Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Kigali, June 8 (Xinhua) — Rwanda on Saturday announced its withdrawal from the Economic Community of Central African States (ECOCAC), accusing its neighbor the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) of “instrumentalizing” the bloc with the support of some of its member states.
This statement was made following the 26th ECOCAS summit, which took place in the capital of Equatorial Guinea, Malabo, and was attended by Rwandan Prime Minister Edouard Ngirente.
As Rwanda’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation stated, the purpose of ECOCAS was clearly distorted at the summit, as “Rwanda’s right to assume the rotating chairmanship of the bloc… was deliberately ignored in order to impose a dictate on the DRC.”
The statement also condemned the “illegal exclusion of Rwanda” from the 22nd ECOCAS summit, which was held in 2023 in the DRC capital Kinshasa under the DRC presidency. Rwanda criticized ECOCAS for “failing to enforce its own rules.”
“Rwanda condemns the violation of its rights,” the statement said. “Therefore, Rwanda sees no reason to remain a member of an organization whose current functioning is contrary to its founding principles and the original purposes for which it was created.”
Early Sunday morning, the DRC presidency issued a press release stating that due to the current security situation in the east of the country, ECOCAS leaders confirmed that “the DRC is under aggression from Rwanda” and called on it to withdraw its troops from DRC territory.
Regarding the rotating presidency of ECOCAS, the summit participants recommended that Equatorial Guinea continue to chair the bloc, while the transfer of powers to Rwanda be postponed until the dispute between it and the DRC is resolved.
ECOCAS has not yet commented on the decision to withdraw announced by the Rwandan authorities.
Rwanda’s decision comes amid heightened tensions between it and the DRC over the conflict in eastern DRC.
The DRC accuses Rwanda of supporting the rebel group Movement of March 23 (M23) fighting in eastern DRC. Rwanda has denied the charge. –0–
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Andy Harris (MD-01)
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, the House Freedom Caucus Board of Directors released the following statement:
“The House Freedom Caucus delivered real victories for the American people in the One Big Beautiful Bill. We want to be crystal clear: if the Senate attempts to water down, strip out, or walk back the hard-fought spending reductions and IRA Green New Scam rollbacks achieved in this legislation, we will not accept it. The House Freedom Caucus Board will stand united holding the line. The American people didn’t send us here to cave to the swamp — they sent us here to change it.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative David Kustoff (TN-08)
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Reps. David Kustoff (R-TN) and August Pfluger (R-TX), as well as U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), introduced the Small Biotech Innovation Act to exempt research and development-intensive small biotech manufacturers from the Medicare drug price negotiation program.
“It is critical that the United States remains at the forefront of developing new medical technologies, treatments, and drugs,” said Congressman Kustoff. “The Small Biotech Innovation Act will help smaller companies invest in research and development by alleviating the excessive Biden-era regulations placed on them. This legislation is an important step in boosting innovation and helping find new cures for patients across the globe.”
“The Inflation Reduction Act has proven to fall short in several areas, including its small biotech exemption that disincentivizes companies from investing in R&D and hinders the development of innovative therapies. By tying eligibility to R&D spending, we can better incentivize companies to develop new treatments that will benefit patients nationwide,” said Congressman Pfluger. “The bicameral Small Biotech Innovation Act is a forward-thinking approach that will strengthen America’s leadership in life-saving science by modernizing the small biotech exemption to reward real innovation and research investment, and ultimately protect these innovative small biotech companies.”
“When the federal government stands in the way of developing better care, there’s a problem. The cures developed through small biotech innovation change the future for many patients. Instead of limiting it, we should encourage it,” said Dr. Cassidy.
The Small Biotech Innovation Act would counter the negative impact that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) will have on innovation and drug development by providing any small biotech that spends a certain amount of money on research and development with the ability to delay one of their drugs for IRA negotiation for a year. The bill also prohibits any company that is owned by a foreign adversary from being eligible for the delay.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07), Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology,led a group of her California colleagues in sending a letter to Senate leadership, strongly objecting to the section of H.R. 1 that would impose a ten-year moratorium on state and local enforcement of their own artificial intelligence laws and regulations.
“This moratorium’s assumption—that the United States will be unable to lead the world in AI if states identify and implement measures to protect their citizens from potential AI harms—is misguided,” wrote the lawmakers. “It wrongly accepts the premise that identifying and addressing AI-specific risks and harms and imposing guardrails is counterproductive to being the world’s AI leader. Nothing is further from the truth. Common sense AI guardrails can propel innovation by building trust with consumers and future users, while promoting a fair, open, and competitive playing field.”
In the absence of a federal AI regulatory framework, California and other states across the nation are embracing common-sense safeguards that ensure innovation and competition can continue to thrive. As AI tools grow more sophisticated and more widely deployed, these state measures are crucial to promote safety and trust with consumers. The House-passed moratorium, spearheaded by Republicans, would strip states of their authority to respond to new and evolving AI risks—freezing vital consumer protections for a full decade.
“We should not place consumers in harm’s way by pausing for a decade the good work that states have done and will continue to do,” the lawmakers continued. “Instead, let us work together in a bicameral, bipartisan fashion to create smart, tailored, and consensus-driven legislative solutions that empower Americans’ use of AI and automated decision systems.”
Full text of the letter can be found below or HERE.
Dear Majority Leader Thune, Minority Leader Schumer, Chairman Cruz, and Ranking Member Cantwell:
We are writing to express our strong objections to the section of H.R. 1 that would impose a sweeping ten-year moratorium on state and local enforcement of their own artificial intelligence (AI) laws and regulations.
As part of being the global AI leader, the United States must take the lead on identifying and setting common sense guardrails for responsible and safe AI development and deployment. To prevent states, including our state of California, from enforcing state AI regulations that provide such guardrails—particularly without any meaningful federal alternative—is inconsistent with the goal of AI leadership. This moratorium’s assumption—that the United States will be unable to lead the world in AI if states identify and implement measures to protect their citizens from potential AI harms—is misguided. It wrongly accepts the premise that identifying and addressing AI-specific risks and harms and imposing guardrails is counterproductive to being the world’s AI leader. Nothing is further from the truth. Common sense AI guardrails can propel innovation by building trust with consumers and future users, while promoting a fair, open, and competitive playing field.
California is the fourth largest economy in the world in part because innovative technology companies, including 32 of the world’s 50 leading AI companies, call the state home. As a hub of AI activity, our state has been a national leader in ensuring that innovation and competition thrive alongside common-sense safeguards, starting with transparency. In our increasingly digital world, AI and other emerging technologies are rapid disruptors. To place a ten-year hold on state and local enforcement of their own AI laws, especially without federal alternatives, exposes Americans to a growing list of harms as AI technologies are adopted across sectors from healthcare to education, housing, and transportation. The resulting regulatory gap created by the AI moratorium in H.R. 1 would decimate the good work that California and other states, led by both Democrats and Republicans, have done, such as:
requiring transparency regarding training data or the use of AI to communicate with patients in medical settings
giving performers and their families rights over digital replicas of their likenesses
protecting American artists’ voice and likeness from unauthorized AI impersonations,
requiring employers to ensure AI-enabled employment decisions comply with civil rights laws, and
requiring mental health platforms to disclose to users that they are interacting with an AI mental health chatbot, not a human therapist.
These examples and other proposed state legislation exemplify the mounting desire among AI experts and the American public to provide guardrails to promote AI safety, trust, and transparency. This is an extension of bipartisan concerns over online safety and manipulative algorithms—issues that, if left unchecked, leaves Americans vulnerable to harms impacting their health, their jobs, their education, and ultimately, their lives. Now is the time for Congress to work on bipartisan legislation to address these harms. The House Republican ten-year moratorium, by contrast, would gut protections for the very people we represent.
This bill provision isn’t limited to state laws and regulations of new and emerging AI. It imposes a ten-year moratorium on laws and regulations regulating “automated decision making systems” which arguably covers any computer processing.
Furthermore, the provision covers state and local regulations of their own use of AI and of automated decision making systems, which will mean states and localities cannot impose procurement requirements on AI and computer systems that are different than those imposed on other technologies. Under this provision, they would not be allowed, for example, to adopt regulations imposing safeguards on education technology to be used in public schools or on AI systems that they want to use to improve the provision of government services. That makes no sense at all.
Late in the process, House Republicans added an exception to the ten-year moratorium for state and local laws to the extent they impose criminal penalties. But that exception only underscores the absurd breadth of the 10-year moratorium. Why should the federal government incentivize states and localities to adopt criminal penalties to deal with harms from AI models and systems, and automated decision-making systems, in instances where a civil penalty, breach of contract claim, injunctive relief or some other non-criminal remedy is more appropriate to address the problem at hand?
We have already seen an outpouring of opposition to this moratorium, including bipartisan opposition from state attorneys general, state legislators, voters, and over 140 consumer advocacy, online safety, and civil rights groups. The House Bipartisan AI Taskforce last Congress acknowledged the “risks” of enacting an AI moratorium on state activity and, instead, recommended that Congress “commission a study to analyze the applicable federal and state regulations and laws that affect the development and use of AI systems across sectors.” We should not place consumers in harm’s way by pausing for a decade the good work that states have done and will continue to do. We must learn from them. After all, we have had the opportunity to learn from five years’ worth of several state efforts to criminalize the sharing of non-consensual intimate imagery, real and AI-generated, to produce the TAKE IT DOWN Act that President Trump recently signed into law. Now is not the time to deny Congress the critical insight our states provide as laboratories of democracy.
