Category: Australia

MIL-OSI New Zealand: Universities and Trade – Strengthening ties to China during Prime Minister’s trade delegation
Source: Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington

Launching new study abroad and research collaboration partnerships with top Chinese universities and research institutes is the focus of Te Herenga Waka—Victoria University of Wellington’s involvement in the Prime Minister’s trade delegation to China.

Vice-Chancellor Professor Nic Smith is delighted to be participating in this visit to China to formalise these arrangements which offer exciting opportunities to future students interested in coming to study in Aotearoa New Zealand, as well as forge new research collaborations.

These partnerships include a major research partnership with Shanghai’s prestigious Fudan University, focused on public health, biotechnology, and climate science, as well as articulation and study abroad agreements with one of China’s largest universities, Zhengzhou University.

This visit provides an important opportunity for Victoria University of Wellington to position itself as a top choice for students to consider when looking at studying overseas, says Professor Smith.

“We are committed to deepening our partnerships with China’s leading institutions—united by a shared ambition to blend academic excellence with global citizenship.

“Together, we are preparing the next generation to lead with knowledge, empathy, and purpose.”

“Being part of this delegation reflects New Zealand’s recognition of universities as engines of innovation, diplomacy, and enduring global relationships. It is a privilege to represent our sector and reinforce education’s vital role in connecting nations.”

Prime Minister Rt Hon Christopher Luxon says New Zealand’s education sector is globally respected for its quality, innovation, and commitment to partnership.

“Our universities, including Victoria University of Wellington, play a key role in fostering long-term academic and research collaborations with countries like China. These connections not only support student mobility and world-class research but also strengthen the broader relationship between our two countries.”

Victoria University of Wellington already maintains deep connections and a broad reach across China through longstanding research partnerships, student mobility programmes, and alumni networks.

The University first signed an agreement with Xiamen University in the 1980s, and its Confucius Institute was opened by Chinese President Xi Jinping during his visit to New Zealand in 2010. It is a founding partner of the New Zealand Centre at Peking University and hosts the pre-eminent New Zealand Contemporary Chinese Research Centre.

In 2023, Victoria University of Wellington welcomed its first cohort of students enrolled at a Joint Institute through a partnership with China’s largest university—Zhengzhou University, a globally ranked university with around 73,000 students. 

Professor Smith says universities play a crucial role in international dialogue as the world faces increasingly complex challenges.

“In a world facing complex, interconnected challenges—from climate change to public health—our researchers are advancing global solutions. This delegation is a powerful opportunity to showcase how collaboration across borders strengthens those efforts.”

“At Victoria University of Wellington, we see education not simply as a journey, but as a launchpad—for discovery, for leadership, and for impact. We are proud to support the aspirations of students who will shape the future of our world.”

The University will also be launching the Kitea Impact Programme—a leadership development initiative for future global changemakers—and a work integrated learning programme which provides students with hands-on experience in real-world projects while offering New Zealand businesses deeper insights into the Chinese market and access to top talent.

Professor Smith will participate in official events and meetings in Beijing and Shanghai and will reinforce Victoria University of Wellington’s commitment to China by signing partnership agreements with a number of prestigious Chinese universities.

About the partnerships

Research collaboration with Fudan University, Shanghai—one of China’s most prestigious and research-intensive universities—in the areas of public health, biotechnology, and climate science.

Student mobility agreements with Communication University of Zhejiang, Hangzhou—one of the two leading universities in China specialising in cultivating professionals for China’s media and broadcast industries. Students will be provided a pathway into Victoria University of Wellington’s Master’s degrees in Computer Science, and Intercultural Communication and Applied Translation.

Research collaboration with the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences—a leading research centre in Beijing in the fields of philosophy and social sciences. The research collaboration with Victoria University of Wellington’s New Zealand Contemporary China Research Centre focuses on climate change, diaspora studies, and modern Chinese history.

Student mobility agreements with Yantai University, a comprehensive university in Shandong with more than 29,000 students, which will see students transfer to complete a Victoria University of Wellington Bachelor degree in Language Sciences.

Study abroad agreement with Zhengzhou University in Henan. With around 73,000 students, it is the largest university in China. The agreement will allow students from ZZU to study at VUW for one or two trimesters.
MIL OSI New Zealand News –
June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI New Zealand: First Responders – Victoria Park New World Fire Update #5

Source: Fire and Emergency New Zealand

Two crews of firefighters remain at the Victoria Park New World supermarket in Auckland, following yesterday’s fire, and the section of Victoria St between College Hill and Franklin Rd is still closed.

The fire was extinguished last night and the firefighters are monitoring hotspots, Incident Controller Phil Larcombe says. Further assessment and observations will be made after daybreak, using an aerial appliance.

The property is extensively damaged, and fire investigators have returned today to continue working to establish the origin and cause of the fire.

Phil Larcombe says that Fire and Emergency expects to maintain a presence at the scene for most of today.

MIL OSI New Zealand News –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Australia: 10-year Financial Plan adopted to guide a sustainable future
Source: New South Wales Ministerial News

A new Financial Plan 2025–2035 has been adopted that sets a clear and responsible path for delivering services and infrastructure to support a growing and diverse community.

The City uses a financial model to forecast and monitor a 10-year projection of how it plans to fund the actions in the newly adopted Council Plan to achieve the Community Vision:

Greater Bendigo celebrates and respects our diverse and growing community. We aim to be welcoming, sustainable and flourishing. Walking hand-in-hand with our First Nations communities. Building on our heritage for a safe and happy future.

Developed through extensive community consultation, including a deliberative panel and annual Budget public engagement, the Financial Plan reflects a shared commitment to a responsible, healthy, thriving Greater Bendigo.

The Financial Plan forms part of the City’s Integrated Strategic Planning Framework, which connects long-term aspirations (Community Vision), medium-term goals (Council Plan), and short-term actions (Annual Budget), with progress tracked through the Annual Report. The plan was adopted at last Monday’s Council meeting.

Mayor Cr Andrea Metcalf said the plan was essential for ensuring financial sustainability in the face of growing challenges.

“Council is committed to operating in a financially sustainable way for the benefit of the whole community,” Cr Metcalf said.

“With our population forecast to reach around 170,000 by 2046, we must take a disciplined approach to funding existing services and infrastructure, while planning for new initiatives to meet future needs.

“Rate capping by the Victorian Government continues to limit our income, while costs rise and service demands increase. The City currently delivers around 60 services and manages more than $2.9 billion in community assets, including roads, pools, footpaths, bridges, theatres, sports grounds, and playgrounds, with more built infrastructure needed to support population growth and diverse community needs.

“The Financial Plan provides a roadmap for maintaining resilience and delivering high-quality services and infrastructure. Achieving financial sustainability means making tough decisions about the role of local government in delivering services and maintaining assets. It’s important that both Council and the community understand that some services may need to change over the life of this plan.

“This plan ensures we remain financially resilient while continuing to support a vibrant, inclusive and future-ready Greater Bendigo.”

The Financial Plan is underpinned by a set of strategic financial principles to guide decision-making:
- Efficient use of resources – Aligning budgets with community priorities and financial constraints
- Well-planned assets – Balancing investment in new infrastructure with renewal, upgrades, and decommissioning where appropriate
- Service review and planning – Ensuring services are efficient and responsive to community needs
- Sustainable cash management – Maintaining minimum cash reserves and forecasting for future requirements
- Robust financial systems – Strengthening processes to ensure effective and transparent use of resources
MIL OSI News –
June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Australia: Optus agrees to $100m penalty, subject to court approval, for unconscionable conduct
Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development

Scam warning: The ACCC is aware that scammers may call, email or text to falsely offer to help get compensation from various businesses. They may use this media release about compensation to convince people their contact is real.

STOP – Don’t give money or personal information to anyone if you’re unsure. Scammers will create a sense of urgency. Don’t rush to act. Don’t click on links even if the message appears to come from Optus. Say ‘no’, hang up, delete.

CHECK – Ask yourself could the call, email or text be fake? Scammers pretend to be from organisations and entities you know and trust. Contact the organisation using information you source independently, so that you can verify if it is real or not.

PROTECT – Act quickly if something feels wrong. Contact your bank immediately if you lose money. If you have provided personal information call IDCARE on 1800 595 160. The more we talk the less power they have. Report scams to the National Anti-Scam Centre’s Scamwatch service at scamwatch.gov.au when you see them.

Optus Mobile Pty Ltd (Optus) has admitted to engaging in unconscionable conduct when selling telecommunications goods and services to hundreds of consumers, after court action brought by the ACCC.

In many instances the consumers did not want or need, could not use or could not afford what they were sold, and in some cases consumers were pursued for debts resulting from these sales.

Many of the affected consumers were vulnerable or experiencing disadvantage, such as living with a mental disability, diminished cognitive capacity or learning difficulties, being financially dependent or unemployed, having limited financial literacy or English not being a first language. Many of the consumers were First Nations Australians from regional, remote and very remote parts of Australia.

As part of an agreement announced today, the ACCC and Optus will jointly ask the Federal Court to impose a total penalty of $100 million on Optus for breaching the Australian Consumer Law. It is a matter for the Court to decide whether the penalty is appropriate and to make other orders.

Optus has admitted that its sales staff acted unconscionably when selling phones and contracts to over 400 consumers at 16 different stores across Australia between August 2019 and July 2023. Examples of the conduct engaged in by the sales staff included:
- putting undue pressure on consumers to purchase a large number of products, including expensive phones and accessories, that they did not want or need, could not use or could not afford;
- failing to explain relevant terms and conditions to vulnerable consumers in a manner they could understand, resulting in them not understanding their ongoing payment obligations;
- not having regard to whether consumers had Optus coverage where they lived;
- selling products and services which Optus knew, or ought reasonably to have known, the consumers could not afford; and
- misleading these consumers to believe that goods were free or included as part of a bundle at no additional cost.
Optus has also signed an undertaking, accepted by the ACCC, that it will compensate impacted consumers and improve its internal systems, the commencement of which is subject to the Court making relevant orders.

“The conduct, which included selling inappropriate, unwanted or unaffordable mobiles and phone plans to people who are vulnerable or experiencing disadvantage is simply unacceptable,” ACCC Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe said.

“During our investigation into this case, the ACCC heard many stories of the impact of this conduct on affected consumers.”

“Many of these consumers who were vulnerable or experiencing disadvantage also experienced significant financial harm. They accrued thousands of dollars of unexpected debt and some were pursued by debt collectors, in some instances for years,” Ms Lowe said.

