70. BP's Road to Rebuilding Trust with CEO Bernard Looney
This week we sit down with the CEO of BP, Bernard Looney. Following BP’s announcement to be net-zero by 2050 and cutting oil production by 40% by 2030, we talk about the beginning steps to rebuilding trust and what it looks like to transition an oil and gas company away from oil and gas.
Our special musical guest this week is Gecko:
Keep up with Christiana here:
Join @GlobalOptimism on social media!
Dont forget to hit SUBSCRIBE so you don’t miss another episode of Outrage + Optimism!
Christiana: What a delight to have you on outrage and optimism, as you might suspect, the name of this podcast is is basically shows that we feel that we need both outrage at what is still not happening on climate change, of which there are many issues that we’re totally outraged about, but we also need optimism about what is happening and what more we can do and and who better to sit somewhere in in the uncomfortable middle between those two than you.
Could I start, Bernard, by just reflecting that you have spent your entire professional career at BP, you have seen it go through many, many different cycles, many vision cycles, I should say. You were there when Lord Browne was there when he brought the Beyond Petroleum Vision way back in the 1990s. You were there during Bob Dudley, who was brought in to sort out the deepwater oil spill. And then you were announced as the new CEO in October of last year. You took over in February and it seemed like you had barely taken over three seconds when you announced a climate strategy. And then now on the fourth of August, you went into much more details about cutting your oil and gas output by 40 percent over the next 10 years, reaching 50 gigawatts of renewable energy by 2030.
And and many other details that are that are really groundbreaking for an oil and gas company. Here’s my question for you to take on those very ambitious targets so soon, basically a few months after taking over, you could not possibly have considered the implications of those targets the moment that you got into the CEO seat. I am suspecting that you were pestering and festering on all of this while you were not CEO.
So just wanted to invite you to reflect a little bit on on what I call your pestering and pestering time.
Bernard: Well, thanks, Christiana and Tom and Paul, and thanks so much for having me on. It’s it’s a real privilege. And in answer to your question, I mean, I think throughout my career I actually started in BP as a drilling engineer. So actually my career was in in in extracting oil and gas. And but I think throughout my career, as I got older, I guess I’ve always felt that I’m interested in what’s happening in society. And I guess in some ways I felt I was in touch with what society was thinking and doing around the world. And I think in the latter years it became very clear to me, Christiana, that while society needed what we wanted, it’s not obvious to me that they wanted what we had to offer. So they needed our product. But it wasn’t clear to me that they necessarily wanted it. And in many ways it just felt increasingly like what we were doing was sort of out of step with society. And and I personally just don’t think that’s a very productive place or space to occupy when you’re out of step with what society really, really wants, which, of course, is. Yes, reliable energy. Yes, affordable energy, but increasingly cleaner energy. When I was announcing the job in October last year, I thought I’d better go in and validate whether this hunch is actually real or not. And I went deliberately out to seek views from a wide cross-section of people from from the U.N., from NGOs, from activists, from investors-
Christiana: I should say, quite a few critics you spoke to quite a few known, outrageous critics.
Bernard: Yes, absolutely. There is no point in talking to people who agree with you. I mean, it really it’s it might be very fun and comfortable in the moment, but I’m not. You learn anything, and my mother, who is very important to me, told me I have two years and one mouth and to use them in that proportion. So I think it is important, it is important to get out there and listen. And I really believe in listening. And I listened. And there was one activist who has had a huge influence on me. And, you know, she was able to explain things to me in a way that made me help me understand why people didn’t trust us, why people maybe didn’t want what we had, that they needed it, but they didn’t want it.
And and I wouldn’t have got that insight had I not gone and listened. So those over a period of three or four months that confirmed to me, it confirmed to me that we had to change as a company. We had to change because what society wanted from us was different. And secondly, what I learned from our employees and our organization is that they wanted us to change. And we want so it was it was a sort of we had to and we wanted to we had tremendous skills to offer in this world. We believe we can contribute hugely actually to the transition. So it was a hunch. It was a deliberate sort of listening tour. Definitely don’t talk to people who’s going to agree with you. I basically think what’s the point? So I went and talked to a lot of people who challenged me that helped me, it confirmed what I thought. And that’s why in February it was actually seven days after I started in the job, we launched a new purpose, what is it that we’re actually about? And we’ve always been in the provision of energy so the concept of people and planet has always been there. But we said we actually need to reimagine energy because energy is actually going to be different in the future and people want to we’re reimagining energy for people and the planet. We then said that’s not enough. We need an ambition. So we a net zero ambition by 2050 or sooner, if we can. How we’re going to help the world get there, back that up with 10 aims, which we are doing. 5 for BP and 5 to help the world. And then we said, people said we need more detail, which is great because I agree, I was kind of seven days in so I didn’t have all the answers, but we had set the sat-nav. We had set Christiana the direction and I kept saying to people, look the direction is set there’s no going back now. Next it’s the milestones and we’ve just launched our strategy on the 4th of August and that is about how do we actually go from being an international company to being an integrated energy company, lost people.