Additionally, this moratorium is procedurally deficient, as it bears no relationship to the federal budget. House Republicans stretch credulity beyond its breaking point when claiming this moratorium is necessary to effectuate their reconciliation bill’s $500 million for the Department of Commerce to update its IT and cybersecurity systems. Under the Supremacy Clause, states cannot pass laws that restrict or impose obligations on the federal government, including the Department of Commerce and federal procurement rules governing agency IT systems. Consequently, the moratorium does not impact the federal budget and must fall out as an “extraneous matter” prohibited, under the Senate Byrd Rule, from inclusion in a reconciliation bill.
As you take up the House Republicans’ reconciliation bill for consideration, we urge you to remove the AI moratorium provision. Instead, let us work together in a bicameral, bipartisan fashion to create smart, tailored, and consensus-driven legislative solutions that empower Americans’ use of AI and automated decision systems. We can learn from what the states—like California, New York, Tennessee, Utah, and many others—are doing to leverage the benefits of AI technologies while protecting consumers from their harms.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07) and Congressman Jim Costa (CA-21) led a group of 23 lawmakers in a letter to U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC) Secretary Howard Lutnick and Acting National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Administrator Laura Grimm, demanding that the Trump Administration restore 24/7 operations at the National Weather Service’s (NWS) Sacramento and Hanford Forecast Offices.
It was recently reportedthat the NWS Sacramento and Hanford Weather Forecast Offices are unable to maintain 24/7 operations due to severe staffing shortages, following layoffs, resignations, and a hiring freeze by the Trump Administration.
“These service reductions represent the beginning of a public safety crisis with potentially catastrophic consequences if the NWS is unable to retain the staff necessary to maintain around-the-clock weather monitoring in California,” wrote the lawmakers. “Across the state’s airports, highways, farms, and reservoirs, accurate, reliable, and timely weather forecasting is critical for every Californian.”
From hurricanes and tornadoes to atmospheric rivers, NWS provides the forecasting necessary to keep Americans safe and prepared for natural disasters. In California, NWS experts are critical for wildfire prediction and water management. NWS also delivers critical services for our farmers, our military, and our critical infrastructure. However, since the Trump Administration took office, over 500 NWS employees have been laid off or pushed into early retirement. Those cuts mean that nearly half of NWS offices have staffing vacancy rates of 20 percent or higher.
“The National Weather Service is a public safety lifeline and an essential public good. This is not waste or fraud. Americans depend on accurate and timely weather forecasts and alerts not just to plan their day, but to prepare for, and survive, deadly natural disasters,” the lawmakers concluded. “We demand that you immediately reinstate all terminated workers at these offices, lift the federal hiring freeze for NWS, and ensure that the Sacramento and Hanford weather forecast offices are adequately staffed to maintain 24/7 operations.”
Full text of the letter can be found below orHERE.
Dear Secretary Lutnick and Acting Administrator Grimm,
Due to terminations, hiring freezes, and vacancies, the National Weather Service (NWS) recently announced that it would cease 24-hour 7-day-a-week operations at the Sacramento and Hanford Weather Forecast Offices. These service reductions represent the beginning of a public safety crisis with potentially catastrophic consequences if the NWS is unable to retain the staff necessary to maintain around-the-clock weather monitoring in California. Across the state’s airports, highways, farms, and reservoirs, accurate, reliable, and timely weather forecasting is critical for every Californian. We urge immediate action to halt any service interruptions at the Sacramento and Hanford Weather Forecast Offices by reinstating terminated workers and lifting the federal hiring freeze for NWS.
Across NWS, reports have recently stated that as many as 500 employees have been terminated or taken an early retirement, representing a 12% reduction in staffing since President Trump took office. A recent internal assessment by NWS employees found that nearly half of NWS Weather Forecast Offices had vacancy rates of 20% or higher, a level that represents “critical understaffing.” The Sacramento office currently has seven vacancies for meteorologists, out of 16 positions, while the Hanford office has eight vacancies out of 13 positions—leaving both offices operating at half strength as we approach the peak of wildfire season. Slashing staffing in half at the offices responsible for predicting wildfires, atmospheric rivers, and natural disasters is unacceptable, puts thousands of lives at risk, and does nothing to increase government efficiency.
Recent years have demonstrated that wildfire season in California is now year-round. In 2024, California saw 8,018 wildfires, burning a total of 1,049,963 acres.4 Since 2013, an average of 1,029,049 acres have burned annually.5 NWS fire weather forecasting plays a critical role in predicting wildfire and protecting the lives of millions of Californians who live in fire prone areas. Incident meteorologists at NWS are often at the frontline to provide information to wildfire managers and first responders to safely contain wildfires.
The Office of Water Prediction and the National Water Prediction Service also play a critical role in hydrological predictions, in concert with NOAA’s Office of Marine and Aviation Operations. Water managers in California rely on the forecasting expertise of these federal agencies to make reservoir operating decisions. Without the NWS’s expert hydrological forecasters, water managers in California are left blindly guessing and forced to make life-or-death decisions amid the state’s swings between crippling drought and catastrophic flooding.
The National Weather Service is a public safety lifeline and an essential public good. This is not waste or fraud. Americans depend on accurate and timely weather forecasts and alerts not just to plan their day, but to prepare for, and survive, deadly natural disasters. If the NWS weather forecast offices in Sacramento and Hanford, together covering the entire Central Valley, cannot monitor overnight conditions, that puts our constituents in danger. This is a reckless and unnecessary risk that offers no benefit to the American public. We demand that you immediately reinstate all terminated workers at these offices, lift the federal hiring freeze for NWS, and ensure that the Sacramento and Hanford weather forecast offices are adequately staffed to maintain 24/7 operations. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)
WASHINGTON D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07), Ranking Member of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, released the following statement after the Department of Commerce released new guidance regarding the Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) program.
“The result of today’s announcement is simple: the Trump administration is delaying once-in-a-generation investments, blocking states from closing the digital divide and getting Americans online,” said Congresswoman Matsui. “Congress was thoughtful and bipartisan when hammering out the details for BEAD, because we realize the stakes for getting connectivity right are sky high. We empowered our states and local communities to use their on-the-ground knowledge to ensure BEAD dollars go where they’re most needed. We have worked hard to ensure access, affordability, and adoption go hand in hand. This is a matter of necessity for our constituents. Reliable, high speed internet access dictates who succeeds and who is left behind in the modern economy.”
“These new changes undo the states’ hard work, punt the broadband deployment timeline further down the line, and ultimately, drive up costs for consumers,” Matsui continued. “This delay is unacceptable. Americans, especially those in rural and underserved areas, are counting on this funding. The Trump Administration is clearly willing to leave everyday Americans behind – but I will continue to fight to ensure we deliver on our promises to close the digital divide.”
Background:
The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program provides $42.45 billion to expand high-speed internet access by funding planning, infrastructure deployment and adoption programs in all 50 states. In California, the BEAD program is being implemented by the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). California was allocated over $1.8 billion to deploy or upgrade high-speed internet networks and close the digital divide. California is currently selecting the service providers that would deploy last mile broadband infrastructure to unserved and underserved communities.
Today, the Department of Commerce released new guidelines that would substantially delay broadband projects and increase costs to states by forcing all states to conduct at least another round of applications, rescinding all their preliminary and provisional awards. The new guidelines also would impose burdensome scoring requirements that would hamstring states’ flexibility to choose the right mix of technologies to provide the most reliable, scalable, and future-proof internet service available to a location. Additionally, the Trump administration’s changes would weaken or eliminate protections for affordability, good-paying jobs, climate-resilient networks, and a free and open internet. These changes will drive up costs for consumers while driving down the quality of service.
For a more detailed breakdown of the entire BEAD process in California, click HERE.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D-CA)
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congresswoman Doris Matsui (CA-07) Congressman Darren Soto (FL-09), Congresswoman Kathy Castor (FL-14), and Congressman Paul Tonko (NY-20) led a group of 33 lawmakers in a letter to Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Executive Director Gloria Shepherd, demanding that they immediately release National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) funding, following the Government Accountability Office’s finding that the funding freeze is illegal.
The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Program provides funding to states to build a nationwide network of publicly accessible electric vehicle chargers along major highways across the country. Congress authorized $5 billion for the NEVI program through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The program has already had a transformative effect, creating jobs and catalyzing private investment throughout America. However, on February 6, the Trump Administration notified states that they were suspending the program and freezing states’ funding. This has left hundreds of projects and thousands of workers across the country in limbo.
On May 22, the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) foundthat these actions by the Trump Administration violated the Impoundment Control Act by illegally withholding funds that had been authorized by Congress. Despite this clear and unambiguous finding by Congress’s nonpartisan watchdog, the White House’s Office of Management and Budget instructed DOT on Wednesday to disregard the GAO ruling.
In response,the lawmakers wrote, “Congress did not give the Executive Branch the authority to withhold or rescind NEVI funding that has been made available to the states, and Congress clearly did not intend for the Administration to retroactively disapprove or suspend approval of state plans.”
“The Trump Administration’s continued attacks on the U.S. automobile industry are not only unamerican but also illegal,” the lawmakers concluded. “As such, we request that FHWA immediately rescind the memo issued on February 6th and enable states to begin spending NEVI funds without delay.”
Full text of the letter can be found below or HERE.