“It is not surprising, and indeed could and should have been anticipated, that this conduct caused many of these people significant emotional distress and fear.”

“We are particularly concerned that Optus engaged debt collectors to pursue some of these consumers after it had launched internal investigations into the sales conduct,” Ms Lowe said.

“Optus has admitted to this conduct and has appropriately committed to changing its systems. It has begun compensating affected consumers.”

“We are grateful to the many advocates, financial counsellors and carers who assisted the impacted individuals. We also thank the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman for their role in drawing these issues to our attention.”

Optus admits inappropriate practices, using debt collectors

Optus has admitted that the inappropriate sales practices affected many consumers in its two Darwin stores and 24 individuals in stores around Australia.

In respect of the Mount Isa store, which has now closed, Optus pursued debts in circumstances where its senior management knew that those debts related to contracts for goods and services that had been or might have been created without the knowledge of the affected consumers, the majority of whom were First Nations Australians from Mount Isa and the Northern Territory.

Optus’s senior management became increasingly aware that Optus staff were engaging in the inappropriate sales practices and that Optus’s systems and controls could not stop the conduct. Optus acknowledged it failed to promptly take steps to fix deficiencies in its systems, which allowed the conduct to continue.

Commission-based sales arrangements for Optus’s sales staff had the potential to incentivise the inappropriate sales conduct, despite the Telecommunications Consumer Protections Code requiring Optus, from 17 June 2022, to have regard to the ACCC’s best practice recommendations, which recommend businesses avoid commission-based selling because of its potential to exacerbate the vulnerability of consumers.

This case follows similar ACCC action against Telstra, which was ordered in May 2021 to pay a $50 million penalty for engaging in unconscionable conduct when it sold mobile contracts to 108 Indigenous consumers between at least 1 January 2016 and about 27 August 2018.

Summary of the proposed Undertaking

Optus has given an undertaking to provide remediation and has started compensating consumers. It has undertaken to address claims through a clear resolution process.

Optus has undertaken to make a $1 million donation to an organisation facilitating digital literacy of First Nations Australians.

Optus has undertaken to review its complaint handling, improve staff training, change its debt collection systems, and make other changes to systems and procedures.

It has undertaken to change the remuneration structure of sales staff to disincentivise them from engaging in similar conduct.

It has also commenced buying back 34 Optus licensee stores in the Northern Territory, Queensland and South Australia.

Consumers who think they may have been impacted by conduct similar to that outlined in the undertaking can call Optus’s specialist customer care team on 1300 082 820 for further information or support.

The undertaking offered by Optus, and accepted by the ACCC, is available at Optus Mobile Pty Ltd. It will come into force once the court makes final orders.

Examples of alleged conduct

A First Nations consumer, who speaks English as a second language and lives in a remote community with no Optus coverage, was approached by Optus staff outside an Optus store and pressured to enter. They did not want or need a new phone. They thought staff were offering them a free phone and other free products and felt pressured by staff to accept.

They were contracted to two high-end phones, three phone plans, two Device Protect services and one accessories bundle, which had a total minimum cost of $3,808 over 24 months. The following day, the consumer was entered into a second contract for a phone plan and accessories, for a total minimum of $540. The consumer was not informed there was no coverage at their home address, and false information was entered into their credit check. The consumer had their debt referred to debt collectors and was contacted on many occasions by the debt collector. The consumer sought the assistance of a financial counsellor as they did not understand what the debt related to.

Another consumer, who lives with an intellectual disability, attended an Optus store with a support worker to purchase a $20 pre-paid recharge for their phone. The consumer’s main source of income was the disability support pension. They were told by Optus staff that they could get a new phone and a free speaker for $30 a month, and were pressured into the purchase.

Optus staff added a false ABN to their account and manipulated credit checks. The consumer was entered into three separate contracts for a phone, plans and a smart watch and accessories, which they could not afford and would cost over $8,000 over 36 months. The consumer went to a community legal centre who assisted them with cancelling the contracts with Optus.

In 2019 an internal Optus investigation into customer accounts at the Optus store in Mount Isa resulted in a report that identified that the store manager had falsified identification documents and consumer information to create services and had used the identities of First Nations consumers who were not aware that their identities had been used. The report identified 82 contracts that appeared to have been fraudulently completed without consumer knowledge.

After Optus was notified of the conduct the subject of the report, including through its senior management, it referred and sold outstanding debts associated with some of those contracts to third party debt collection and factoring agencies. Some consumers whose identities were associated with the relevant customer accounts were subject to threats of legal proceedings being commenced against them and of reporting defaults to credit reporting bodies. Some customers continued to be pursued by third party collections agencies until as late as July 2024 and Optus had not taken steps to stop that occurring.

Background

Optus is Australia’s second largest telecommunications provider. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Singtel Optus Pty Ltd, a foreign owned private company.

In Australia, Optus’s retail stores are either:
- owned and operated directly by Optus RetailCo Pty Ltd; or
- owned and operated through third party licensees, through Retail License Agreements. For example, prior to Optus buying back certain stores, all Optus stores in the Adelaide region were owned and operated by Mavaya Pty Ltd, and all Optus stores in the Northern Territory, as well as several in regional Queensland, were owned and operated by Suntel Communications Pty Ltd.
The ACCC commenced court action against Optus on 31 October 2024. The investigation was prompted by a referral from the Telecommunications Industry Ombudsman.

MIL OSI News –
June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Australia: ACT Budget 2025–26: Strengthening Access to Justice for Vulnerable Canberrans
Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

As part of ACT Government’s ‘One Government, One Voice’ program, we are transitioning this website across to our . You can access everything you need through this website while it’s happening.

Skip to content
Released 18/06/2025

The ACT Government is investing over $15 million in practical, targeted justice initiatives to ensure vulnerable Canberrans can continue to access the legal services they need, when they need them.

The 2025–26 ACT Budget is supporting key legal assistance services, justice reform initiatives, and the growing need for responsive support for victims of crime, people on low income, women, First Nations peoples and culturally diverse communities.

Attorney-General Tara Cheyne said the Budget would strengthen frontline legal services and improve outcomes for people facing disadvantage, hardship or discrimination.

“We know that early access to the right legal advice can make a huge difference, especially for those facing complex barriers to justice,” Minister Cheyne said.

“This Budget delivers for the community. It supports culturally safe, accessible legal help, expands frontline capacity in our courts, and continues critical programs that put the needs of vulnerable people at the centre of the justice system.”

Key measures in the 2025–26 ACT Budget include:
- Appointment of a tenth Magistrate to the ACT Magistrates Court, to improve processing times and address growing demand in civil and criminal matters.
- Additional funding for the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions’ Witness Assistance Scheme and to meet the increased demands of an expanded judiciary.
- Funding for legal assistance providers, including the Women’s Legal Centre, Canberra Community Law, the Aboriginal Legal Service, and CARE Financial Counselling.
- Investment in the ACT Human Rights Commission, to continue the Intermediary Program, which provides targeted services for vulnerable complainants, witnesses and accused persons in the criminal justice system.
- Funding will also support Legal Aid ACT’s services across a number of programs, including legal aid assistance grants, ensuring coordinated support across the legal system.
- Additional funding for the Victims Services Scheme and Financial Assistance Scheme administered by Victims Services ACT, to respond to growing demand and provide financial assistance and support for victims of crime.
- Implementation of a sexual assault advocate pilot program to support victims’ access to specialist services and conducting of investigations in a more victim-centric and trauma-informed way.
- Support for the ACT Government Solicitor’s Office to meet increased demand for legal advice under the Human Rights Act 2004, and to establish a new regulatory prosecution function that will strengthen enforcement and compliance across government.
- Funding to enhance the Coroner’s Court with increased resourcing to manage caseloads and support efficient and sensitive handling of matters that often involve vulnerable individuals and families.
Treasurer Chris Steel said the Government was investing in long-term justice capability while continuing to target the areas of greatest community need.

“The ACT has a proud record of social justice and legal inclusion. These investments ensure justice is not just a principle, but a lived reality for people who need support the most,” Minister Steel said.

“We’re taking a whole-of-system view, supporting frontline organisations, reforming service delivery, and improving our ability to respond to challenges through programs like the Intermediary Service and increased court capacity.”

This package builds on the ACT Government’s commitment to a fair, inclusive and accessible justice system, especially for people who experience disadvantage or barriers in engaging with legal processes.

“By building legal capability and ensuring services are culturally safe and responsive, we’re not only supporting individuals, we’re reducing the long-term burden on the justice system as a whole,” Minister Cheyne said.

– Statement ends –

Chris Steel, MLA | Tara Cheyne, MLA | Media Releases

«ACT Government Media Releases | «Minister Media Releases
MIL OSI News –
June 18, 2025

MIL-OSI: Diversified Royalty Corp. Announces Acquisition of US-Based Cheba Hut Franchising, Inc.’s Trademarks, a 10% Dividend Increase, and an Increase in Size of its Acquisition Facility

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

VANCOUVER, British Columbia, June 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Diversified Royalty Corp. (TSX: DIV and DIV.DB.A) (the “Corporation” or “DIV”) is pleased to announce that it has acquired the trademarks and certain other intellectual property used by Cheba Hut Franchising, Inc. (“Cheba Hut”) of Fort Collins, Colorado, adding a ninth royalty stream (and the second based in the United States) to DIV’s portfolio. All dollar amounts in this news release, unless specifically denominated in U.S. dollars, are represented in Canadian dollars.

Highlights

Acquisition of Cheba Hut’s worldwide trademark portfolio and certain other intellectual property rights for US$36 million and certain additional consideration
Initial annual royalty revenue from Cheba Hut of US$4 million, representing approximately 7% of DIV’s pro-forma adjusted revenue¹
The royalty grows at a fixed rate equal to the greater of 3.5% and the U.S. Consumer Price Index (“U.S. CPI”) + 1.5% per year
Annual dividend on DIV’s common shares to be increased 10% from 25 cents per share to 27.5 cents per share, effective July 1, 2025
DIV’s strong balance sheet enabled it to fund the Transaction without the need to raise equity

1. Pro-forma adjusted revenue is a non-IFRS financial measure and as such, does not have a standardized meaning under IFRS. For additional information, refer to “Non-IFRS Measures” in this news release.