Christiana: So, Bernard, can can I push on that envelope a little bit more because I’m interested in your sense of both the timing of your recent announcements as well as the scale of the change, because I’m sure you are aware that there are many who on one side would say, you know what, this is way too late. It’s way too little. It’s it was necessary X number of years ago. The timing was totally wrong. Why didn’t they read the IPCC report X number of years ago? On and on and on. Then of course, there are some and I would say there is a huge majority of people, at least those certainly within our reach in space, who would argue that then there are some who would say, you know what, totally premature, bad timing. You should hold out more. You should really be able to confirm where the industry is going, not be a leader, but rather be a follower, et cetera, et cetera. And there’s a huge spectrum there in between. The same thing goes for the scale of the change. There are many who would say, well, you know, not enough. I mean, yeah, good, good cigar, but not not quite there. If you were saying that you are going to put 40 percent of BP’s overall capital spending budget into renewables, well, whereas the other 60 percent going use actually, if you really, really clear about this, it should be one hundred percent that it is going in the right direction.
And then, of course, there are others who would be on the other side of that spectrum saying, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, that’s way too quickly. So my question is on that spectrum, both of which are interrelated timing and scale. Obviously, you have taken the the the timing of the decisions that you think is best as well as the scale. Why do you think this is the appropriate timing and why do you think this is the appropriate scale and not more from my perspective, why not more?
Christiana: Well, I think, you know, we talk a lot here in BP about what I call ambitious realism. And what I want our strategy to be is to be at the ambitious edge of what is really possible. And what do I mean by that? We need to be ambitious for the world, for the stakeholders that we engage with, society, our shareholders and our employees. We want to be ambitious because, you know, there is a finite carbon budget. It is running out and we need action. So we are in action now. We need to be successful in doing in this endeavor. We as a company, BP, can help the world in this transition. We have enormous skills that can add to what the world desperately needs and therefore we must we must make it work. And that’s where the realism and the pragmatism comes in. You know, we’ve taken an incredible step of saying that we’re going to reduce our production from oil and gas, our core business, for one hundred and eleven years, that we’re going to reduce it by 40 percent in the next decade, 80 percent, that is by 40 percent. That is actually an extraordinary step to take. Now, why not 100 percent? Well, you know, unfortunately, it’s not that simple for us to fund the transition. We have to be a viable company. We have to have cash flows and those cash flows whether people may not like this, but it is the truth. And, you know, it is important to speak to the truth, so to speak.
Those cash flows come from hydrocarbons. Therefore, we need those hydrocarbons business, not as much of it, we’re going to make it a much smaller business, 40 percent smaller, but it will be the engine which funds the transition, which allows our company to scale up a tenfold increase in what we’re sorry, a 20 fold increase from two and a half gigawatts to 50 gigawatts of renewable capacity, a 20 fold increase in charging points. We’re going to go a tenfold increase in investment. We can’t we can’t turn a tap off overnight and turn it to zero and simply transition is just not possible. So we’re doing the absolute best that we can as quickly as we can while acknowledging some realities. And of course, the reality is that the world still depends on oil and gas today. And I think it would also be wrong for us to turn off the top from that perspective so better that BP is doing it than someone else. So it’s ambitious. I think it’s incredibly ambitious. And I understand that people think it should be 100 percent in terms of we should completely be out of oil and gas tomorrow. But unfortunately, there are realities and practicalities. And at the end of the day, we are going to transition the company. To do that. We need the cash flows. And to do that, we need that hydrocarbon business at a scale that enables us to make that transition. That’s what we’re trying to do.
Christiana: Ok, understood. How much pushback did you get internally for this?
Bernard: Well, actually, you know, I remember talking recently, Christiana, to and it sounds like a story for TV, but it’s actually the truth. And I was talking to some refinery workers in Toledo in the United States, and they called me up in the middle of covid and they said they reached out to me and said, would you would you chat with us for a little bit?