Dear Secretary Duffy and Director Shepherd,
We write to express our continued alarm and opposition to the Trump Administration’s illegal impoundment of formula funds under the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Formula Program (NEVI). The nonpartisan Government Accountability Office (GAO) has confirmed in a recent legal opinion that the Trump Administration’s actions withholding NEVI funding from expenditure violate the Impoundment Control Act, reaffirming what 52 Members of Congress have previously stated: this funding pause is not only harmful but illegal. Contrary to views expressed by the Office of Management and Budget, the Administration’s actions clearly do not align with Congressional intent. The Trump Administration must immediately rescind the February 06, 2025, memorandum issued by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which suspended state electric vehicle infrastructure deployment plans and rescinded related guidance. States must be allowed to spend the funds to which they are legally entitled.
Congress authorized $5 billion for FY22 through FY26 in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law for states to deploy EV charging infrastructure. Every state, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico submitted plans in accordance with the statute, and many have awarded contracts and deployed active charging stations. According to the GAO opinion, the $3,270,000,000 made available to states from FY22-FY25 constitutes an obligation and states are entitled to proceed with their programs. Congress did not give the Executive Branch the authority to withhold or rescind NEVI funding that has been made available to the states, and Congress clearly did not intend for the Administration to retroactively disapprove or suspend approval of state plans. The Trump Administration’s actions are therefore plainly counter to Congressional intent and illegal under the Impoundment Control Act.
NEVI is a critical investment in American infrastructure and innovation and is key to the long-term competitiveness of the American automobile industry. It is designed to increase accessibility and address range anxiety for Americans who choose to drive EVs. The program has already catalyzed significant private investment, and over 13,000 potential jobs could be at risk if the Administration does not release the NEVI funding. Continued delay could lead to stranded assets and wasted expenditures. Importantly, a 2024 study by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory projected that the U.S. would need 182,000 publicly accessible direct current fast chargers (DCFC) to accommodate the growing EV market, nearly triple the current capacity of around 55,000 charging ports.
The Trump Administration’s continued attacks on the U.S. automobile industry are not only unamerican but also illegal. As such, we request that FHWA immediately rescind the memo issued on February 6th and enable states to begin spending NEVI funds without delay. Inaction on this request may very well be unconstitutional.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
KABUL, June 8 (Xinhua) — A massive fire broke out at a second-hand clothing market in the Afghan capital Kabul on Sunday morning, local TV channel Ariana News reported.
As the TV channel noted, citing one of the market’s traders, the fire broke out at around 9:00 a.m. local time in the area of the 5th police district in the western part of the capital, and the fire engulfed around 200 stores.
Law enforcement officials reported that despite strong winds, firefighters managed to contain the fire.
Thick black smoke was visible from several kilometers away, causing concern among residents of Kabul. The cause of the fire has not yet been determined.
The blaze is the second major fire in Afghanistan in three weeks. On May 16, a fire at a market in the northern Kunduz province damaged several shops. –0–
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Emanuel Cleaver II (5th District Missouri)
(Washington, D.C.) – This week, U.S. Representative Emanuel Cleaver, II (D-MO) joined Congressmen Sanford D. Bishop, Jr. (D-GA), Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and nearly 200 other congressional lawmakers in urging the Department of Labor to continue the Job Corps program. Ina letterto Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Cleaver and the bipartisan cohort of lawmakers highlighted the benefits of the program and reiterated its importance to young workers and small businesses across the nation.
“Nearly 20,000 young people utilize Job Corps to learn skills for in-demand vocational and technical job training,” the lawmakers wrote. “Job Corps is one of the few national programs that specifically targets the 16-24-year-old population that is neither working, nor in school, and provides them with a direct pathway into employment openings in industries such as manufacturing and shipbuilding. The program also connects these young Americans with apprenticeships, higher education opportunities, or the military.”
“As companies continue to onshore and invest in the men and women of our country, a steady stream of skilled laborers will be required to meet the growing workforce demand,” the lawmakers continued. “The Job Corps program is uniquely positioned to fill that role and provide these hardworking young Americans with the vocational and technical job training that will set them and our country up for success.”
“There is no one more capable than the American worker when given a chance at success. We urge you to support our request so that local Job Corps Centers can continue connecting young Americans with careers and opportunities available to them. We are confident that, in collaboration with the Administration and Job Corps Centers in our communities, we can strengthen this program, continuing to develop a highly skilled and competitive labor force,” the lawmakers concluded.
On May 29, the U.S. Department of Laborissued a noticethat it will begin a phased pause in operations at contractor-operated Job Corps centers across the country. Job Corps is a national program with over 120 centers nationwide. Job Corps offers at-risk youth varied academic opportunities and career pathways in business and industry.
Congressman Cleaver has been a longtime supporter of Job Corps and the benefits it provides to young workers across Missouri,requestingCongress to provide adequate funding for the program and Job Corp Centers throughout the Show Me State.
The official letter from lawmakers is availablehere.
Emanuel Cleaver, II is the U.S. Representative for Missouri’s Fifth Congressional District, which includes Kansas City, Independence, Lee’s Summit, Raytown, Grandview, Sugar Creek, Greenwood, Blue Springs, North Kansas City, Gladstone, and Claycomo. He is a member of the exclusive House Financial Services Committee and Ranking Member of the House Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Doug LaMalfa 1st District of California
Washington, D.C.—This week, Congressman Doug LaMalfa (R-Richvale) reintroduced theProtecting Children from Experimentation Act, legislation that prohibits doctors from performing gender reassignment procedures on minors. The bill is designed to protect children from irreversible medical interventions that carry serious, lifelong consequences.
“Vulnerable kids are being deceived into surgeries or life-altering drugs they shouldn’t even have to contemplate,” said Rep. LaMalfa. “Minors shouldn’t be making permanent decisions to alter their bodies, and adults, especially in the medical field, have no business coercing them into it. Let kids be kids. This isn’t compassionate care, it’s irreversible harm. When adults lead children down this path, that’s not medicine. It’s abuse, and they should be held accountable.”
Under the bill, doctors who knowingly perform gender reassignment procedures on minors would face civil and criminal penalties, including fines and potential imprisonment. Additionally, the person who underwent the procedure as a minor would have the right to bring civil action against the provider. The legislation includes clear exceptions for children born with medically verifiable sex development disorders.
The Protecting Children from Experimentation Act was previously introduced in both the 117th and 118th Congress and continues to build on growing concerns among parents, medical professionals, and lawmakers about the long-term harms of subjecting minors to unproven and irreversible procedures.
Congressman Doug LaMalfa is Chairman of the Congressional Western Caucus and a lifelong farmer representing California’s First Congressional District, including Butte, Colusa, Glenn, Lassen, Modoc, Shasta, Siskiyou, Sutter, Tehama and Yuba Counties.
Over the past eleven years, India has undergone a remarkable transformation in its business and investment climate, driven by Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s governance model that emphasizes Seva (service), Sushasan (good governance), and Garib Kalyan (welfare of the poor). As part of the vision for a Viksit Bharat (Developed India), a series of economic and administrative reforms have positioned India as one of the most attractive global destinations for business and entrepreneurship.
One of the most striking signs of progress is the meteoric rise of India’s startup ecosystem. From a few hundred startups in 2014, the country now boasts over 1.6 lakh recognized startups, which have collectively created more than 17.6 lakh direct jobs. Today, India is the world’s third-largest startup ecosystem.
This growth has been supported by bold structural reforms that have reshaped the Ease of Doing Business landscape. The government has repealed over 1,500 obsolete laws and scrapped thousands of unnecessary compliances that previously created bureaucratic hurdles and increased the cost of doing business. These moves have significantly reduced red tape and rent-seeking practices, replacing them with a red-carpet welcome for investors and entrepreneurs.
To enhance transparency and simplify government-citizen and business interactions, measures such as the National Single Window System have been introduced, enabling businesses to secure approvals through a single digital platform. Randomized labour inspections and faceless tax assessments have eliminated the era of ‘Inspector Raj’ and boosted compliance by reinforcing trust in businesses.
The government’s commitment to fair and efficient governance is also reflected in the success of platforms like the Government e-Marketplace (GeM), which now handles nearly 75% of public procurement transparently, and in record tax collections, indicating a broader and more willing tax base.
India’s improvements have been recognized globally. The country’s ranking in the World Bank’s Ease of Doing Business Index soared from 142 in 2014 to 63 in 2019. In the 2023 Logistics Performance Index (LPI), India climbed six places to reach the 38th position out of 139 countries—thanks to infrastructure development programs such as PM Gati Shakti and the National Logistics Policy.
Furthermore, landmark decisions such as the removal of retrospective taxation, the scrapping of the Angel Tax, and a significant reduction in corporate tax rates have reinforced investor confidence.
Prime Minister Modi’s economic philosophy sees entrepreneurs not merely as profit-makers but as key partners in national development. This shift in perception, supported by policy and institutional reforms, has expanded the pool of wealth creators, increased job opportunities, and generated higher incomes.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Mike Quigley (IL-05)
Today, U.S. Representative and Vice-Chair of the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force Mike Quigley(IL-05) reintroduced the Trafficking Reduction and Criminal Enforcement (TRACE) Actto help the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) reduce the trafficking of illegal firearms and prevent criminals from obtaining these weapons.
By repealing restrictions on gun trace data, the TRACE Actwill enable the ATF to track the movement of illegal firearms across state lines and to share that data with state and local law enforcement. The bill will also hold gun dealers accountable by requiring them to monitor their inventory and report lost or stolen inventory to the ATF. The TRACE Actwill help law enforcement crack down on the gun ‘black market,’ which often funnels firearms to states and cities with stricter gun laws in place, including Chicago.