Acquisition Overview

DIV and its wholly-owned subsidiary Cheeb Royalties Limited Partnership (“Cheeb LP”) entered into an acquisition agreement dated June 17, 2025 (the “Acquisition Agreement”) with Cheba Hut and an affiliate of Cheba Hut pursuant to which Cheeb LP acquired (the “Acquisition”) Cheba Hut’s worldwide trademarks portfolio and certain other intellectual property rights utilized by Cheba Hut in its fast casual, toasted sub sandwich restaurants (the “Cheba Rights”) for a purchase price (the “Purchase Price”), of US$36 million cash. The Purchase Price was funded with (i) approximately US$18 million drawn from DIV’s amended acquisition facility (further details below) (the “Acquisition Facility”), (ii) approximately US$8 million from DIV’s cash on hand, (iii) US$5 million drawn from a new senior credit facility issued to Cheeb LP (the “Cheeb Credit Facility”), and (iv) US$5 million drawn from a new senior term credit facility issued to DIV (the “Additional Term Facility”).

Immediately following the closing of the Acquisition, DIV licensed the Cheba Rights in the United States back to Cheba Hut for 50 years, in exchange for an initial royalty payment of US$4 million per annum (the “Royalty” and together with the Acquisition, the “Transaction”). The Royalty will be automatically increased at a rate equal to the greater of 3.5% and the U.S. CPI + 1.5% per year without any further consideration payable by DIV or Cheeb LP. Cheba Hut may also increase the annual royalty payable on April 1^st of each year following the closing (each an “Adjustment Date”) subject to Cheba Hut satisfying certain royalty coverage tests. The amount of each royalty increase cannot be less than US$500,000 per annum and must, in respect of amounts over that threshold, be in increments of US$100,000 per annum. In consideration for a royalty increase on an Adjustment Date, Cheeb LP will pay an amount to Cheba Hut in cash, based on a multiple between 7 and 8 times (depending on certain conditions being met) the incremental annual royalty purchased, as additional consideration for the Cheba Rights.

Payment of the Royalty will be secured by a general security agreement granted by Cheba Hut to Cheeb LP, and by secured corporate guarantees to be granted to Cheeb LP by several affiliates of Cheba Hut.

The Acquisition is expected to increase DIV’s tax pools by approximately $51 million to a total of approximately $424 million, which can be depreciated over time to reduce DIV’s cash taxes. Amounts paid for incremental annual royalties will also increase DIV’s tax pools.

Founded in 1998, Cheba Hut has 77 fast casual, toasted sub sandwich restaurants in the US. All of Cheba Hut’s locations are franchised, except for two corporate stores and substantially all future growth is currently expected to result from opening additional franchised locations. Cheba Hut had US$149 million of system sales² and SSSG² of 5% in 2024. Cheba Hut is forecasting over US$187 million in system sales² in the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025.

2. System sales and same store sales growth (SSSG) are supplementary financial measures and as such, do not have standardized meanings under IFRS. For additional information, refer to “Non-IFRS Measures” in this news release.

Sean Morrison, Chief Executive Officer of DIV, stated, “The Cheba Hut trademark acquisition and royalty agreement adds a ninth royalty stream to DIV’s portfolio, representing approximately 7% of DIV’s pro-forma adjusted revenue³ and is another step in our strategy of purchasing royalties from a diverse group of proven multi-location businesses and franchisors. We believe Cheba Hut’s impressive track record of growth is a result of its strong store-level economics, quality of its franchisees and experience of its management team. Scott Jennings, the founder of Cheba Hut, and his management team represent a great partner for DIV, as they strongly believe in the continued success of Cheba Hut over the long term and therefore partnering with DIV was far superior to selling equity ownership. We look forward to working with Scott and Cheba Hut’s management team to continue expanding the business across the U.S.

DIV has worked to promote its royalty model in the U.S. market and now, with its second US-based royalty transaction, is building significant momentum in that market. Such continued momentum in the U.S. franchisor market will become significant to DIV as it scales its business going forward.

Further, DIV’s strong balance sheet (cash on hand, under-levered existing royalty LP’s, an unused acquisition facility) enabled it to fund the Transaction without the need to raise equity. DIV’s less than 100% payout ratio⁴, automated DRIP program and ability to refinance existing LP’s will enable it to substantially pay down the acquisition facility within 12 months. This is a game-changer for DIV as all prior trademarks acquisitions have been funded concurrently, or shortly thereafter, with a sizeable equity raise.”

Scott Jennings, stated, “DIV understands and believes that leaving us in control of our company keeps us in the best position to sustain our controlled growth. In addition, we can continue to take care of our product, partners, crew, and most importantly our CUSTOMERS the way we have for the last 27 years. We thank DIV for believing in Cheba Hut and helping us stay in excellent position to keep our soul intact for the next 50 years and beyond!!!”

3. Pro-forma adjusted revenue is a non-IFRS financial measure, and as such, does not have a standardized meaning under IFRS. For additional information, refer to “Non-IFRS Measures” in this news release.

Amendment to Acquisition Facility

DIV amended its Acquisition Facility to increase the size from $50 million to $70 million and extend the maturity date to May 30, 2027, and thereafter to June 17, 2028 (if certain conditions are met).

DIV and Cheeb LP Credit Facilities

Cheeb LP financed US$5 million of the Purchase Price with new bank debt having a term of three years from closing. The Cheeb Credit Facility is non-amortizing and has a floating interest rate equal to SOFR + 2.5% per annum; however, DIV will have 90 days following closing to effectively fix the interest rate on 75% of the amount borrowed under this facility through an interest rate swap. The Cheeb Credit Facility is secured by the Cheba Rights and the Royalty payable by Cheba Hut, and has covenants customary for this type of a credit facility.

DIV financed approximately US$18 million of the Purchase Price from the Acquisition Facility as amended and described above. The approximately US$18 million drawn on the Acquisition Facility is interest-only for twelve months and thereafter amortizes over a 60-month period. In connection with the Transaction, DIV financed US$5 million of the Purchase Price from an Additional Term Facility of US$5 million with a term of approximately 18 months. The Additional Term Facility is non-amortizing and has a floating interest rate based on SOFR plus a spread based on prevailing market rates. The Additional Term Facility is secured by a general security interest over the assets of the Corporation and, if requested by the lender, may be secured by specific assignments of certain material agreements entered into by the Corporation from time to time, and has covenants customary for this type of credit facility. DIV intends to pay down the Acquisition Facility through a combination of cash flows, debt refinancings and/or capital markets transactions.

Dividend Policy Increase

DIV’s board of directors has approved an increase in DIV’s dividend policy to increase its annualized dividend from 25.0 cents per share to 27.5 cents per share effective July 1, 2025, an increase of 10%. DIV estimates its pro-forma payout ratio⁴ will be approximately 94.9% (pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP is approximately 83.0%)⁴.

4. Pro-forma payout ratio and pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP are non-IFRS ratios, and as such, do not have standardized meanings under IFRS. For additional information, refer to “Non-IFRS Measures” in this news release.

Investor Conference Call

Management of DIV will host a conference call on Wednesday, June 18, 2025, at 7:00 am Pacific Time (10:00 am Eastern Time). To participate by telephone across Canada, call toll free at 1 (800) 717-1738 or 1 (289) 514-5100 (conference ID 02753). The presentation will be followed by a question-and-answer session. An archived telephone recording of the call will be available until Wednesday, September 17, 2025, by calling 1 (888) 660-6264 or 1 (289) 819-1325 (playback passcode: 02753 #). The management presentation for the conference call will be available on DIV’s website https://www.diversifiedroyaltycorp.com/investors/investor-presentation/ prior to the call. Alternatively, the link to the webcast of the conference can be found below:

https://onlinexperiences.com/Launch/QReg/ShowUUID=AE82A2E9-8F95-4F22-BF7D-3DF54A94A39D

About Diversified Royalty Corp.

DIV is a multi-royalty corporation, engaged in the business of acquiring top-line royalties from well-managed multi-location businesses and franchisors in North America. DIV’s objective is to acquire predictable, growing royalty streams from a diverse group of multi-location businesses and franchisors.

DIV currently owns the Mr. Lube + Tires, AIR MILES®, Sutton, Mr. Mikes, Nurse Next Door, Oxford Learning Centres, Stratus Building Solutions, BarBurrito and Cheba Hut trademarks. Mr. Lube + Tires is the leading quick lube service business in Canada, with locations across Canada. AIR MILES® is Canada’s largest coalition loyalty program. Sutton is among the leading residential real estate brokerage franchisor businesses in Canada. Mr. Mikes operates casual steakhouse restaurants primarily in western Canadian communities. Nurse Next Door is a home care provider with locations across Canada and the United States as well as in Australia. Oxford Learning Centres is one of Canada’s leading franchisee supplemental education services. Stratus Building Solutions is a leading commercial cleaning service franchise company providing comprehensive janitorial, building cleaning, and office cleaning services primarily in the United States. BarBurrito is the largest quick service Mexican restaurant food chain in Canada. Cheba Hut is a fast casual toasted sub sandwich franchise with locations across 19 U.S. states.

DIV’s objective is to increase cash flow per share by making accretive royalty purchases and through the growth of purchased royalties. DIV intends to continue to pay a predictable and stable monthly dividend to shareholders and increase the dividend over time, in each case as cash flow per share allows.