And, you know, everybody’s doing Zoom calls and checking in. And I said, fine, let’s have a chat. So we got on the phone. There was four or five of them. They’ve worked in the refinery, probably all their lives. Twenty, twenty eight, thirty, thirty five years. And we had a chat for about 20 minutes about their jobs and what they’re up to and all of that. And at the end of the conversation, this gentleman said to me, Joe Rodriguez is his name. Joe said, I want to thank you for what you’re doing on the energy transition. And I thought to myself, well, that’s interesting because Joe’s, you know, working in a refinery. And one of the things we’ve said is that we’ll probably do less refining. And he’s probably wondering what that means for the future of his own career. And I said, well, thank you, Joe. I said, why do you say that? And he said, because the guys here will tell you I love my grandchildren.
And he said, given a choice, given a choice, I choose my grandchildren every time. And he said, what you’re doing with the energy transition and the position that you’ve taken, he said, will help. It won’t solve, but it will help create a better world for my grandchildren.
And he said, I’m very happy for this refinery to provide the cash flows to enable you to make that transition. So I don’t want to downplay the fact that there are people inside the company who are anxious about their future because they’ve spent their career in oil and gas. But nonetheless, the overwhelming sort of feedback and sentiment is that people, you know, we have we have great people working for BP. They’re these are people who care. They have children, they have relations. They have grandparents. They have grandchildren. They want they want what everyone listening to this, they’re not different. They’re not different people. They want the same thing. So to be part of a company that is doing what they think is the right thing for the world gives them enormous energy. And yes, there are concerns about what does it mean that we’re reducing the oil and gas business? What does it mean that we’re doing less refining? What does it mean for me personally in the midst of a pandemic in the midst? This is a mental health crisis that we’re dealing with at the moment. So this is very difficult. But there is energy at the same time from knowing that deep down what we are doing is, I think, the right thing for the world. And that story is probably the the best example of that.
Tom: And I love that. And I love the way that you’ve just described, you know, what purpose does and how it motivates action. I know Paul wants to come in with a question. But just very quickly, before we do, to what degree have you set out a plan where you’re going to take your workforce with you on this transition? Because they might be quite different skills that the BP in 10 years time needs than the BP of today. How’s that going to work from a workforce perspective?
Bernard: Tom. I mean, you know, here’s the thing. Here is the thing, because, you know, a lot of people say, you know, as you’ve done the oil and gas for 111 years, what skills do you have in this new world? Really? Like, really? And the answer is. Far more than you would think, and, you know, and I’ve thought long and hard about this, and we’ve had lots of debate about this, but, you know, if you want to do offshore wind, you need project management skills and independent analysis. Not me saying it benchmarks BP in as best in class in four out of five categories in project management Our people can equally build offshore wind farms as they can build a refinery. We have people who, an example, we have someone who’s working on a drilling site. We call them a well site leader. And one of my team was talking to those people once, and their job is to manage a drilling operation. There are logistics managers, they coordinate people, they do contract management. That’s the type of thing that they do. And there is a debate, there was a discussion about, so what does this new strategy mean for us? Because we’re well site leaders, we drill wells. And one of the guys said, well, actually, he said, I’m a well site leader today. Why can’t I be a solar site leader tomorrow? Solar site leader, a great story. Somebody thinking, actually, my skills are transferable. We have reservoir engineers, we have geoscientists. They can work in carbon capture and storage. That is a part of the solution for the future. We will see how big a part. But it is a part. We have scientists, we have engineers, we market products. We’re truly global.
If you want to solve a global problem, we’re in 70 to 80 countries around the world. We have 6000 engineers. We have two and a half thousand scientists. So there’s actually a lot more skills and relevance. And of course, there are things we don’t have. And where we don’t have them, we’re hiring we’re hiring people. And I can tell you right now that we are able to attract people to our company that we would not have imagined, wouldn’t have imagined joining us.
Christiana: Totally get that.
Bernard: And by the way, partnerships, partnerships, you know, this week we announced a partnership with Microsoft. You think Microsoft would want to work with us if we didn’t have set out the strategy that we had given their ambition to be carbon negative by 2030? Uber has a strategy where we announced that ambition, that partnership with them in London. So these people are coming towards us, wanting to work with us. We’re having people, you know, the biggest people reaching out to BP to join BP was the day after the 12th of February. I think we had 12000 applicants on our online system for jobs.