Quigley first introduced the TRACE Act in 2011 and has continued to revive the bill in each Congress since.
“The Chicago Police Department alone recovers roughly 7,000 illegal guns every year, but current law requires gun buyer background check records to be destroyed after 24 hours. My bill will stop the madness and require these background checks to be maintained for at least 180 days,” said Quigley.“I’m proud to reintroduce the TRACE Act this Gun Violence Awareness Month. Together, we can stop guns from ending up in the wrong hands.”
In September 2022, Quigley led and passed the NICS Denial Notification Act as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022. The law now requires background check denials to be reported to state authorities to help enforce gun laws. Quigley also cosponsored the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Passed in June of 2022 with Quigley’s support, the law provided $250M for community violence intervention, $750M for crisis intervention, expanded background checks, closed the “boyfriend” loophole, and more.
The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, a key advocate for gun violence prevention, has endorsed the legislation.
“Huge quantities of firearms are recovered in the illegal market and at crime scenes every year, providing law enforcement the opportunity to trace these weapons and better understand where they are coming from. Yet, Congress has shielded the gun industry from public scrutiny and has deprived law enforcement of key data needed to truly understand and address the flow of crime guns. The TRACE Act will remove these barriers, allowing law enforcement to stymie the flow of firearms into our communities and hold lawbreaking gun industry actors accountable,” said Mark Collins, Director of Federal Policy at Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.“Brady applauds Rep. Quigley for reintroducing the TRACE Actand is proud to support this legislation.”
The TRACE Actwould:
Require background check records to be maintained for a minimum of 180 days.The Tiahrt Amendments currently require 24-hour record destruction, making it nearly impossible to catch law-breaking gun dealers who falsify their records or to track straw purchasers who buy guns on behalf of criminals.
Require gun dealers to perform inventory checks to report lost and stolen guns, a measure currently prohibited under the Tiahrt Amendments.If law-abiding dealers reported inventories, the ATF would be much more effective at identifying lost and stolen weapons and proactively combating corrupt gun dealers.
Repeal restrictions on gun trace data disclosures.Currently, members of the public, including researchers and litigants, cannot get trace data from the ATF under Tiahrt restrictions. Trace data is also inadmissible as evidence in civil proceedings under the existing policy. The TRACE Act would repeal these restrictions.
Require that new firearms have a second, hidden serial number located inside the frame or receiver that is only visible under infrared light when the firearm is fully disassembled.This would make it harder for criminals to remove serial numbers from firearms in an attempt to evade law enforcement.
HomeSecretary Rubio’s Call with Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif
Secretary Rubio’s Call with Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif
Readout
May 8, 2025
The below is attributable to Spokesperson Tammy Bruce:
Secretary Marco Rubio spoke today with Pakistani Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif. The Secretary emphasized the need for immediate de-escalation. He expressed U.S. support for direct dialogue between India and Pakistan and encouraged continued efforts to improve communications.
The Secretary expressed sorrow for the reported loss of civilian lives in the current conflict. He reiterated his calls for Pakistan to take concrete steps to end any support for terrorist groups.
HomeAnnouncing a U.S.-Brokered Ceasefire between India and Pakistan
Announcing a U.S.-Brokered Ceasefire between India and Pakistan
Press Statement
May 10, 2025
Over the past 48 hours, Vice President Vance and I have engaged with senior Indian and Pakistani officials, including Prime Ministers Narendra Modi and Shehbaz Sharif, External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir, and National Security Advisors Ajit Doval and Asim Malik.
I am pleased to announce the Governments of India and Pakistan have agreed to an immediate ceasefire and to start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.
We commend Prime Ministers Modi and Sharif on their wisdom, prudence, and statesmanship in choosing the path of peace.
HomeDeputy Secretary Landau’s Meeting with Indian Foreign Secretary Misri
Deputy Secretary Landau’s Meeting with Indian Foreign Secretary Misri
Readout
May 28, 2025
The below is attributable to Spokesperson Tammy Bruce:
Deputy Secretary Christopher Landau met with Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri today in Washington. The Deputy Secretary reaffirmed the close partnership between the U.S. and India, a key component of U.S. foreign policy for the 21st century. He underscored the importance of fair and reciprocal market access to fostering economic growth and prosperity in both countries. The Deputy Secretary emphasized the importance of enhanced cooperation on migration and counternarcotics. The Deputy Secretary and the Foreign Secretary also reaffirmed their shared desire to maintain regional stability and peace.
HomeDeputy Secretary Landau’s Meeting with an Indian Parliamentary Delegation
Deputy Secretary Landau’s Meeting with an Indian Parliamentary Delegation
Readout
June 6, 2025
The below is attributable to Spokesperson Tammy Bruce:
Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau met today with an Indian parliamentary delegation in Washington. The Deputy Secretary reaffirmed the United States’ strong support of India in the fight against terrorism and the strategic partnership between the two countries. The Deputy and delegation discussed the importance of advancing key areas of the bilateral relationship, including expanding trade and commercial ties to foster economic growth and prosperity in both countries.
The below is attributable to Spokesperson Tammy Bruce:
Secretary Marco Rubio spoke today with Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar. The Secretary emphasized the need for immediate de-escalation. He expressed U.S. support for direct dialogue between India and Pakistan and encouraged continued efforts to improve communications.
The Secretary reiterated his condolences for the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam and reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to work with India in the fight against terrorism.
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
HANGZHOU, June 8 (Xinhua) — On a beach in Taizhou, east China’s Zhejiang Province, 68-year-old Wang Zhongfu bends down to pick up discarded plastic bottles and torn fishing nets.
Wang Zhongfu is one of thousands of participants in the Blue Circle marine plastic recycling program, which launched in 2020 and uses blockchain and the Internet of Things to track the full life cycle of marine plastic waste, from collection to remanufacturing and resale.
The Blue Circle program, developed by the Zhejiang Provincial Bureau of Ecology and Environment and Zhejiang Lanjing Technology Co., Ltd., is the largest of its kind in the country.
In 2023, the program won the United Nations /UN/ Champions of the Earth 2023 Award for Entrepreneurial Vision for its efforts to combat marine plastic pollution. According to the UN Environment Programme, the award is the UN’s highest environmental honour.
“We are reducing the amount of plastic waste in the ocean and helping people earn extra income from collecting trash,” said Kong Chen, who runs the Blue Circle plastic waste collection station, known as Little Blue Home, located on Dachen Island, about 29 nautical miles off the coast of Taizhou. He noted that the station has removed more than 20 tons of marine waste in 2024.
Blue Circle pays 0.20 yuan (almost 3 US cents) for each plastic bottle collected, a price several times higher than the market average, in an effort to supplement the incomes of many local residents.
“This initiative motivates people to participate in environmental protection and increase their income. People who fish can consciously collect plastic waste while working in the sea,” said Kong Chen, noting that participants like Wang Zhongfu can earn about 1,000 yuan a month this way.
People can trace the path of recycled plastic by scanning QR codes on products such as car parts, suitcases and phone cases made from certified ocean-bound plastic. Plastic waste is cleaned and processed into pellets for industrial use at Veolia Huafei Polymer Technology /Zhejiang/ Co., Ltd.’s plant in Anji County, Huzhou City, Zhejiang Province.
“Since 2022, we have recycled tens of millions of plastic bottles collected through the Blue Circle program,” said Fu Xianwei, the company’s chief operating officer. He added that certified marine plastic pellets can sell for more than 1.3 times the price of regular recycled plastic, and products made from these pellets have higher added value.
“Once fishermen make a profit and businesses are motivated, marine plastic waste management enters a virtuous cycle,” said Ye Zongsen, an official with the Jiaojiang District branch of Taizhou City’s Ecology and Environment Bureau.
The initiative has expanded to all coastal areas of Zhejiang, and to date, about 1,360 residents, 10,000 vessels and seven recycling companies have joined in. In Zhejiang alone, the program has collected 15,000 tons of marine waste, including more than 2,900 tons of plastic waste. It has also expanded to seven other provinces, including China’s southernmost island province of Hainan.
Dachen Island in Jiaojiang District is a model of green development. Dozens of wind turbines on the island’s mountain ridge generate an average of 60 million kWh of electricity per year, five times the island’s consumption, reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 45,000 tons.
Excess electricity is sent to the mainland via undersea power cables, according to Jiang Weijian, director of the Dachen power station of State Grid Zhejiang Power Co.
Green energy has led to many changes, including all-electric buses, electric oxygen and ice production in fisheries, and the gradual introduction of electric stoves in guest houses on the island.
In addition, thanks to Dachen’s low-carbon solid waste treatment plant and sewage treatment plant, the proportion of high-quality water in coastal areas has reached 98%.
As the island’s environment improves, tourism is booming. Last year, Dachen welcomed 200,000 tourists and earned 170 million yuan in revenue.
“As the situation improves, our hotel business is booming,” said Dachen resident Kong Qinglei, who opened his business on the island in 2020. In 2024, his revenue exceeded 1 million yuan.
The island also benefits from its marine resources. The island, famous for its pink salmon plantations, has 14 pink salmon farms, and its output reached 10,005 tons last year, worth more than 1.1 billion yuan. The fishing industry has created jobs for nearly 300 people.
Local authorities are currently encouraging the development of the sea travel and souvenir industry. Some guest house owners are even combining their business with yellow croaker farming.