Forward Looking Statements

Certain statements contained in this news release may constitute “forward-looking information” or “financial outlook” within the meaning of applicable securities laws that involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking information or financial outlook. The use of any of the words “anticipate”, “continue”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “may”, “will”, ”project”, “should”, “believe”, “confident”, “plan” and “intends” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking information, although not all forward-looking information contains these identifying words. Specifically, forward-looking information or financial outlook in this news release includes, but are not limited to, statements made in relation to: the increase in DIV’s annual dividend; statements related to the expected tax implications of the Acquisition on DIV; substantially all future growth for Cheba Hut is currently expected to result from opening additional franchised locations; Cheba Hut’s forecasted system sales in the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025; the expected financial impact of the Transaction on DIV, including on its pro-forma payout ratio, pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP and pro-forma adjusted revenue; DIV intends to pay down the Acquisition Facility through a combination of cash flows, debt refinancings and/or capital markets transactions; the continued expansion in the U.S. franchisor market and the expected effect on DIV and its business; DIV’s intention to continue to pay a predictable and stable monthly dividend to shareholders and increase the dividend over time; and DIV’s corporate objectives. The forward-looking information and financial outlook contained herein involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results or events, performance, or achievements of DIV to differ materially from those anticipated or implied therein. DIV believes that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking information and financial-outlook are reasonable but no assurance can be given that these expectations will prove to be correct. In particular there can be no assurance that: DIV will realize the expected benefits of the Transaction, or that it will be accretive; the actual tax implications of the Acquisition and the Transaction on DIV will be consistent with the tax implications expected by DIV; Cheba Hut will pay the Royalty and otherwise comply with its obligations under the agreements governing the Transaction; Cheba Hut will not be adversely affected by the other risks facing its business; DIV may not complete any further royalty acquisitions; DIV may not increase its dividend in accordance with the currently expected timing or amounts; DIV will be able to make monthly dividend payments to the holders of the DIV common shares; or DIV will achieve any of its corporate objectives. Given these uncertainties, readers are cautioned that forward-looking information and financial outlook included in this news release are not guarantees of future performance, and such forward-looking information and financial outlook should not be unduly relied upon. More information about the risks and uncertainties affecting DIV’s business and the businesses of its royalty partners can be found in the “Risk Factors” section of its Annual Information Form dated March 24, 2025 and the “Risk Factors” section of its management’s discussion and analysis for the three months ended March 31, 2025 that are available under DIV’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

In formulating the forward-looking statements contained herein, management has assumed that, among other things, Cheba Hut will be successful in meeting its stated corporate objectives, including its growth targets; DIV will realize the expected benefits of the Transaction; the Cheba Hut business will not suffer any material adverse effect; the actual tax implications of the Acquisition, the Transaction and the payment of the Royalty will be consistent with the tax implications expected by DIV; and the business and economic conditions affecting DIV and Cheba Hut will continue substantially in the ordinary course, including without limitation with respect to general industry conditions, general levels of economic activity and regulations. These assumptions, although considered reasonable by management at the time of preparation, may prove to be incorrect.

To the extent any forward-looking information in this news release constitute a “financial outlook” within the meaning of applicable securities laws, such information is being provided to assist investors in understanding the potential financial impact of the Transaction, the Cheeb Credit Facility, the Additional Term Facility and the dividend increase and may not appropriate for other purposes.

All of the forward-looking information and financial outlook disclosed in this news release is qualified by these cautionary statements and other cautionary statements or factors contained herein, and there can be no assurance that the actual results or developments contemplated thereby will be realized or, even if substantially realized, that they will have the expected consequences to, or effects on, DIV contemplated by such forward-looking information and financial outlook contained herein. The forward-looking information and financial outlook included in this news release is made as of the date of this news release and DIV assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise such information to reflect new events or circumstances, except as may be required by applicable law.

Non-IFRS Measures

Management believes that disclosing certain non-IFRS financial measures, non-IFRS ratios and supplementary financial measures provides readers with important information regarding the Corporation’s financial performance and its ability to pay dividends, the performance of its royalty partners and the financial impacts to DIV of the Transaction. By considering these measures in combination with the most closely comparable IFRS measure, management believes that investors are provided with additional and more useful information about the Corporation, its royalty partners and the Transaction than investors would have if they simply considered IFRS measures alone. The non-IFRS financial measures, non-IFRS ratios and supplementary financial measures used in this news release do not have standardized meanings prescribed by IFRS and therefore are unlikely to be comparable to similar measures presented by other issuers. Investors are cautioned that non-IFRS financial measures should not be construed as a substitute or an alternative to net income or cash flows from operating activities as determined in accordance with IFRS.

The non-IFRS financial measure used in this news release is pro-forma adjusted revenue, which includes as components the following non-IFRS financial measures: DIV royalty entitlement, adjusted revenue and run-rate adjusted revenue. Run-rate adjusted revenue is calculated as the sum of DIV’s adjusted revenue for each of the three months ended December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025, multiplied by two for purposes of annualizing such amount, plus the amount of Mr. Lube’s roll-in of royalties from 5 net new store locations on May 1, 2025. Pro-forma adjusted revenue is calculated as the run-rate adjusted revenue plus the amount of the initial adjusted revenue contribution payable by Cheba Hut. DIV management believes run-rate adjusted revenue provides useful information as it provides supplemental information regarding DIV’s consolidated revenues, and pro-forma adjusted revenue provides useful information as it provides supplemental information regarding DIV’s consolidated revenues after giving effect to the Transaction. For an explanation of the composition of DIV royalty entitlement and adjusted revenue, including a reconciliation to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, see the disclosure under the heading “Description of Non-IFRS Financial Measures, Non-IFRS Ratios and Supplementary Financial Measures” in DIV’s management discussion and analysis for the three months and year ended December 31, 2024 and three months ended March 31, 2025, copies of which are available under DIV’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca, which is incorporated by reference herein.

The following table reconciles revenue for the three months ended December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025 to pro-forma adjusted revenue and run-rate adjusted revenue:

(Cdn$000’s)	(a) Q4 2024	(b) Q1 2025	=(a+b) x 2 Annualized
Revenues	17,032	15,639	65,342
DIV royalty entitlement	1,320	1,329	5,298
Adjusted revenue	18,352	16,968	70,640

Adjustment:
Mr. Lube roll-in – May 1, 2025⁽¹⁾			668
Run-rate adjusted revenue			71,308

Cheba Hut contribution⁽²⁾			5,600
Pro-forma adjusted revenue			76,908

1) Adjustment for Mr. Lube’s roll-in of royalties from 5 net new store locations on May 1, 2025, assuming incremental annual net system sales (system sales is a non-IFRS supplementary measure and as such, does not have a standardized meaning under IFRS – see the disclosure under the heading “Description of Non-IFRS Financial Measures, Non-IFRS Ratios and Supplementary Financial Measures” in DIV’s management discussion and analysis for the three months and year ended December 31, 2024 and three months ended March 31, 2025) of $8.4 million, multiplied by 7.95% royalty rate

2) Cheba Hut contribution is calculated as the initial adjusted revenue contribution of USD$4,000,000 payable by Cheba Hut, multiplied by a USD to CAD exchange rate of $1.4:1

The non-IFRS ratios used in this news release are pro-forma payout ratio and pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP, which include as components the following non-IFRS financial measures: EBITDA, normalized EBITDA, distributable cash, run-rate distributable cash, pro-forma distributable cash, pro-forma dividends declared and DIV royalty entitlement net of NND Royalties LP expenses. Run-rate distributable cash is calculated as the sum of DIV’s distributable cash for each of the three months ended December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025, multiplied by two for purposes of annualizing such amount, plus the after-tax amount of Mr. Lube’s roll-in of royalties from 5 net new store locations on May 1, 2025, less adjustments for interest income and current tax. Pro-forma distributable cash is calculated as run-rate distributable cash plus the amount of the initial adjusted revenue contribution payable by Cheba Hut, less incremental operating expenses, interest expenses and taxes. DIV management believes run-rate distributable cash provides useful information as it provides supplemental information regarding DIV’s ability to generate cash available for payment of dividends after adjusting for non-recurring expenses and pro-forma distributable cash provides useful information as it provides supplemental information regarding DIV’s ability to generate cash available for payment of dividends after giving effect to the Transaction. Pro-forma dividends declared is calculated as DIV’s new annualized dividend of $0.275 per share multiplied by the number of DIV common shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2025. Pro-forma dividends declared is used to calculate the pro-forma payout ratio, and thus management believes that it provides useful information as to DIV’s expected future aggregate annualized dividend payments. Pro-forma payout ratio is calculated as pro-forma dividends declared divided by pro-forma distributable cash. Pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP is calculated as the difference of (X) pro-forma dividends declared less (Y) dividends paid by DIV in the form of DIV common shares issued under DIV’s dividend reinvestment plan (“DRIP”) at an estimated participation rate of 12.5%, divided by pro-forma distributable cash. For an explanation of the composition of EBITDA, normalized EBITDA, distributable cash and DIV royalty entitlement net of NND Royalties LP expenses, including a reconciliation to the most directly comparable IFRS measure, see the disclosure under the heading “Description of Non-IFRS Financial Measures, Non-IFRS Ratios and Supplementary Financial Measures” in DIV’s management discussion and analysis for the three months and year ended December 31, 2024 and three months ended March 31, 2025, copies of which are available under DIV’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca, which is incorporated by reference herein. DIV management believes that (i) pro-forma payout ratio provides useful information as it provides supplemental information regarding DIV’s ability to generate cash to pay dividends following the completion of the Transaction and the increase to the dividend, and (ii) pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP provides useful information as it provides supplemental information regarding DIV’s ability to generate cash to pay dividends following the completion of the Transaction and the increase to the dividend after adjusting for dividends paid by DIV in the form of DIV common shares issued under the DRIP.

The following table reconciles net income for the three months ended December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2025, to run-rate distributable cash and pro-forma distributable cash and illustrates the calculation of pro-forma payout ratio and pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP:

(Cdn$000’s)	(a) Q4 2024	(b) Q1 2025	=(a+b) x 2 Annualized
Net income	4,015	7,993	24,016

Interest expense on credit facilities	3,368	3,150	13,036
Income tax expense	1,653	2,997	9,300
Depreciation expense	25	24	98
EBITDA	9,061	14,164	46,450

Adjustments:
Share-based compensation	645	368	2,026
Other finance costs, net	(2,044)	995	(2,098)
Fair value adjustment on financial instruments	15	(904)	(1,778)
Payment of lease obligations	(28)	(28)	(112)
DIV royalty entitlement net of NND Royalties LP expenses	1,314	1,325	5,278
Impairment loss	8,204	–	16,408
Normalized EBITDA	17,167	15,920	66,174
Add: interest income	139	135	548
Less: Distributions on exchangeable MRM units	(34)	(48)	(164)
Less: current tax expense	(1,301)	(1,719)	(6,040)
Less: interest expense on credit facilities	(3,368)	(3,150)	(13,036)
Distributable cash	12,603	11,138	47,482

Adjustment:
Mr. Lube roll-in – May 1, 2025, net of taxes⁽¹⁾			487
Interest income adjustment			(493)
Current tax adjustment			(2,000)
Run-rate distributable cash			45,476
Cheba Hut distributable cash contribution⁽²⁾			3,075
Pro-forma distributable cash			48,551

Pro-forma dividends declared⁽³⁾			46,081
Pro-forma payout ratio			94.9%

Pro-forma dividends declared, net of DRIP⁽⁴⁾			40,321
Pro-forma payout ratio, net of DRIP			83.0%

2) Cheba Hut contribution is calculated as the initial adjusted revenue contribution of USD$4,000,000, multiplied by a USD to CAD exchange rate of $1.4:1, less incremental operating expenses of $50,000, interest expense of $1,890,000 and taxes of $586,000

3) Calculated as the number of DIV common shares issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2025 (167,567,468) multiplied by the new annualized dividend of $0.275 per share

4) Calculated as pro-forma dividends declared, multiplied by 1 minus the effective DRIP rate of 12.5%

System Sales is a supplementary financial measure and is a reference to the top-line sales revenue reported to Cheba Hut by all Cheba Hut franchisees. System sales is a supplementary financial measure and does not have a standardized meaning prescribed by IFRS. The Corporation believes system sales is a useful measure as it provides investors with an indication of performance of the franchisees underlying Cheba Hut’s business.