Paul: So I’ve I’ve got it’s my job to leap in. And I just the reason I’m laughing so much is because I wrote I wrote a book in the year 2000 called Beautiful Corporations.You just basically explained to me why I think there is so much potential in the corporate system and how a company like BP literally can change the world. It’s incredibly exciting. So I’m going to ask you a softball question, but I’m going to try and build you up to see if you will agree with something.
Christiana: Yeah, that was a setup.
Bernard: Haven’t made me nervous at all.
Paul: OK, well, lawyers at the ready, you said in an analyst call recently. All right, this is what you said. You said, we’re not promising the world. We’re promising eight to ten percent. Now, my question is this. How big a statement is that? And do you think it might have a role in resetting what companies are trying to achieve across the world and give them scope to better balance the interests of shareholders with those of the societies on which they depend? And, you know, forgive me, but is what you said may be a huge statement of kind of historic significance.
Bernard: Well, maybe and maybe not. I doubt I see anything of historic significance, to be honest with you, but what I would say is the point that I was trying to make is that there is this continual debate in the financial world that oil and gas is somehow very high returns. And this new industry that we’re pivoting into is low returns. And therefore, is this a good use of shareholder capital? The point I was trying to make on the day is that actually we think that the returns in the new sectors, in renewable energy, we think we can actually make them better than what we would see as eight to 10 percent. But what I don’t want to do is promise that. I just want to give people confidence that we can deliver eight to 10. In our hearts, we believe we can do better. But I don’t want to promise the world. I just that’s what I mean by promising the world. I don’t want to promise an aspiration. I want to promise something that is credible that I know we can do and that we can deliver on, because I want people to trust what we’re saying, that they can buy into that and back it.
Because the ultimate thing here is we need this transition of BP to be successful. I think I think all three of you would want us to succeed. Why? Not because you love BP necessarily, but because I think we all know that if BP makes a success of this transition, then maybe others will look at it and say, actually, this is actually quite good. So what we need from that perspective is we need shareholders to back us. There’s a lot of talk in the financial community about ESG and all of this good stuff. But fundamentally, we need to be backed because it’s not easy. What we’re trying to do. It is challenging. It does have risks. We’ve been very clear about that. We’ve explained them. We’ve said we don’t have all the answers. We’ve said we’ll make mistakes. These are all things that we’re very clear on. But we have a deep, deep conviction, a deep commitment. We believe we’ve got the skills to do it, but we need support and we need backing.
Tom: So, Paul, can I jump in here, please?
Paul: No, no, no. OK, I’ll set you up by saying I’ll set you up by saying I mean, to some degree, the returns are based upon the actions governments take and the critical policy environment. So, Tom, what’s your question?
Tom: So Bernard it’s really I mean, thank you so much for joining us is fascinating. And you keep returning to this issue of trust and this kind of breakdown of trust between companies in your sector and society at large and and honestly, we’ve heard that many times from senior people in oil and gas companies. And the fact that you’re identifying that you’re looking at it and you’re diving in and doing something about it is really is really inspiring to us. What I would say is that part of the reason that trust is broken down is because previous engagements from some oil and gas companies, potentially including BP, has been less than completely straightforward. Right. I mean, we have seen and I’m sure you’d admit that there have been companies who say one thing in public announce really big, ambitious, and then behind closed doors, this kind of lobbying for other things that that take the world in a different direction. And it can be really difficult when you look at how complicated trade associations can be, for example, the companies, trade associations, that lobby for something different. Now, I know that when you join within three weeks, you pulled out of three trade associations citing climate concerns. So I’m just wondering if you can unpack for a bit how you can be sure that anyone engaging in policy development in your name is doing so in good faith in accordance with this strategy that there’s alignment 100% of the time.
Bernard: Just just first of all, on the issue of trust, I mean, one of the things that this this activist woman who really helped me, you know, one of the things that she said is exactly what you just said, which is, you know you know, you guys say one thing in public and behind closed doors, you do the complete opposite, which now that’s a that’s a sort of an affront to me because, you know, it’s not what it’s not who I am. And all of the people that I know work in BP, that’s not who they are. But that’s not the point.