The island is also a pioneer in trading “blue carbon” and forest carbon. “The funds were channeled into a common prosperity fund to protect the marine environment, as well as for the island’s marine farmers and residents,” said Yang Haifei, a spokesman for the island’s administration. -0-
“What we are doing in Gaza now is a war of devastation: indiscriminate, limitless, cruel and criminal killing of civilians. It’s the result of government policy — knowingly, evilly, maliciously, irresponsibly dictated.”
This statement was made not by a foreign or liberal critic of Israel but by the former Prime Minister and former senior member of Benjamin Netanyahu’s own Likud party, Ehud Olmet.
Nightly, we witness live-streamed evidence of the truth of his statement — lethargic and gaunt children dying of malnutrition, a bereaved doctor and mother of 10 children, nine of them killed by an Israeli strike (and her husband, another doctor, died later), 15 emergency ambulance workers gunned down by the IDF as they tried to help others injured by bombs, despite their identity being clear.
Statistics reflect the scale of the horror imposed on Palestinians who are overwhelmingly civilians — 54,000 killed, 121,000 maimed and injured. Over 17,000 of these are children.
This can no longer be excused as regrettable collateral damage from targeted attacks on Hamas.
Israel simply doesn’t care about the impact of its military attacks on civilians and how many innocent people and children it is killing.
Its willingness to block all humanitarian aid- food, water, medical supplies, from Gaza demonstrates further its willingness to make mass punishment and starvation a means to achieve its ends. Both are war crimes.
Influenced by the right wing extremists in the Coalition cabinet, like Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s goal is no longer self defence or justifiable retaliation against Hamas terrorists.
Israel attacks Palestinians at US-backed aid hubs in Gaza, killing 36. Image: AJ screenshot APR
Making life unbearable The Israeli government policy is focused on making life unbearable for Palestinians and seeking to remove them from their homeland. In this, they are openly encouraged by President Trump who has publicly and repeatedly endorsed deporting the Palestinian population so that the Gaza could be made into a “Middle East Riviera”.
This is not the once progressive pioneer Israel, led by people who had faced the Nazi Holocaust and were fighting for the right to a place where they could determine their own future and be safe.
Sadly, a country of people who were themselves long victims of oppression is now guilty of oppressing and committing genocide against others.
Foreign Minister Winston Peters called Israel’s actions “ intolerable”. He said that we had “had enough and were running out of patience and hearing excuses”.
While speaking out might make us feel better, words are not enough. Israel’s attacks on the civilian population in Gaza are being increased, aid distribution which has restarted is grossly insufficient to stop hunger and human suffering and Palestinians are being herded into confined areas described as humanitarian zones but which are still subject to bombardment.
People living in tents in schools and hospitals are being slaughtered.
World must force Israel to stop Like Putin, Israel will not end its killing and oppression unless the world forces it to. The US has the power but will not do this.
The sanctions Trump has imposed are not on Israel’s leaders but on judges in the International Criminal Court (ICC) who dared to find Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu guilty of war crimes.
New Zealand’s foreign policy has traditionally involved working with like-minded countries, often small nations like us. Two of these, Ireland and Sweden, are seeking to impose sanctions on Israel.
Both are members of the European Union which makes up a third of Israel’s global trade. If the EU decides to act, sanctions imposed by it would have a big impact on Israel.
These sanctions should be both on trade and against individuals.
New Zealand has imposed sanctions on a small number of extremist Jewish settlers on the West Bank where there is evidence of them using violence against Palestinian villagers.
These sanctions should be extended to Israel’s political leadership and New Zealand could take a lead in doing this. We should not be influenced by concern that by taking a stand we might offend US president Donald Trump.
Show our preparedness to uphold values In the way that we have been proud of in the past, we should as a small but fiercely independent country show our preparedness to uphold our own values and act against gross abuse of human rights and flagrant disregard for international law.
We should be working with others through the United Nations General Assembly to maximise political pressure on Israel to stop the ongoing killing of innocent civilians.
Moral outrage at what Israel is doing has to be backed by taking action with others to force the Israeli government to end the killing, destruction, mass punishment and deliberate starvation of Palestinians including their children.
An American doctor working at a Gaza hospital reported that in the last five weeks he had worked on dozens of badly injured children but not a single combatant.
He noted that as well as being maimed and disfigured by bombing, many of the children were also suffering from malnutrition. Children were dying from wounds that they could recover from but there were not the supplies needed to treat them.
Protest is not enough. We need to act.
Phil Goff is Aotearoa New Zealand’s former Minister of Foreign Affairs. This article was first published by the Stuff website and is republished with the permission of the author.
BALTIMORE, June 08, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — In a newly surfaced public briefing, bestselling author and tech analyst James Altucher reveals what he calls a “massive transfer of control” inside the federal government — one that began on Day One of President Trump’s return to the White House.
According to Altucher, Trump isn’t just slashing bureaucracy — he’s outsourcing innovation to Elon Musk. The result is Project Colossus: a 200,000-chip AI supercomputer hidden inside a Memphis warehouse and operated entirely outside the traditional system.
A Silent Power Shift — Signed by Trump
“In one of his FIRST acts as President… Donald Trump overturned Executive Order #14110.”
That reversal, Altucher says, stripped away Biden’s AI restrictions — immediately giving private operators like Musk the runway to build freely.
Trump then revealed Stargate, a $500 billion AI infrastructure initiative that, according to Altucher, is “not about building government… it’s about replacing it.”
Musk’s AI Is Already Online
“Right here, inside this warehouse in Memphis, Tennessee… lies a massive supercomputer Musk calls ‘Project Colossus.’”
“Making it the most advanced AI facility known to man.”
Altucher claims that the system is already operational — and is expected to expand dramatically before July 1, when a major upgrade could “10X its power overnight.”
Not Reform. Replacement.
According to Altucher, Musk and Trump aren’t just reforming the system — they’re replacing it with autonomous intelligence designed to streamline decisions, reduce costs, and eliminate delay.
“AI 2.0… gives that knowledge to intelligent machines that I believe will solve our problems for us.”
Altucher warns that what began as an infrastructure story is fast becoming one of control — and that the real question now is: who governs the machines?
About James Altucher
James Altucher is a computer scientist, entrepreneur, and bestselling author with four decades of experience in artificial intelligence. He studied at Cornell and Carnegie Mellon, helped develop IBM’s Deep Blue, and has built AI-powered systems for use in finance and enterprise. His latest briefings focus on how AI is being deployed beyond the public’s view — and who’s behind it.
Over the past eleven years, the Narendra Modi-led government has redefined India’s foreign policy, transitioning from a reactive to a proactive and assertive global stance. Guided by the principles of “Sabka Saath, Sabka Vikas, Sabka Vishwas, and Sabka Prayas,” India’s diplomacy has become more inclusive, development-focused, and aligned with national interests.
Neighborhood First and Regional Engagement
Central to India’s foreign policy is the ‘Neighborhood First’ approach, which emphasizes strengthening ties with neighboring countries. This policy has been complemented by the ‘Act East,’ ‘Think West,’ and ‘Connect Central Asia’ strategies, aiming to enhance India’s engagement with its extended neighborhood. The government’s vision of ‘Security and Growth for All in the Region’ (SAGAR) underscores the commitment to regional stability and cooperation.
Indigenous Defense and Strategic Partnerships
India’s defense policy has focused on achieving self-reliance and enhancing indigenous manufacturing capabilities. The commissioning of the indigenous aircraft carrier, INS Vikrant, showcases the country’s growing prowess in defense technology. Through initiatives like the Innovation for Defence Excellence (iDEX), India has supported startups and innovators in developing successful prototypes, fostering innovation and technological advancement in the defense sector.
Humanitarian Leadership and Disaster Response
India continues to play a pivotal role as the ‘First Responder’ during times of humanitarian crises. The establishment of the Rapid Response Cell as a specialized division in the Ministry of External Affairs has made disaster protocols more resilient. India has undertaken several major relief and evacuation operations, such as Operation Dost (2023), Operation Ganga (2022), Operation Devi Shakti (2021), and Mission Sagar (2020), demonstrating its commitment to humanitarian assistance.
Global Initiatives and Multilateral Engagement
India’s foreign policy has been characterized by active participation in global initiatives and multilateral platforms. The launch of the International Solar Alliance (ISA), the Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI), and the Lifestyle for Environment (LiFE) movement reflects India’s commitment to addressing global challenges such as climate change and sustainable development. These initiatives have strengthened India’s multilateral relations and showcased its leadership in promoting a sustainable future.
G20 Presidency: A Global Milestone
India’s G20 presidency in 2023 marked a significant achievement in its diplomatic journey. The theme “Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam” (One Earth, One Family, One Future) resonated globally, emphasizing the interconnectedness of all nations. India successfully advocated for the inclusion of the African Union as a full member of the G20, highlighting its leadership role in representing the Global South.
Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s leadership, India’s foreign policy has evolved into a dynamic and transformative force on the global stage. By prioritizing regional cooperation, indigenous defense capabilities, humanitarian assistance, global initiatives, and multilateral engagement, India has established itself as a responsible and influential global power.
Police and the family of a 15-year-old boy are appealing to the public for their help to locate a missing teenager
The family of a 15-year-old boy who has been missing since March are appealing for help to find him.
Prince Watson, who lives in Ealing was last seen at around 16:00hrs on Saturday, 15 March in Friern Barnet.
Since then, officers understand he may have been seen by friends in Hanwell. He also has links to The Hyde, Colindale, Southall and Romford.
Prince is roughly 5’5” tall and slim build. When he was last seen he had a short back and sides haircut and was wearing a black jacket with grey tracksuit bottoms.