Same store sales growth or SSSG is a supplementary financial measure and is a reference to the percentage increase in system sales over the prior comparable period for Cheba Hut locations that were in operation in both the current and prior periods, excluding stores that were permanently closed. The Corporation believes that SSSG is a useful measure as it provides investors with an indication of the change in year-over-year sales of Cheba Hut locations.

Third Party Information

This news release includes information obtained from third party reports and other publicly available sources as well as financial statements and other reports provided to DIV by its royalty partners and Cheba Hut. Although DIV believes these sources to be generally reliable, such information cannot be verified with complete certainty. Accordingly, the accuracy and completeness of this information is not guaranteed. DIV has not independently verified any of the information from third party sources referred to in this news release nor ascertained the underlying assumptions relied upon by such sources.

THE TORONTO STOCK EXCHANGE HAS NOT REVIEWED AND DOES NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ADEQUACY OR THE ACCURACY OF THIS RELEASE.

Additional Information

Additional information relating to the Corporation and other public filings, is available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

Contact:
Sean Morrison, President and Chief Executive Officer
Diversified Royalty Corp.
(236) 521-8470

Greg Gutmanis, Chief Financial Officer and VP Acquisitions
Diversified Royalty Corp.
(236) 521-8471

The MIL Network –

June 18, 2025

MIL-OSI: Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP Announces Regular Quarterly Cash Distribution and Listing For Sale of Vantage at Fair Oaks

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

OMAHA, Neb., June 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP (NYSE: GHI) (the “Partnership”) announced that the Board of Managers of Greystone AF Manager LLC (“Greystone Manager”) declared a cash distribution to the Partnership’s Beneficial Unit Certificate (“BUC”) holders of $0.30 per BUC.

The cash distribution will be paid on July 31, 2025 to all BUC holders of record as of the close of trading on June 30, 2025. The BUCs will trade ex-distribution as of June 30, 2025.

Commenting on the Partnership’s quarterly distribution, Chief Executive Officer Ken Rogozinski stated, “Persistently high interest rates, coupled with higher capitalization rates, have combined to create a more muted environment for sales of certain high quality joint venture properties within our investment portfolio, particularly in Texas markets. As a result, we are reducing our quarterly distribution to appropriately align with the current operating environment. Our quarterly distribution equates to a 9.5% annualized distribution yield based on our net book value as of March 31, 2025, which we believe is attractive in the current operating environment.”

Greystone Manager is the general partner of America First Capital Associates Limited Partnership Two, the Partnership’s general partner. Distributions to the Partnership’s BUC holders, including regular and any supplemental distributions, are determined by Greystone Manager based on a disciplined evaluation of the Partnership’s current and anticipated operating results, financial condition and other factors it deems relevant. Greystone Manager continually evaluates the factors that go into BUC holder distribution decisions, consistent with the long-term best interests of the BUC holders and the Partnership.

The Partnership also announced that Vantage at Fair Oaks, a 288-unit market rate multifamily property located in Boerne, TX (the “Property”), was publicly listed for sale by Institutional Property Advisors Texas at the direction of the Property-owning entity’s managing member. The Partnership’s non-controlling investment in the Property was originated in September 2021 and the Partnership contributed equity totaling $12.0 million to date. Construction of the Property was completed in May 2023. Consistent with past Vantage property sales, the managing member controls the listing and sales process under the terms of the Property-owning entity’s operating agreement, with the Partnership entitled to certain net proceeds upon the successful completion of the sale of the Property.

About Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP

Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP was formed in 1998 under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act for the primary purpose of acquiring, holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of mortgage revenue bonds which have been issued to provide construction and/or permanent financing for affordable multifamily, seniors and student housing properties. The Partnership is pursuing a business strategy of acquiring additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments on a leveraged basis. The Partnership expects and believes the interest earned on these mortgage revenue bonds is excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. The Partnership seeks to achieve its investment growth strategy by investing in additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments as permitted by its Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement, dated December 5, 2022, (the “Partnership Agreement”), taking advantage of attractive financing structures available in the securities market, and entering into interest rate risk management instruments. Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP press releases are available at www.ghiinvestors.com.

Safe Harbor Statement

Certain statements in this press release are intended to be covered by the safe harbor for “forward-looking statements” provided by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements generally can be identified by use of statements that include, but are not limited to, phrases such as “believe,” “expect,” “future,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “foresee,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “estimates,” “potential,” “continue,” or other similar words or phrases. Similarly, statements that describe objectives, plans, or goals also are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond the control of the Partnership. The Partnership cautions readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, implied, or projected by such forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: defaults on the mortgage loans securing our mortgage revenue bonds and governmental issuer loans; the competitive environment in which the Partnership operates; risks associated with investing in multifamily, student, senior citizen residential properties and commercial properties; general economic, geopolitical, and financial conditions, including the current and future impact of changing interest rates, inflation, and international conflicts (including the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war) on business operations, employment, and financial conditions; uncertain conditions within the domestic and international macroeconomic environment, including monetary and fiscal policy and conditions in the investment, credit, interest rate, and derivatives markets; adverse reactions in U.S. financial markets related to actions of foreign central banks or the economic performance of foreign economies, including in particular China, Japan, the European Union, and the United Kingdom; the general condition of the real estate markets in the regions in which the Partnership operates, which may be unfavorably impacted by pressures in the commercial real estate sector, incrementally higher unemployment rates, persistent elevated inflation levels, and other factors; changes in interest rates and credit spreads, as well as the success of any hedging strategies the Partnership may undertake in relation to such changes, and the effect such changes may have on the relative spreads between the yield on investments and cost of financing; the aggregate effect of elevated inflation levels over the past several years, spurred by multiple factors including expansionary monetary and fiscal policy, higher commodity prices, a tight labor market, and low residential vacancy rates, which may result in continued elevated interest rate levels and increased market volatility; the Partnership’s ability to access debt and equity capital to finance its assets; current maturities of the Partnership’s financing arrangements and the Partnership’s ability to renew or refinance such financing arrangements; local, regional, national and international economic and credit market conditions; recapture of previously issued Low Income Housing Tax Credits in accordance with Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code; geographic concentration of properties related to investments held by the Partnership; changes in the U.S. corporate tax code and other government regulations affecting the Partnership’s business; and the other risks detailed in the Partnership’s SEC filings (including but not limited to, the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K). Readers are urged to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements.

If any of these risks or uncertainties materializes or if any of the assumptions underlying such forward-looking statements proves to be incorrect, the developments and future events concerning the Partnership set forth in this press release may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause our expectations and beliefs to change. The Partnership assumes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, unless obligated to do so under the federal securities laws.

MEDIA CONTACT:

Karen Marotta
Greystone
212-896-9149
Karen.Marotta@greyco.com

INVESTOR CONTACT:

Andy Grier
Senior Vice President
402-952-1235

The MIL Network –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI: Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP Announces Regular Quarterly Cash Distribution and Listing For Sale of Vantage at Fair Oaks

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

OMAHA, Neb., June 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP (NYSE: GHI) (the “Partnership”) announced that the Board of Managers of Greystone AF Manager LLC (“Greystone Manager”) declared a cash distribution to the Partnership’s Beneficial Unit Certificate (“BUC”) holders of $0.30 per BUC.

The cash distribution will be paid on July 31, 2025 to all BUC holders of record as of the close of trading on June 30, 2025. The BUCs will trade ex-distribution as of June 30, 2025.

Commenting on the Partnership’s quarterly distribution, Chief Executive Officer Ken Rogozinski stated, “Persistently high interest rates, coupled with higher capitalization rates, have combined to create a more muted environment for sales of certain high quality joint venture properties within our investment portfolio, particularly in Texas markets. As a result, we are reducing our quarterly distribution to appropriately align with the current operating environment. Our quarterly distribution equates to a 9.5% annualized distribution yield based on our net book value as of March 31, 2025, which we believe is attractive in the current operating environment.”

Greystone Manager is the general partner of America First Capital Associates Limited Partnership Two, the Partnership’s general partner. Distributions to the Partnership’s BUC holders, including regular and any supplemental distributions, are determined by Greystone Manager based on a disciplined evaluation of the Partnership’s current and anticipated operating results, financial condition and other factors it deems relevant. Greystone Manager continually evaluates the factors that go into BUC holder distribution decisions, consistent with the long-term best interests of the BUC holders and the Partnership.

The Partnership also announced that Vantage at Fair Oaks, a 288-unit market rate multifamily property located in Boerne, TX (the “Property”), was publicly listed for sale by Institutional Property Advisors Texas at the direction of the Property-owning entity’s managing member. The Partnership’s non-controlling investment in the Property was originated in September 2021 and the Partnership contributed equity totaling $12.0 million to date. Construction of the Property was completed in May 2023. Consistent with past Vantage property sales, the managing member controls the listing and sales process under the terms of the Property-owning entity’s operating agreement, with the Partnership entitled to certain net proceeds upon the successful completion of the sale of the Property.

About Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP

Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP was formed in 1998 under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act for the primary purpose of acquiring, holding, selling and otherwise dealing with a portfolio of mortgage revenue bonds which have been issued to provide construction and/or permanent financing for affordable multifamily, seniors and student housing properties. The Partnership is pursuing a business strategy of acquiring additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments on a leveraged basis. The Partnership expects and believes the interest earned on these mortgage revenue bonds is excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes. The Partnership seeks to achieve its investment growth strategy by investing in additional mortgage revenue bonds and other investments as permitted by its Second Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement, dated December 5, 2022, (the “Partnership Agreement”), taking advantage of attractive financing structures available in the securities market, and entering into interest rate risk management instruments. Greystone Housing Impact Investors LP press releases are available at www.ghiinvestors.com.

