So you all you can adopt a school district, you can adopt a zip code. Uh there there are lots of ways to do it. They're going to launch. 

Ray>> But the things for a company, if you if the government's giving you $1,000, a company can match it, put $1,000. The compounding is that 

Bessent>> the company could put up to 5,000. 

Ray>> Okay. Well, the compounding effect over that period of time for a company, if they just put a,1000 on top of the 2000.

And, it ends up being worth hundreds of thousands of dollars at that point.

Well, so it it's available to the children when they turn 18 or you can roll it into a retirement account and then let it roll to 60 or 65. And then studies have shown that when when we hear a lot about food deserts of families not being able to get have access to good nutrition, there's also a financial services desert. And if if you think about 25 or 30 million of these accounts being open, then all of a sudden Christmas, birthdays, relatives can just drop in $20 each month.

And I I just think this is a gamecher. I think is going to get everyone interested in the markets. I is um and my my experience studying financial history is people who own part of the system don't want to bring down the system and I I think it just does create this new enthusiasm. I think this is going to be the most important uh program since social security in terms of financial security because for working Americans, social security is the bedrock of their retirement.

It's the defined benefit plan guaranteed monthly payments. But then on the other side, you will be getting this lump sum and at at age 60 or if you want to take it out whether it's $5 $10,000 from just the original,000 in compounding uh you use it to start a business to purchase a car part of a home down payment because I had the mortgage bankers association in the other day and they said that they have a 70% falloff rate from people who start a mortgage application and don't finish it, one of the biggest impediments is $2,000.

Ray>> Wow.

Bessent >> That families can't get do the $2,000 whether it's for title insurance or um you know some some other payment. So I I think that these things can be leveraged. look forward to working with you all. And um again, financial literacy has been one of our family's charitable endeavors over the past 10 years.

So, this is kind of a dream for me. 

Ray>>Well, thank you for coming. You're doing a great job and and appreciate coming back.