Prince’s Grandmother has said:
“We love and miss Prince dearly and are so worried about him. Please take a close look at the photo we are making public today, and don’t think twice about getting in touch if you have any information.”
PC Ben Norris, from the Met’s West Area Missing Persons unit, added:
“We are growing increasingly concerned about Prince’s wellbeing. Although we have been carrying out a number of enquiries in an effort to find him, we now need the public’s support in bringing him home.”
If you see Prince, please call 999 and quote the reference 2409/07JUNE.
If you believe you have previously seen him or have any other information, please call 101 providing the same reference.
Alternatively, information can be reported 100 per cent anonymously to the independent charity Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111. They never ask for personal details and they do not trace your device.
But workers now face a more detailed and intrusive type of monitoring that is less understood, and at times even entirely unknown, by employees: employee monitoring applications (EMAs).
It’s no longer just about being captured in the frame of a CCTV camera or having phone calls recorded. Workers now must be concerned about the collection of any and all activities that occur on their devices, and the use of this information to make decisions about their productivity, performance and risk to company security.
Behaviour-monitoring software
EMAs are a type of monitoring software that can be installed on worker devices to monitor their behaviours and activities. Common features include tracking time, keyboard strokes, email communications, websites visited, applications used and webcam video footage. Many of these apps also operate in an “invisible mode” that runs in the background, unknown to the employee.
Amid the move to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, employers faced the challenge of managing their employees while they worked from home. EMAs provided employers with a quick and easy solution.
My research focuses on surveillance and privacy. Working alongside surveillance scholar Adam Molnar of the University of Waterloo, we conducted a survey between January and February 2022 of 402 managers, supervisors and employers working in companies in Ontario (60 per cent), British Columbia (30 per cent) and Québec (10 per cent) to better understand the use of these apps during the pandemic.
Both remote working and EMA use were found to have increased after the start of the pandemic. Many, but not all, companies turned to EMAs to monitor their remote workers.
A comparison of remote work and use of EMA rates before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. (D.E. Thompson), CC BY
Privacy concerns
We asked participants about the specific EMA software their company uses. A variety of EMAs exist on the market and are advertised for uses from security to workforce analytics. The most frequently used apps in our sample were Kickidler (49.8 per cent), Spyera (49.5 per cent), Flexispy (49.3 per cent), and Teramind (48.4 per cent).
We then took a deeper dive into their advertised features and found that all four apps collected data using at least two highly invasive features, such as video surveillance or keystroke logging.
Table comparing features and uses for the top four employee monitoring applications. (D.E. Thompson), CC BY
Collecting data in these ways can raise serious concerns for employee privacy, especially when they work at home — a space that is typically viewed as private and often contains personal information that employers should not be privy to.
If we’re concerned about employee privacy, then we need to understand exactly what companies are using the data for.
We know that employee monitoring apps were adopted by many Canadian companies to manage remote workers, but what does that mean exactly? What is the data actually telling employers and how are they using it?
We asked employers, managers and supervisors how their company currently uses EMAs, and found the most common uses to be productivity (28.9 per cent), efficiency (20.1 per cent), remote workforce management (19.9 per cent) and company analytics (18.2 per cent).
Privacy versus productivity
Owners and managers appear to be aware of the harmful consequences of these applications: 87.1 per cent were at least somewhat concerned about the negative impacts of these apps on employee trust. More than two-thirds — 70.7 per cent — also reported that they would be more likely adopt an app if it did not use invasive features like keystroke logging and video surveillance.
Are the gains in productivity and efficiency worth the losses to employee privacy and trust? For some companies, the answer appears to be yes. While most owners and managers reported concerns about the invasiveness of EMAs, 51.7 per cent were still using the applications.
For other companies, the gains in productivity are not worth the risks to employee privacy. For example, 29.3 per cent of owners and managers stated that significant changes to app features would be necessary before they would consider using it in their company.
Protecting employees
As hybrid working arrangements remain a normal part of our working lives, employee monitoring apps appear to be here to stay.
A public opinion poll by the Center for Democracy and Technology in the United States found that American workers wanted to know why and how they were being monitored by their employers.
Workers also felt they should be able to review any and all data collected about them, and that employers should be prohibited from sharing worker data without their permission, monitoring workers while off the clock, tracking their locations and monitoring productivity in ways that are harmful to the mental or physical health of workers.
Worker protections vary by province and territory. Ontario’s Bill 88, passed in April 2022, established the first notification law for electronic monitoring in Canada. While a step in the right direction, notification alone is insufficient for the protection of worker privacy and well-being.
Restrictions must be placed on the types of data collected, how it is collected and what it can be used for.
Companies that continue to use EMAs must respect the privacy of workers by limiting the use of invasive features and providing workers with transparency and agency in their monitoring.
Business owners considering the use of EMAs should ask themselves if the software is necessary to reach their goals. Do they need to track the location and activity of workers or access their webcams to determine productivity? Or are there other less harmful ways to measure performance, such as the quality of outputs and whether tasks are completed on time?
Danielle E. Thompson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Rather than intervening, supporting targets or reporting the misconduct, bystanders may downplay it, withdraw support or even blame the target, which ultimately reinforces the mistreatment.(Shutterstock)
“You always mess things up. Why are you even on this project? Just quit already.” Demeaning, hostile or undermining behaviour like this is more common in the workplace and damaging than many people realize. One in three employees experience such behaviours, and almost half witness them.
Rather than intervening, supporting targets or reporting the misconduct, research shows bystanders may downplay it, withdraw support or even blame the target, which ultimately reinforces the mistreatment.
As our recent study shows, this is largely because when mistreatment seems inevitable or commonplace, bystanders are psychologically motivated to justify it rather than challenge it.
Why do bystanders rationalize mistreatment?
Humans are hardwired to see mistreatment as wrong. Most of us value fairness and want to punish wrongdoing. But if this is the case, why do bystanders so often fail to act when they witness mistreatment?
Our recent research explores this question drawing on system justification theory — the idea that people are motivated to see the systems they live and work in as fair, legitimate and stable.
When mistreatment seems inevitable — when people think “that’s just how things work around here” — bystanders face a psychological dilemma. They can either challenge the behaviour and risk conflict, exclusion or backlash, or they can rationalize it as normal or deserved.
Most people, often without realizing it, choose the latter. This mental shortcut allows them to preserve the comforting belief that the system is fair and people get what they deserve.
One in three employees experience demeaning, hostile or undermining behaviour in the workplace, and almost half witness them. (Shutterstock)
Witnessing workplace mistreatment
We interviewed 554 employees who had witnessed workplace mistreatment within the past two weeks at the time the survey was conducted. They shared their thoughts on how inevitable they believed the mistreatment incident was, and how tolerant they felt their organization was toward such behaviour.
In a follow-up survey, we asked these employees whether they felt the incident they witnessed was justifiable and the target as deserving. A week later, in a third survey, we asked these bystanders to report how they behaved toward the target, and whether they tried to address or minimize the incident.
We found that when bystanders perceived mistreatment as inevitable, they were more likely to see the incident as justified and targets as deserving of that treatment. These bystanders were more likely to socially distance themselves from the target, engage in negative gossip about them and were less willing to offer help.
Bystander inaction wasn’t due to cowardice or callousness, but was often a defence mechanism. Rationalizing mistreatment allowed bystanders to preserve the belief that their workplace was just. But this coping strategy can deepen harm for those who experience mistreatment, who may be further marginalized, isolated or discredited.
How mistreatment is normalized
Workplace climates play a key role in the normalization of mistreatment. Our findings indicate when employees believed their workplace tolerated mistreatment, they were more likely to rationalize it and less likely to support the person being mistreated.
In these contexts, mistreatment isn’t just ignored, but is quietly accepted. Tacit acceptance sends a powerful message: this is normal, this is deserved, this is not worth challenging.
What does a toxic, permissive workplace look like? Warning signs include staff who feel anxious about coming to work and leaders who publicly criticize employees or tell them to “toughen up” or “not take it personally.”
If negative gossip is tolerated, or reports of mistreatment are ignored or delayed, these are also strong indicators that mistreatment has been normalized.
Organizations may fail to acknowledge these patterns for a variety of reasons, including resistance, denial or a lack of readiness. But surfacing these issues is a strength, not a weakness. It allows organizations to address root causes, retain valuable employees, and foster a more respectful environment.
When mistreatment is ignored in the workplace, it sends a message to employees that it is normal, deserved and not worth challenging. (Unsplash/Borja Verbena)
4 ways to create positive change
Even in workplaces where mistreatment has become normalized, positive change is possible. Research shows that effectively managing everyday incidents can create bottom-up effects that support broader positive change within the workplace, ultimately improving workplace climate.
Managers have a particularly pivotal role to play. When they respond quickly, support targets openly and hold perpetrators accountable, they challenge the perception that mistreatment is inevitable. They also send a broader message about what behaviours are and aren’t acceptable in the workplace.
Here are four evidence-based strategies that can help disrupt the bystander dynamic and improve workplace culture:
1. Challenge the narrative of inevitability
Organizations should clearly signal that mistreatment will not be tolerated in their workplace. This includes explicitly communicating behavioural expectations, investigating reports quickly and transparently, and ensuring senior leaders model respectful behaviour. These small but visible actions disrupt the sense that mistreatment is “just how things work.”
2. Reduce ambiguity
When organizations don’t define behavioural norms clearly, bystanders are more likely to rationalize mistreatment. Organizations should define what mistreatment includes, such as exclusion and sarcastic comments, and distinguish it from tough feedback or constructive conflict. Training can help employees recognize subtle forms of harm and reflect on how their reactions would appear to someone they respect.