Safe Harbor Statement

Certain statements in this press release are intended to be covered by the safe harbor for “forward-looking statements” provided by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements generally can be identified by use of statements that include, but are not limited to, phrases such as “believe,” “expect,” “future,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “foresee,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “estimates,” “potential,” “continue,” or other similar words or phrases. Similarly, statements that describe objectives, plans, or goals also are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond the control of the Partnership. The Partnership cautions readers that a number of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in, implied, or projected by such forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to: defaults on the mortgage loans securing our mortgage revenue bonds and governmental issuer loans; the competitive environment in which the Partnership operates; risks associated with investing in multifamily, student, senior citizen residential properties and commercial properties; general economic, geopolitical, and financial conditions, including the current and future impact of changing interest rates, inflation, and international conflicts (including the Russia-Ukraine war and the Israel-Hamas war) on business operations, employment, and financial conditions; uncertain conditions within the domestic and international macroeconomic environment, including monetary and fiscal policy and conditions in the investment, credit, interest rate, and derivatives markets; adverse reactions in U.S. financial markets related to actions of foreign central banks or the economic performance of foreign economies, including in particular China, Japan, the European Union, and the United Kingdom; the general condition of the real estate markets in the regions in which the Partnership operates, which may be unfavorably impacted by pressures in the commercial real estate sector, incrementally higher unemployment rates, persistent elevated inflation levels, and other factors; changes in interest rates and credit spreads, as well as the success of any hedging strategies the Partnership may undertake in relation to such changes, and the effect such changes may have on the relative spreads between the yield on investments and cost of financing; the aggregate effect of elevated inflation levels over the past several years, spurred by multiple factors including expansionary monetary and fiscal policy, higher commodity prices, a tight labor market, and low residential vacancy rates, which may result in continued elevated interest rate levels and increased market volatility; the Partnership’s ability to access debt and equity capital to finance its assets; current maturities of the Partnership’s financing arrangements and the Partnership’s ability to renew or refinance such financing arrangements; local, regional, national and international economic and credit market conditions; recapture of previously issued Low Income Housing Tax Credits in accordance with Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code; geographic concentration of properties related to investments held by the Partnership; changes in the U.S. corporate tax code and other government regulations affecting the Partnership’s business; and the other risks detailed in the Partnership’s SEC filings (including but not limited to, the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K). Readers are urged to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements.

If any of these risks or uncertainties materializes or if any of the assumptions underlying such forward-looking statements proves to be incorrect, the developments and future events concerning the Partnership set forth in this press release may differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. We anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause our expectations and beliefs to change. The Partnership assumes no obligation to update such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this document or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, unless obligated to do so under the federal securities laws.

MEDIA CONTACT:

Karen Marotta
Greystone
212-896-9149
Karen.Marotta@greyco.com

INVESTOR CONTACT:

Andy Grier
Senior Vice President
402-952-1235

The MIL Network –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: Chair’s Summary
Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

The Leaders of the Group of Seven (G7) gathered in Kananaskis, Alberta, from June 15-17, 2025, with the objective of building stronger economies by making communities safer and the world more secure, promoting energy security and accelerating the digital transition, as well as fostering partnerships of the future.

Five decades after its founding in 1975, the G7 continues to demonstrate its value as a platform for advanced economies to coordinate financial and economic policy, address issues of peace and security, and cooperate with international partners in response to global challenges.

G7 Leaders focused on economic developments. In a context of rising market volatility and shocks to international trade, as well as longer-term trends toward fragmentation and global imbalances, they discussed the need for greater economic and financial stability, technological innovation, and an open and predictable trading regime to drive investment and growth. They considered ways to collaborate on global trade to boost productivity and grow their economies, emphasizing energy security and the digital transition. They acknowledged that both are underpinned by secure and responsible critical mineral supply chains and that more collaboration is required, within and beyond the G7. Leaders undertook to safeguard their economies from unfair non-market policies and practices that distort markets and drive overcapacity in ways that are harmful to workers and businesses. This includes de-risking through diversification and reduction of critical dependencies. Leaders welcomed the new Canada-led G7 initiative – the Critical Minerals Production Alliance – working with trusted international partners to guarantee supply for advanced manufacturing and defence.

G7 Leaders expressed support for President Trump’s efforts to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. They recognized that Ukraine has committed to an unconditional ceasefire, and they agreed that Russia must do the same. G7 Leaders are resolute in exploring all options to maximize pressure on Russia, including financial sanctions. The G7 met with President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Mark Rutte to discuss their support for a strong and sovereign Ukraine, including budgetary defence and recovery and reconstruction support.

G7 Leaders reiterated their commitment to peace and stability in the Middle East. They exchanged on the evolving situation, following Hamas’s terrorist attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023, and the active conflict between Israel and Iran. Leaders discussed the importance of unhindered humanitarian aid to Gaza, the release of all hostages and an immediate and permanent ceasefire. Leaders also talked about the need for a negotiated political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that achieves lasting peace. Leaders affirmed Israel’s right to defend itself, and were clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. They underlined the importance of protecting civilians. They expressed their readiness to coordinate to safeguard the stability of international energy markets. They urged that the resolution of this crisis leads to a broader de-escalation of hostilities in the Middle East, including a ceasefire in Gaza. G7 Leaders released a statement on recent developments between Israel and Iran.

Leaders highlighted the importance of a free, open, prosperous and secure Indo-Pacific, based on the rule of law, and discussed growing economic cooperation with the region. They stressed the importance of constructive and stable relations with China, while calling on China to refrain from market distortions and harmful overcapacity, tackle global challenges and promote international peace and security. Leaders discussed their ongoing serious concerns about China’s destabilizing activities in the East and South China Seas and the importance of maintaining peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. They expressed concern about DPRK’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs and the need to jointly address DPRK cryptocurrency thefts fueling these programs. The need to resolve the abductions issue was also raised. Leaders acknowledged the links between crisis theatres in Ukraine, the Middle East and Indo-Pacific. Leaders discussed other instances of crisis and conflict, including in Africa and Haiti.

The G7 Leaders underscored their resolve to ensure the safety and security of communities. They condemned foreign interference, underlining the unacceptable threat of transnational repression to rights and freedoms, national security and state sovereignty. Leaders highlighted the importance of ongoing collaboration to promote border security and counter migrant smuggling and illicit synthetic drug trafficking, noting recent successes. They stressed the need to work with countries of origin and transit countries. Leaders discussed the impacts of increasingly extreme weather events around the world. They highlighted the need for more international collaboration to prevent, fight and respond to wildfires, which are destroying homes and ecosystems, and driving pollution and emissions.

The G7 welcomed participation in the Summit by the President of South Africa, Matamela Cyril Ramaphosa, President of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, President of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum, President of the Republic Korea, Lee Jae-myung, Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, and Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese, as well as UN Secretary General, António Guterres, and President of the World Bank, Ajaypal Singh Banga. Together, they identified ways to collaborate on energy security in a changing world, with a focus on advancing technology and innovation, diversifying and strengthening critical mineral supply chains, building infrastructure, and mobilizing investment. They discussed just energy transitions as well as sustainable and innovative solutions to boost energy access and affordability, while mitigating the impact on climate and the environment. They talked about the consequences of growing conflicts for shared prosperity, including energy security, and the need to work towards a shared peace.

Leaders and guests had a productive discussion on the importance of building coalitions with reliable partners – existing and new – that include the private sector, development finance institutions and multilateral development banks, to drive inclusive economic growth and advance sustainable development. The upcoming United Nations’ Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development was raised as an opportunity to continue these discussions, including on private capital mobilization.

G7 Leaders agreed to collaborate with partners on concrete outcomes that deliver for everyone. To this end, they agreed to six joint statements. Their commitments included:
- Securing high-standard critical mineral supply chains that power the economies of the future.
- Driving secure, responsible and trustworthy AI adoption across public and private sectors, powering AI now and into the future, and closing digital divides.
- Boosting cooperation to unlock the full potential of quantum technology to grow economies, solve global challenges and keep communities secure.
- Mounting a multilateral effort to better prevent, fight and recover from wildfires, which are on the rise around the world.
- Protecting the rights of everyone in society, and the fundamental principle of state sovereignty, by continuing to combat foreign interference, with a focus on transnational repression.
- Countering migrant smuggling by dismantling transnational organized crime groups.
G7 Leaders welcomed the endorsement by many outreach partners of the Critical Minerals Action Plan and the Kananaskis Wildfire Charter.

Discussions at the Kananaskis Summit were informed by the recommendations of the G7 Gender Equality Advisory Council (GEAC), which stressed the social and economic benefits of gender equality, and of all G7 engagement groups.

The G7 remains committed to working with domestic and international stakeholders and partners, including local governments, Indigenous Peoples, civil society, industry and international organizations, to advance shared priorities.

The G7 will continue its work under Canada’s presidency throughout 2025, and looks forward to France’s leadership in 2026.

MIL OSI Canada News –
June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI New Zealand: Release: PM must stop changes further failing children

Source: New Zealand Labour Party

Today’s damning report on Oranga Tamariki shows Māori children are being left with little chance of success, or even survival, after their experiences in the state care system, and Minister for Children Karen Chhour is making it worse.

“This report is the first of its kind and reveals a disturbing and urgent problem which can no longer be ignored by the Prime Minister who has overseen dangerous changes to Oranga Tamariki during his term in government,” Labour children’s spokesperson Willow-Jean Prime said.

“The Government has cut early intervention, continued with botched bootcamps that have never worked, and taken away funding from community-run services that help children and whānau.

“Christopher Luxon has allowed an ACT Minister to recklessly erode the services that have been built up to support children.

“As well as repealing Section 7AA, Karen Chhour has removed a key target for placement of children with whanau, and removed the target for investment for services provided by Iwi organisations.

“The Government has taken away actions specifically put in place to address the significant disparities for Māori children in care.

“Christopher Luxon must step in and cancel boot camps and restore funding to frontline community providers before it’s too late,” Willow-Jean Prime said.

Stay in the loop by signing up to our mailing list and following us on Facebook, Instagram, and X.

MIL OSI New Zealand News –

June 18, 2025

MIL-OSI Australia: Changes to reserve allocations

Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

What are the changes?

From 7 December 2024, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Legacy Retirement Product Commutations and Reserves) Regulations 2024External Link (the Regulation) changes the way allocations from reserves count towards an individual’s contribution caps.

Before 7 December 2024, certain reserve allocations by a complying superannuation plan for an individual counted towards the individual’s concessional contributions cap. This could result in excess concessional contributions for the individual.