The point is, that’s what people think we do. And I always say to people before you blame them for being wrong and thinking that let’s hold up the mirror to ourselves. Let’s look at ourselves in the mirror and say, how might they have thought that? Or put yourself in their shoes, put yourself in the other person’s shoes. These are two things that I, I try to not preach, but that I try to to get people to do. Because actually, when you think about it, I can I can see why people might think that. So we said, OK, there’s a trust issue not everywhere in the world, but in certain parts of the world. People think we say one thing and do something else. Trade associations are clearly one area where that type of lobbying that you refer to happens. We did a review. We reviewed all the trade associations that were a member of we published a report that we sort of had green, amber and and and where we were completely misaligned. We pulled out we pulled out a three on the ones that are an amber. We said, you know, we’re not aligned with you on everything that you stand for as an association. We will be making it clear when we disagree with the position of the trade association and we want to work with you to help. So there are examples where through our presence and it’s not about giving us a pat on the back, but it’s the it’s the reality through our presence and other companies, presence trade associations have adopted more progressive positions on climate, not to the position that maybe everybody would say this is exactly what it should be, but it’s a direction of travel, it’s change, and we’re influencing.
So the reality is, is that we’re very, very clear we will not lobby against or we will not lobby in a way which is inconsistent with our net zero ambition, even if that means potentially inflicting pain on our existing business. The only thing that I would add to this, Tom, is that the day after we did this, Geoff Morrell and I, who leads communications and advocacy for BP, we got on the phone with all of our leaders around the world to explain this message. And we’re a company of 70 or 80 thousand people. And all I would say is it doesn’t turn on a dime, much as I would like overnight. So these messages take time to get through. But the purpose of the call was to say when you lobby, you lobby consistent with the ambition and the ambition is to become a net zero company by 2050. Is there something somewhere in the world right now that isn’t quite perfectly aligned with that? I am sure that’s the case. We are working hard to make sure that everything is consistent and joined up top to bottom. But organizations are complex. Is every trade association saying exactly what we want to say? Probably not, but we have to take things in the mix. Some trade associations do an awful lot of work on safety regulations as an example. So, you know, life, as you all know, is not black and white. We have to make judgments about what we think is right. But we have been really clear. We lobby consistent with a net zero ambition, regardless of what that means to a local business.
Tom: That’s a great response. Thank you so much.
Bernard: And, you know, you should be aware, as I’m sure you probably are, but TCI on the east coast of the United States, where we’re we’re lobbying in favor that I think redit I think we’re lobbying in favor that we’ve just come out against the rollback of methane regulations where pro regulation here in the UK for the acceleration of the ban on internal combustion engines. So, you know, positions that people would go seriously, you’re BP, why would you do that? Well, we’re doing it because it’s consistent with our net zero ambition. And by the way, we think it’s an enormous business opportunity for our company because we’re in the UK here. We’re the largest we own the largest electric vehicle charging network in the UK. And therefore, while it may affect our fuel sales, it will grow our electric vehicle charging business. So that’s what we’re trying to do. And I hope that makes sense.
Christiana: Bernard we are almost out of time, so I want to fast forward you into the future. What does what does BP look like in 2040? And by extension, what does the currently known as oil and gas industry look like in 2040?
Bernard: Well, I won’t speak for the oil and gas industry because it’s not my place, but I am responsible for BP and therefore I’ll give you a lens into what that looks like I, I, I certainly believe and everything that we’re doing today says, first and foremost, that we will be a thriving company, absolutely thriving and giving the world the products that it needs, giving the world the energy that it needs with a workforce who feels incredibly engaged and motivated by fulfilling the purpose that we talked about. And that means it will be a multi energy company. It will be a probably still in hydrocarbons in 2040, making sure that we continue those cash flows probably less over time. We will be in the mobility business and the convenience business. I think it’ll be a very large part of our company by then and we will certainly be low carbon electricity and energy provider globally. So three parts of the company, a company that I think will be thriving at that stage, I believe thriving long before then, but in 2040 for sure. And and and, you know, an organization that’s that feels really proud and people want to come and work for us and want to partner with us.
Christiana: I love that vision, love that vision. So our final question that we ask everyone has to do with our title Outrage and Optimism. And I would love, I think we have spoken quite a bit today about where you’re optimistic. But if you would like to summarize, where are you optimistic and would love to know where are you outraged about the status of progress on climate change?
Bernard: I think the you know, in terms of optimism and sort of what what fires me up what inspires me, I mean, honestly, you know, it is the 70000 people that work for BP and it’s their attitude. I mean, I love nothing more than speaking with engaging with, talking with our people. And Christiana, if you were with me, you would be full of life and optimism from listening to them, because just like many people, they’re great people. They want to bring about change. They want our company to bring about change. They’re excited, they’re optimistic and they’re determined. And that’s what gives me optimism. It’s our people and they’re the things they’re the people that I’m closest to.