3. Enforce consequences consistently
When policies exist but aren’t enforced, bystanders learn that mistreatment carries no cost. Organizations need to follow through on mistreatment policies, protect those who report it and make it clear that retaliation is unacceptable. Visibility matters: people need to see that action is taken.
When targets are supported by respected leaders, bystanders are more likely to follow suit. (Shutterstock)
Why this matters
Much of the existing research on workplace mistreatment has focused on the importance of bystander and leader intervention. Our research adds a deeper layer by illustrating that bystanders may not intervene because they are subconsciously defending their belief in a fair and legitimate system.
This defence mechanism is especially dangerous when mistreatment is common, creating a cycle in which the most vulnerable employees are harmed twice: first by the perpetrator, and then by those who fail to stand by them.
Breaking this cycle requires more than training videos or one-off statements. It requires reshaping the climate that makes mistreatment seem normal, inevitable or trivial.
The encouraging news is that even small, consistent actions can begin to shift these dynamics. Research has shown that incivility training that teaches people how to engage in civil ways, for example, has lasting effects on employee well-being and relationships. When these harmful dynamics are shifted, it improves the workplace for everyone.
Zhanna Lyubykh receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Laurie J. Barclay receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the University of Guelph’s Research Leader Award.
Nick Turner receives research funding from Cenovus Energy Inc., Haskayne School of Business’s Future Fund, Mitacs, and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC).
Sandy Hershcovis receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
We live in an age of increasing wildfire disasters because more of us are living in places where wildfires and human development collide. Right now, fast-moving wildfires are forcing mass evacuations and destroying homes across Manitoba, Saskatchewan and British Columbia, where entire communities are under threat.
Despite the growing impacts of extreme weather events, including prolonged droughts and increasing temperatures, we continue building and even rebuilding homes in likely paths of destructive wildfires.
As cities grow, the demand for new home developments in previously forested areas means that we’re rapidly losing buffers between developed and natural land. Consequently, we’re also losing much of our protection from wildfire.
I’m a structural engineer, and I was living in British Columbia during the 2023 Kelowna fires. I remember the smoke and anxiety about what was coming next. Seeing news coverage of January’s fires in Los Angeles brought back those memories. Hearing people ask how this could have happened led me to ask in response: How could it not have happened?
My research speciality is in protecting structures from fires, earthquakes and explosions. From my work, I know that improved materials and engineering can protect homes much better than we do today.
As we enter another wildfire season in Canada, I worry there will soon be new reminders of what we still haven’t done and urgently need to do.
CP24 News covers wildfires burning from British Columbia to Ontario.
Recent research shows that about 14.3 per cent of all Canadian buildings sit directly in the wildland-urban-interface — the area where development neighbours or intersects with wildland vegetation. However, if we expand this interface buffer by a kilometre to account for windborne travelling embers, over 79 per cent of all Canadian structures fall under some level of wildfire ignition risk.
While researchers are working on developing more sophisticated technologies for early fire detection and monitoring, we also need to make homes safer in at-risk areas. Programs like FireSmart Canada educate communities about managing fire risk, but broader public engagement and co-ordinated action are still lacking.
This mismatch in design priorities introduces vulnerability. Just as we wouldn’t build in seismically active regions like Vancouver, Victoria or San Francisco without accounting for earthquake risk, or in flood-prone areas like Winnipeg or New Orleans without proper mitigation, we must begin to treat fire risk as an equally fundamental design consideration.
It’s certainly daunting to consider the expense of building or retrofitting homes and adapting properties to resist wildfires, but the consequences of not planning or preparing better — both in terms of lives lost and homes ruined and in terms of the financial costs of rebuilding — will only worsen if societies don’t do much more.
Alternative materials
It’s obvious that buildings at elevated risk from fire should not be made from combustible materials, like exposed timber. Now, there are impressive alternatives such as new forms of concrete and metal roofing that can prevent fire from taking hold in a home, garage or other building.
Improved land-use planning and community-scale design can also meaningfully decrease the exposure and vulnerability of buildings to wildfire. What we need is a cohesive, risk-averse and data-driven framework that allows for architectural and structural design choices based on quantified fire risk.
Research — only if we make it a funding priority — can give us such a framework.
Enhancing safety
In Jasper, Alta., which is in a national park, new federal guidelines for rebuilding after last year’s devastating fire call for enhanced safety. These include new separations between buildings and flammable landscaping, including nonflammable buffers to separate homes from wooden fences and decks.
If we continue to build (and rebuild) within forest boundaries, we have to expand standards, mandates and engineering efforts to protect people and their homes.
How can we make them safer?
We can start by much-needed building code updates. And we can educate residents and home-buyers about reducing their risk.
FireSmart Canada, for example, offers practical advice on what kinds of trees, shrubs and lawns are safest to use in landscaping, and how far they should be from one’s house, depending on the degree of local fire risk. However, a more community-driven safety mindset is required for successful implementation of these guidelines; individual efforts alone are not enough to reduce the wildfire risk in interconnected neighbourhoods.
For developers, designers and builders, improving safety may mean tighter new zoning rules and stricter building codes to govern where and how we build to protect against fire. Suppliers will need access to safer materials, some of which have yet to be developed.
Research priorities
To develop a framework, recommendations and guidelines to enhance fire safety and reduce loss, we need evidence, and that requires research.
In Canada, we have excellent researchers working on forest fires. But as a fire crosses from a natural setting to an urban one, everything changes — the fuel, wind patterns and movement of the fire — so we need to study and model it differently too.
These forms of knowledge are all within reach, but until we prioritize them, we are deciding to put lives and neighbourhoods at risk. The price of doing nothing will be much greater than the cost of taking action.
Ramla Karim Qureshi receives funding from Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Christopher Campbell-Duruflé, Assistant Professor, Lincoln Alexander School of Law, Toronto Metropolitan University
It isn’t just wildfires threatening people’s homes and livelihoods. In May, 1,600 residents from the Kashechewan Cree First Nation in Northern Ontario evacuated again due to flooding of the Albany River, which happens almost every year.
The 2018 United Nations Climate Conference called on all states to adopt “laws, policies and strategies” meant “to avert, minimize and address displacement related to the adverse impacts of climate change.”
The figures are disquieting. By 2050, more than 140 million people could become internal climate migrants in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Latin America alone, especially if action towards reaching net-zero carbon emissions continues to be insufficient.
Canada is not spared: 192,000 people were evacuated in 2023 due to disasters made more severe by climate change, including floods and wildfires. As climate change leads to more extreme weather, temporary climate displacement could become permanent migration.
Climate migration
The World Bank defines internal climate migration as having to relocate for at least a decade to a location 14 kilometres or more away from your community because of climate impacts.
The Canadian government understated the reality of internal climate migration in its submissions under the 2015 Paris Agreement, which obscure the gravity of this phenomenon.
One of those submissions is the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), the cornerstone report each state party must present every five years. Canada’s NDC from 2021 recognizes that climate change harms certain populations more than others, but does not address temporary displacement, let alone internal climate migration.
The Fort McMurray wildfires displaced more than 80,000 people in 2016, with its population declining 11 per cent between 2015 and 2018. Similarly, the 2019 Québec spring floods displaced more than 10,000 people and, in Sainte-Marie, hundreds of low-income families abandoned the city because they could not afford the reconstructed homes.
A clear definition of internal climate migrants in Canada, robust data and better co-ordination among Indigenous, municipal, provincial and federal governments is needed.
This is something a National Adaptation Act could deliver, as a part of a comprehensive framework to bolster adaptation action across the country.
Transparency lacking
Canada submitted an adaptation communication in 2024. The communication discusses climate impacts but mentions internal displacement only once. It contains no data or discussion of when displacement becomes permanent, nor does it focus on the disproportionate impact on equity-deserving groups.
The government submitted an updated NDC earlier this year. It noted “the devastating impact of wildfires, floods, drought and melting permafrost on communities across the country” but only briefly discusses adaptation, referring instead to the 2023 National Adaptation Strategy. The only mentions of displacement come in appended submissions by Indigenous Peoples, including Trʼondëk Hwëchʼin First Nation and Makivvik.
Indigenous Peoples suffer from flawed adaptation policies and institutional barriers that prevent them from effectively responding to emergencies. As a result, First Nations evacuate 328 times more frequently than settler communities during climate disasters.
In 2011, for example, officials in Manitoba diverted flood waters to Lake St. Martin to protect urban, cottage and agricultural properties. In the process, they flooded 17 First Nations and displaced 4,525 people. Return of the 1,400 residents of the Lake St. Martin First Nation to a new location only started in 2017, and as recently as 2020 displaced families were protesting on highways for their right to housing.
A national adaptation act
Canada should adopt a clear definition of internal climate migrants that captures displacement from climate disasters and slow-onset phenomena like sea-level rise, permafrost thaw and biodiversity loss.
UN experts released a Technical Guide on Human Mobility in 2024, calling for “a sound evidence base on the patterns and trends, as well as on the drivers and outcomes” of climate-induced mobility. It also highlighted the need for adaptation efforts “that are informed by stakeholder consultations” and “existing (Indigenous) adaptation practices.”
Defining internal climate migrants would allow Canada to gather robust data at last, and to act decisively on it.
One first step is the federal government’s pledge of a National Recovery Strategy by 2028, which would set out “shorter time frames for displaced individuals to be able to return to their homes or resettle after climate change disaster events.” But a comprehensive approach is needed to go beyond the fragmented landscape of federal and provincial strategies.