From 7 December 2024, the Regulation:

counts those allocations towards the individual’s non-concessional contributions cap instead of their concessional contributions cap
updates the drafting used to describe those allocations, and
excludes from the non-concessional contributions cap an additional class of reserve allocation (from a pension reserve), making allocations of that class effectively ‘uncapped’.

These changes are not limited to reserves associated with legacy pension products (although the changes may be applicable to such reserves).

See Other concessional and other non-concessional contributions for more information on when reserve allocations by Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) funds will need to be reported.

Reserve allocations before 7 December 2024

Before 7 December 2024, 2 classes of reserve allocation counted towards the concessional contributions cap:

A particular allocation of an assessable contribution.
Any other allocation (‘a capped allocation’) that did not fall within various specified exclusions.

In other words, for allocations other than assessable contributions (the first class mentioned above), a ‘catch-all’ mechanism counted towards the concessional contributions cap all allocations that did not fall within the specified exclusions (the second class mentioned above).

The exclusions (‘excluded allocations’) did not count towards the concessional contributions cap, with the result that they could be made without contribution cap taxation consequences for the member.

Capped allocations before 7 December 2024

An allocation was a capped allocation unless it was an excluded allocation. The excluded allocations were:

a certain type of rollover superannuation benefit
an amount of applicable fund earnings transferred from a foreign super fund included in the assessable income of the plan
a refund of excess capped fees and costs charged to a member
a ‘fair and reasonable allocation’, which could be made from any kind of reserve (subject to fund rules and regulatory requirements), being an allocation
- made to each member of the fund, or each member of a class of member
- for which the amount allocated was less than 5% of the value of the member’s interest at the time of allocation, and
- that would not have been assessable income of the fund if it were made as a contribution
the following types of pension reserve allocation
- an allocation to satisfy a pension liability
- an allocation on the commutation of an income stream, except as a result of the death of the primary beneficiary, to the recipient to commence another income stream as soon as practicable
- certain allocations on the commutation of an income stream as a result of the death of the beneficiary.

Reserve allocations from 7 December 2024

From 7 December 2024, the Regulation counts capped allocations towards the non-concessional contributions cap instead of the concessional contributions cap. The mechanism for counting allocations has not changed: a reserve allocation counts towards the non-concessional contributions cap it if does not fall within specified exclusions.

Each class of exclusion specified for the concessional contributions cap before 7 December 2024 has been specified for the non-concessional contributions cap from that date. This means types of allocations that fell within those exclusions before 7 December 2024 continue to be uncapped if made from that date. The Regulation makes no change to the treatment of allocations of certain assessable contributions, which continue to count towards the concessional contributions cap.

The drafting of the ‘fair and reasonable’ and ‘pension reserve’ exclusions in the Regulation has been updated. As a result, the exclusions do not mirror those specified for the concessional contributions cap word-for-word. One class of excluded allocation – ‘pension reserve allocation except as a result of death – after commutation to commence another income stream’ – is not explicitly specified as an exclusion for the purposes of the non-concessional contributions cap, because it falls within a new pension reserve exclusion discussed below (‘excluded cessation allocation’).

The table below lists these exclusions for the concessional contributions cap and their non-concessional contributions cap equivalents (legislative references are to the Income Tax Assessment (1997 Act) Regulations 2021 (ITAR (1997 Act) 2021).

Table: Excluded allocations before and from 7 December 2024
Class of excluded allocation	Exclusion from counting towards concessional contributions cap – before 7 December 2024 (repealed)	Exclusion from counting towards the non-concessional contributions cap – from 7 December 2024
Fair and reasonable allocation	Former subsection 291‑25.01(4)	Subsection 292-90.02(2)
Pension reserve allocation – to satisfy pension liability	Former paragraph 291‑25.01(5)(a)	Subsection 292-90.02(3)
Pension reserve allocation except as a result of death – after commutation to commence another income stream	Former paragraph 291‑25.01(5)(b)	Subsection 292-90.02(4)
Pension reserve allocation after death – to discharge pension reserve liabilities as a result of death	Former subparagraph 291‑25.01(5)(c)(i)	Subsection 292-90.02(5)
Pension reserve allocation after death – paid as lump-sum and death benefit	Former subparagraph 291‑25.01(5)(c)(ii)	Subsection 292-90.02(6)

Counting allocations towards the non-concessional contributions cap instead of the concessional contributions cap will affect the amount that can be allocated to some individuals without incurring contribution cap taxation consequences.

For example, some individuals have a nil non-concessional contributions cap. If a reserve allocation counts towards the individual’s non-concessional contributions cap in those circumstances, the amount of the allocation will exceed their non-concessional contributions cap.

Example: remediation payment allocations

A superannuation fund maintains an operational risk reserve, the purpose of which includes the remediation of amounts wrongly charged to member accounts.

As part of one such remediation exercise, amounts are allocated to a class of members in the fund on 1 January 2025 in a manner that does not satisfy:

the ‘fair and reasonable’ allocation exclusion, or
any other exclusion from the non-concessional contributions cap.

As the allocations were made for those members on or after 7 December 2024, they count towards the amount of the members’ non-concessional contributions for the 2024–25 financial year.

End of example

New class of excluded allocation from 7 December 2024

From 7 December 2024, the Regulation also excludes another broad class of pension reserve allocation for an individual. An allocation (an ‘excluded cessation allocation’) from a reserve of a complying superannuation plan for an individual is excluded if:

the reserve is a pension reserve of the plan
the reserve is used to discharge all or part of a liability of the plan to pay a superannuation income stream benefit from a superannuation income stream of which the individual is the recipient
the superannuation income stream is commuted or ceases
the commutation or cessation is not a result of the death of the primary beneficiary
the amount is allocated from the reserve for the individual as a result of the individual having been (before the commutation or cessation) the recipient of the superannuation income stream, and
where the reserve relates to more than one superannuation income stream, the allocation is fair and reasonable having regard to
- for each superannuation income stream that has not been commuted or ceased – the value of the interest that supports the superannuation income stream, and
- for each superannuation income stream that has been commuted or ceased – the value of the interest, that supported the superannuation income stream, immediately before the superannuation income stream was commuted or ceased.

Definition of pension reserve

From 7 December 2024, the Regulation provides that a reserve is a pension reserve of a complying superannuation plan at a particular time if the reserve is used at that time solely for the purpose (the ‘pension liability purpose’) of enabling the plan to discharge all or part of its pension liabilities (contingent or not) as soon as they become due. This definition is relevant not only for excluded cessation allocations, but also for the other excluded allocations (other than fair and reasonable allocations).

In addition:

under the Regulation, certain allocations made as a result of commutation or cessation of a superannuation income stream are deemed to be a use of a reserve for a pension liability purpose, and
under transitional rules provided by the Regulation, certain allocations are disregarded in working out, for the purposes of excluded cessation allocations, whether a reserve is a pension reserve at a time occurring after commencement.

The new definition of pension reserve and the 2 additions above are only relevant for determining excluded allocations from 7 December 2024. They do not apply when determining whether a reserve is a ‘pension reserve’ for the purposes of determining whether allocations are excluded from counting toward the concessional contributions cap before that date.

Allocations deemed to be for a pension liability purpose

From 7 December 2024, the Regulation provides, for the avoidance of doubt, that certain allocations (‘a deemed pension purpose allocation’) to a superannuation income stream recipient after the commutation or cessation of that income stream are taken to be made for the pension liability purpose: see subsection 292-90.02(8) of the ITAR (1997 Act) 2021. This ensures a reserve does not cease to be a pension reserve as a result of such allocations, including in at least the 2 following situations:

The active reserve situation – where the reserve is, apart from the deemed pension purpose allocation, a pension reserve because it is used solely for the purpose of discharging pension liabilities relating to one or more other income streams. The deemed pension purpose ensures the reserve continues to be a pension reserve after a deemed pension purpose allocation when continuing to discharge pension liabilities. Otherwise, the deemed pension purpose allocation and subsequent allocations to discharge pension liabilities would count towards the non-concessional contributions cap.
The dormant reserve situation – where the reserve is, apart from the deemed pension purpose allocation
- not being used for the purpose of discharging pension liabilities (because all income streams the reserve previously supported have been commuted or ceased), and
- used for no other purpose.

In the dormant reserve situation, the deemed pension purpose allocation does not prevent the reserve from ceasing to be a pension reserve for the purpose of making further cessation allocations.

There is no requirement that a deemed pension purpose allocation must be made within a specific period after the relevant commutation or cessation. If all other requirements for the allocation to be excluded are otherwise met, the allocations can be made long after the commutation or cessation.

Example: dormant reserve

A reserve established and used to support a single superannuation income stream:

commenced on 1 July 2005, and
ceased on 1 July 2020.

Between the cessation of the income stream and 6 December 2024, the reserve was not used for any purpose. After 7 December 2024, the trustee allocates the remainder of the reserve to the recipient of the former income stream in circumstances that satisfy all other requirements to be an excluded cessation allocation.

The allocation itself is deemed to be for a pension liability purpose. As a result, the reserve is a pension reserve at the time of the allocation.

End of example

Disregarded allocations

The Regulation also contains a transitional provision. That provision disregards certain allocations made before 7 December 2024 in working out whether a reserve of a complying superannuation plan is a pension reserve for the purposes of making excluded cessation allocations.

If one or more allocations before that date are the sole reason the reserve doesn’t otherwise meet the pension reserve definition for that purpose, disregarding the allocations ensures the definition is met.

An allocation from the reserve is disregarded if:

the reserve was used for the purpose of enabling the plan to discharge all or part of a liability of the plan to pay a superannuation income stream benefit from a superannuation income stream
the superannuation income stream was commuted or otherwise ceased
the allocation was made after the commutation or cessation, and
immediately before the commutation or cessation, the reserve was a pension reserve.

In the case where the reserve only ever supported one income stream, if the above criteria are met, allocations after the income stream commuted or otherwise ceased and before 7 December 2024 are disregarded.

In the case where the reserve was used to support more than one superannuation income stream, allocations made after the above requirements are met for the first time in relation to any of those income streams and before 7 December 2024 are disregarded. In effect, this could result in all allocations from the reserve occurring after that commutation or cessation being disregarded, even while the other income streams were still being supported by the reserve.

Example: fair and reasonable allocations disregarded

A reserve was established and used to support 2 lifetime pensions: income stream A and income stream B. Both commenced on 1 July 2005. Income stream A ceased on 1 July 2015, and income stream B ceased on 1 July 2020. The reserve met the definition of a pension reserve immediately before 1 July 2015. Between 1 July 2020 and 6 December 2024, fair and reasonable allocations were made to all members, but the reserve was otherwise used for no other purpose during that time.