Christiana: You know, Bernard wait I take that as an invitation. I take that as an invitation for a wonderful conversation.
Christiana: Listen, listen, if you would come, we would have any of you, you know, I’d love you to meet our people. And honestly, I always say to people and I mean this because, you know, people people have views about our company, have views about our industry. And I understand that. I get it. As I said earlier, put yourself in their shoes. You can understand why. Hold up a mirror and look back at some of the things that have happened in history. And you can understand why. But I always say, if you want to change someone’s mind, have them meet with our people. So I would love you to come.
I would love any one of you to come look at what we’re doing, meet our people, challenge them, all of that. It makes us better. We love it. Outrage. I will tell you something that sort of irritates not quite the right word. Outrage, just not my thing. It’s just not my-
Christiana: Fair enough.
Bernard: I’m not that type of person. I feel that the world, I feel I guess if I’m being honest, I feel that outrage in some ways is part of the issue. And the reason I say that is as follows. I absolutely believe that people should be incredibly upset and dissatisfied and completely unaccepting of what is happening.
What upsets me is when people have positions, when, you know, I’m not interested in a position, I’m interested in an answer, a solution. And I personally find in this space sometimes that there are people who are more protective of their position and being right than actually coming up with a solution. You know, if I adopted the position that what we have done for one hundred and eleven years must be right and therefore those other people don’t get it. And you don’t understand what a difference we’ve made in the world and you don’t understand what hydrocarbons have done for the world and you just don’t get it. I’m not sure that would have moved us very far.
So my view is sit down, engage, have dialogue. Listen, this very important point, I’d say to our own people, people say, what would happen if you sat down next to an extinction rebellion person at dinner? What would you sit down? I said, of course I’d sit down and I’d listen and maybe we’d have a second meeting or a third meeting. But I’m not going to sit down and say, here are my six key messages that I’ve been given that I need to get across because it’s pointless. I just find less positions, more dialogue, more listening, a bit more engagement. And the whole objective is to find a solution as opposed to prove that my position is right. That probably does upset me because, quite frankly, there’s just no space. There’s just no space to work. And we’re moving. We’re evolving. We have to we want to I would just encourage others to to engage with people who want to do that in good faith and do a bit of listening and do a bit of learning. That’s the thing that probably upsets me. But outrage isn’t my, outrage to me leads to very sort of entrenched positions. And I just have never seen something particularly positive come out of a position. I’ve seen lots of positives come out of solutions.
Christiana: Well, you know, I love that answer because we’ve had several guests and dear friends on this podcast who have chosen to quibble with us about the word optimism, but but no one has said outrage doesn’t feel like the right thing. And so I just love that because, you know, to to put a question mark behind a concept or behind a word or behind a feeling opens up many new doors. So, you know, this is the first, delightfully the first time that someone says outrage is, just not my thing.
Bernard: Well, this is not my thing. I mean, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be outraged. People have a right to be however they want to be. It’s not for me to tell people how to feel, but what I do know and my own or what what I know, what I believe. And it’s what works for me. It just doesn’t, positions don’t help. And I’ve seen so many people get entrenched in that old phrase of do you want to be right or do you want to be effective? Is something that really works for me. And quite frankly, all of us on this phone. We want to be effective. We want solutions. We want progress. We want it now. We were impatient. We’re all of that. But that’s what we want. I don’t want to go home tonight saying my position is the right one when the world might be burning around us.
Christian: Yeah, my my version of that question is, do you want to be righteous or do you want to be helpful?
Bernard: Right. I actually prefer that do you mind if I borrow it?
Christiana: You can definitely take it.
Bernard: And I will quote you. And they’ll say did you talk to Christiana? Wow!
Paul: People who don’t change their minds don’t change anything. So thank you, Bernard, for being, you know, focused on the on the on the prize.
Christiana: Yes, thank you very much. And you may just find the entire outrage and optimism team at your offices in London as soon as we can all travel. So thank you very much for the conversation. Thank you for the invitation.
Tom: And for embracing this transformation, it is very inspiring to hear how you’re doing it, how you keeping an open mind, how you’re being prepared to learn and lead as you go. So thank you for all of that.
Bernard: Well, thank you all very much for having me on and thank you for your own individual and collective leadership. You’ve you’ve made a difference. There’s no question about it. So thank you.
All: Thank you, bye, thank you, bye bye, Bernard. Thank God. Take care. Thank you. Bye thanks. Bye bye. Bye bye. Bye. Bye bye.