The Canadian government should work with all stakeholders toward the adoption of a National Adaptation Act, like Brazil, Germany and Japan.
Such a law could remove barriers to Indigenous adaptation action, co-ordinate efforts across orders of governments to prevent displacements, define internal climate migration, ensure data collection and protect the rights of people temporarily displaced or internally migrating because of climate change.
It should also aim for greater transparency and accountability than what Canada has so far achieved with its Paris Agreement submissions.
Christopher Campbell-Duruflé receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for his research. He serves on the Legal Committee of the Centre québécois du droit de l’environnement.
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
HAIKOU, June 8 (Xinhua) — The South China Sea Tsunami Early Warning Center began operation in south China’s Hainan Province on Sunday, aiming to provide early warning services on marine disasters to countries in the region.
The center, headquartered in the coastal city of Sanya during its trial operation, was set up by the National Marine Environment Forecasting Center and the Hainan Provincial Ocean Administration. It aims to develop a comprehensive multi-functional early warning system for tsunamis, marine heat waves, harmful algal blooms and other natural disasters.
The Centre also aims to become a platform for international cooperation in the field of marine forecasting and warning.
In addition, on the same day, the National Deep-Sea Testing Site was launched in Sanya to support deep-sea fundamental scientific research, original deep-sea technological innovation and the development of related industries.
The SCS region is prone to tsunamis and other marine hazards due to its complex tectonic background, including active fault lines and frequent underwater earthquakes in nearby areas. -0-
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BRASILIA, June 8 (Xinhua) — At the invitation of the Brazilian Workers’ Party (BWP), a delegation of the Communist Party of China led by Wu Hansheng, director of the Social Work Department of the CPC Central Committee, visited Brazil from Friday to Saturday.
During the visit, Wu Hansheng attended the 8th Theoretical Seminar of the CPC and the PTB and met with Executive Secretary of the General Secretariat of the President of Brazil Kelly Mafort. Wu Hansheng expounded Xi Jinping Thought on Socialism with Chinese Characteristics for a New Era and exchanged views with Mafort on bilateral relations, inter-party cooperation, social governance and the international situation.
The Brazilian side highly appreciated the ties between the two countries and the two parties, expressing its willingness to cooperate with China to implement the important consensus reached by the heads of state of the two countries, deepen practical cooperation in various fields, and promote the building of a Brazil-China community with a shared future. –0–
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Dwight Evans (2nd District of Pennsylvania)
Bill would help victims & survivors hold companies accountable in court, discourage illegal sales, defective guns and irresponsible marketing
WASHINGTON (June 6, 2025) – U.S. Rep. Dwight Evans (D-PA-03) is co-leading reintroduction of the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act, legislation to ensure that victims of gun violence would have their day in court and that negligent gun companies and gun sellers are not shielded from liability when they disregard public safety.
The bill would repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), passed by Congress in 2005, which gives the gun industry a unique and unjustifiable legal liability shield that protects gun manufacturers from lawsuits.
“As someone who’s advocated for this concept in Pennsylvania’s legislature and now in Congress, I’m proud to be a co-lead on this bill to restore this basic right of victims and survivors – a right that a heavy-handed federal government took away 20 years ago. So many American gun deaths could be avoided if we held companies accountable for things like illegal sales, defective guns and irresponsible marketing. State attorneys general were able to hold Big Tobacco accountable in the 1990s, and they should be able to hold gun manufacturing companies accountable in the 21st century since thousands of lives depend on it. This legislation would be an important tool in the toolbox to protect our citizens from gun violence,” Evans said.
Evans’ lead partners on the legislation are U.S. Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and were joined this week, the start of Gun Violence Awareness Month, by U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and U.S. Reps. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.), Jason Crow (D-Colo.), and Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) in leading a group of 81 members of Congress in introducing the bill in both the House and Senate.
Murphy, Blumenthal, Swalwell, Schiff, Evans, and Thompson announced the legislation during a virtual press conference joined by leading gun violence prevention advocates: Kris Brown, president of Brady; Angela Ferrell-Zabala, executive director of Moms Demand Action; and Adam Skaggs, chief counsel and vice president of GIFFORDS Law Center. Video of the press conference is available here.
Pennsylvania co-sponsors of the legislation include Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA), and U.S. Reps Madeleine Dean (D-PA-04), Chris Deluzio (D-PA-17), and Mary Gay Scanlon (D-PA-05).
When Congress passed PLCAA, its supporters argued that it was necessary to protect the gun industry from frivolous lawsuits, and that victims of gun violence would not be shut out of the courts. In reality, numerous cases around the nation have been dismissed on the basis of PLCAA, even when the gun dealers and manufacturers acted in a fashion that would qualify as negligent if it involved any other product. Victims in these cases were denied the right to even discover or introduce evidence. This legislation would allow civil cases to go forward against irresponsible bad actors.
“There’s absolutely no reason why the gun industry should get special treatment when it comes to negligence. Their immunity from lawsuits effectively gives them a license to kill. It’s past time for Congress to repeal PLCAA and allow gun violence victims their day in court,” said Murphy.
“PLCAA is the ultimate sweetheart deal – legal immunity afforded to basically no other industry for a product that kills tens of thousands of Americans every year,” said Blumenthal. “Despite the strength and perseverance of the Sandy Hook, Uvalde, and Highland Park families – and the tenacity of their legal teams – this is a problem that cannot be solved only through the courts. PLCAA must be repealed by Congress.”
“No industry in American has a liability shield like gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers,” said Swalwell.“The NRA and their GOP stooges made sure that the gun industry has a unique immunity from accountability. This bill ends that ridiculous carve out. The Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act will finally repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) once and for all, allowing victims of gun violence to bring civil suits against gun producers and sellers. The time has long since come for Congress to be clear – if you put the most dangerous weapons in the hands of the most dangerous people, you will be held accountable.”
“More than a 100 Americans are killed by a gun every single day in America. And yet, Congress does nothing to hold the gun industry accountable when the negligence of gun makers and dealers is responsible for the tragic consequences their products have on our kids, our families, and our communities. As long as gun violence continues to take the lives of so many in California and across the nation, I will fight to repeal the liability shield that wrongly protects negligent gun industry actors from liability,” said Schiff.
“Victims and survivors should be able to hold the gun industry accountable in court for negligent behavior. But right now, the gun industry is shielded from any liability when they disregard public safety. That’s wrong,” said Crow. “I’m introducing this bill so we can finally hold the gun industry responsible.”
“In the 20 years since PLCAA was passed, it’s become clear that negligent gun manufacturers and dealers have taken advantage of the law. Responsible manufacturers and dealers don’t need this legal protection – and irresponsible ones are hiding behind it. As a hunter, combat veteran and responsible gun owner, I’m proud to work with Senator Blumenthal and Representative Swalwell to introduce this sensible legislation,” said Thompson, Chair of the Gun Violence Prevention Task Force.
In 2005, the National Rifle Association (NRA) identified PLCAA as their “number one” legislative priority, and the NRA celebrated the passage calling it the “most significant piece of pro-gun legislation in twenty years.” Changing the law to let courts hear these cases would provide justice to victims and their families, while creating incentives for responsible business practices that would reduce injuries and deaths. Effectively, the gun industry would once again be subject to the same laws as every other industry, just as it was prior to 2005.
The legislation is endorsed by Brady, GIFFORDS Law Center, Everytown for Gun Safety, March for Our Lives, Guns Down America, Newtown Action Alliance, and Sandy Hook Promise Action Fund.
“David Seymour warns of prosecutions this year in school truancy crackdown”
Understanding School Absence – QPEC condemns Minister Seymour’s campaign to fine parents whose children do not attend school to a particular standard.
The Minister is launched on an expensive and fruitless game to blame and shame parents. This feeds his law-&-order base. It also feeds his own diet of rigid neo-liberal control of society. His frame of reference is coercive and wrong-headed, offering no long-term solutions.
In its place, we propose a supportive school engagement model, with two basic principles to guide the issue of absenteeism in school:
1. a serious, well-intentioned, continuing investigation to address the complex reasons why some young people are not regularly at school
These include mixtures of poverty; dislocation; instability in life; low socio-economic status; Covid fallout; unemployment; bullying; mental, cognitive and physical health obstacles; problems with transport; bad, uncertain and unavailable housing; disillusionment with state structures like education.
2. a community-based programme focusing on school engagement to work alongside families, to help them address school attendance
NZ used to have local community stewards for school attendance, who knew their neighbourhoods intimately and supported them throughout the year. But a previous government centralised the programme, thereby undermining the process.
Awkward questions
An obvious question levelled at this issue demands to know what to do with parents and families who choose deliberately to keep students out of school.
QPEC holds that the country should extend the community-based programme above to work as closely and positively as possible with families for long-term effects.
In particular, the programme needs:
(1) to emphasise the lifetime benefits of well-supported, critical education for individuals, families and communities, and
(2) to listen carefully to families’ commentaries on school education.
The emphasis should be on including people rather than scapegoating them as Seymour proposes.
Such a programme could be supported by using the $140 million that Seymour has acquired for his law and order programme.
There is a disconcerting reality to face. Some households may have very legitimate reasons for children to avoid school, based on previous bad experiences. Nationwide, we need to recognise this possibility and develop mature responses as a result.
We should be ready to address discriminatory processes, for instance, and if necessary to provide alternative education models that are consistent with human rights and sound education practice.
Above all, our priority needs to be the best interests of young people and families.