After 7 December 2024, the trustee allocates a part of the reserve to the recipient of former income stream A in circumstances that satisfy all requirements for that allocation to be an excluded cessation allocation. In particular, the fair and reasonable allocations do not prevent the reserve from satisfying the requirement that it be a pension reserve because the transitional provision disregards all allocations between 1 July 2015 and 6 December 2024.

The cessation allocation itself is also deemed to be for a pension liability purpose. As a result, the reserve does not cease to be a pension reserve for the purposes of the Regulation because of the allocation, which may be relevant if a subsequent excluded cessation allocation is made to the recipient of former income stream B.

End of example

MIL OSI News –

June 18, 2025

MIL-OSI Australia: Relaxed commutation rules for legacy retirement products
Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

Changes to commutation restrictions

From 7 December 2024, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Legacy Retirement Product Commutations and Reserves) Regulations 2024External Link (the Regulation) temporarily relaxes commutation restrictions for certain retirement income stream products (known as legacy retirement products).

Before 7 December 2024, providers of certain legacy retirement products had to ensure that those products could not be commuted under the relevant fund rules, contract, or terms and conditions of the product (the fund or product rules), except in limited circumstances.

The Regulation relaxes this restriction so that the relevant fund or product rules can also allow the products to be fully commuted within the 5-year period beginning on 7 December 2024 and ending on 6 December 2029.

What can be commuted
The affected products that can be commuted are:
- lifetime annuities and pensions, being products that meet the meet the standards in subregulations 1.05(2) or 1.06(2) of the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Regulations 1994 (SISR), if the fund that purchases or provides consideration for the benefit (in the case of annuities) or provides the benefit (in the case of pensions)
  
  is not a defined benefit fund, or
  
  is a self-managed superannuation fund (SMSF), or
  
  was, when the benefit commenced to be paid and at all earlier times, a small APRA fund
- life expectancy annuities and pensions, being products that meet the standards in subregulations 1.05(9) or 1.06(7) of the SISR
- market-linked annuities and pensions, being products that meet the standards in subregulations 1.05(10) or 1.06(8) of the SISR, or subregulation 1.07(3A) of the Retirement Savings Accounts Regulations 1997.
While the affected products are described as legacy retirement products, and many commenced before 20 September 2007, there is no requirement in the Regulation that the affected products must have commenced before a particular date.

The Regulation relaxes a restriction on what fund or product rules can allow: it does not change fund or product rules themselves. Fund or product rules may need to be changed by the fund or provider to allow commutation before a recipient can commute without the fund breaching those rules.

Example 1: lifetime pension in an SMSF

Rebecca starts receiving a lifetime pension from her SMSF on 1 July 2003. That pension is provided under fund rules that meet the standards in subregulation 1.06(2) of the SISR.

On 1 January 2025, the trustee amends the fund rules to allow full commutation within the 5-year period beginning on 7 December 2024 of lifetime pensions it provides.

On 1 March 2025, Rebecca fully commutes her lifetime pension. The commutation complies with the standards in the Regulation.

End of example

Example 2: market-linked pension in an SMSF

Isaac starts receiving a lifetime pension from his SMSF on 1 July 2003. On 1 July 2020, that lifetime pension is fully commuted and the resulting lump sum is used to directly purchase a market-linked pension from the same fund in circumstances that do not breach subregulation 1.06(2) of the SISR. The market-linked pension is provided under fund rules that meet the standards in subregulation 1.06(8) and regulation 1.07C of the SISR.

On 1 January 2025, the trustee amends the fund rules to allow full commutation within the 5-year period beginning on 7 December 2024 of market-linked pensions it provides. After that amendment, Isaac fully commutes his market-linked pension. The commutation complies with the standards in the Regulation.

End of example
What happens when a legacy retirement product is commuted
If an affected legacy retirement product is commuted, in most cases the resulting entitlement can be dealt with by the former recipient in the same way as an entitlement from the commutation of most other superannuation income streams. Generally, the entitlement must be allocated to the member’s account and then can be:
- subject to preservation rules and payment standards
  
  used to commence another income stream (if the individual has sufficient transfer balance cap space), or
  
  paid as a lump sum
- retained in the fund, in ‘accumulation phase’
- dealt with in a combination of the above ways.
In some cases, there may be other restrictions on how the entitlement can be dealt with. For example, if the legacy retirement product is a death benefit income stream, the entitlement may need to be paid from the fund to the recipient and not retained in the fund to comply with fund rules and requirements of the SISR.

Possible tax and social security consequences
Both the commutation of an affected legacy retirement product and any subsequent dealings with the resulting entitlement will also have taxation consequences for the former recipient. For example:
- the commutation of the legacy retirement product will result in a transfer balance account debit for the former recipient, and
- the commencement of another superannuation income stream will result in a transfer balance account credit for that individual.
Many affected legacy retirement products are treated differently to account-based superannuation income streams for transfer balance cap purposes. For example, special valuation methods for determining transfer balance account debits and credits may be applicable.

Commuting a legacy retirement product may also have social security implications. Individuals may need to seek financial advice before making decisions about their legacy retirement products to avoid unintended taxation and social security consequences.

Reserves associated with legacy retirement products

Some superannuation funds may have reserves associated with affected legacy retirement products. From 7 December 2024, the Regulation also changes the way that allocations from reserves are treated for taxation purposes, including but not limited to allocations from reserves associated with legacy retirement products. For further explanation of those changes, see Changes to reserve allocations.

MIL OSI News –
June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: Update 5: Alberta wildfire update (June 17, 3 p.m.)
Source: Government of Canada regional news (2)
Current situation (as of 3 p.m., June 17)
- There are 57 wildfires currently burning across Alberta in the Forest Protection Area, and three mutual aid fires.
  
  22 are classified as out of control, nine are being held and 26 are under control.
  
  There have been nine new wildfires since yesterday.
- Since Jan. 1, there have been 567 wildfires in the Forest Protection Area, burning more than 660,000 hectares.
- More than 1,500 Alberta firefighters, contract firefighters and imported firefighters are currently battling wildfires across the province.
- Resources currently being used include heavy equipment, air tankers, helicopters and night vision helicopters.
- Alberta has imported firefighters and aircraft from Yukon, British Columbia, Quebec, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Australia, Washington State, Oregon, Idaho, Hawaii and the United States Forest Service.
- Information about wildfires can be found by visiting the Alberta Wildfire Status Dashboard.
Orders and alerts
- Updates on evacuation orders are available on www.alberta.ca/emergency.
- On June 17, Dene Tha’ First Nation lifted its evacuation order for the community of Chateh, allowing all residents to return home. Residents of Chateh must remain prepared to evacuate again if conditions change.
- On June 16, the Town of Swan Hills lifted its evacuation alert.
- On June 13, the County of Grande Prairie No. 1 lifted its evacuation order, allowing all residents to return home. An evacuation alert remains in place for everyone north of Township Road 710 to 740, east of the provincial border with British Columbia to Range Road 132.
- On June 13, Saddle Hills County updated its evacuation order, which now includes everyone located between Township Road 794 and Highway 680 (Township Road 802), and Range Road 95 and Highway 725, as well as the Crown Land north of Township Road 800 and south of the Blueberry Mountain Grazing Reserve. The surrounding areas remain on evacuation alert.
- On June 13, Lac La Biche County lifted its evacuation alert for southern Winefred Lake and Grist Lake.
- The Kee Tas Kee Now Tribal Council’s evacuation orders for Loon Lake 235, Peerless Lake and Trout Lake remain in effect.
  
  Registration centre at 10451 170 Street, Edmonton.
- The Municipal District of Opportunity No. 17’s evacuation order for Red Earth Creek remains in effect.
  
  Reception centre at the Baytex Energy Centre, 9810 73 Avenue, Peace River.
- The Municipal District of Opportunity No. 17’s evacuation order for Chipewyan Lake also remains in effect.
  
  Reception centre at Lakeview Sports Centre, 102 Opportunity Drive, Wabasca-Desmarais.
- Residents of the following additional areas must also remain prepared to evacuate if necessary:
  
  Hamlet of Marten Beach – Municipal District of Slave River
  
  Hawk Hills area – County of Northern Lights
- Alberta Emergency Alerts are issued by local authorities and are updated at their discretion. For the best source of information on the status of evacuation orders and alerts, residents are encouraged to follow their local authorities’ preferred communication channels for updates.
- People living in Alberta are encouraged to download the Alberta Emergency Alert mobile app, which immediately pushes all alerts out to subscribers.
Fire bans
- A fire ban is in effect for the High Level Forest Area as well as parts of the Fort McMurray and Calgary forest areas.
- Under this ban, all outdoor wood fires, barbecue charcoal briquettes, fireworks and exploding targets are prohibited, and existing fire permits are suspended.
- Please confirm advisories, restrictions or bans for your area at alberta.ca/fire-bans.
- Fire bans outside the Forest Protection Area are the responsibility of municipalities and counties.
- Everyone has a role to play in wildfire prevention. Follow all fire bans and restrictions to avoid new fire starts. If you see smoke or flames in the forest, call 310-FIRE to report it.
- Applying FireSmart principles to homes and property can mitigate the risk of wildfire damage. Removing flammable materials and vegetation around the property and preventing embers from accumulating can help protect your home from wildfires. To learn more, visit FireSmart Alberta.
Air quality
- Visit Wildfire Smoke Information for air quality monitoring information to make informed decisions about outdoor activities to protect your health. While wildfire smoke is affecting air quality in parts of Alberta, the presence of smoke does not necessarily mean there is fire near your community. Find information about the status of active wildfires and wildfire updates at Alberta Wildfire.
Roads and highways
- Highway 686 between Red Earth Creek and Trout Lake is currently closed due to a wildfire.
- Highway 671/Kelly Lake Road at the Alberta/British Columbia border to Range Road 130, southwest of Hythe, is now open.
- 511 Alberta is the best source of real time information as conditions change on our highways. Follow on X (formerly known as Twitter) @511alberta.
- Alberta highways that are affected by the wildfires will open and close frequently depending on safety and weather conditions. Be patient and respect the staff at the closure/detour sites – they are there with your safety in mind.
Health
- As of June 16, following the end of the community’s four-hour evacuation order, Alberta Health Services is actively working to restore acute care services at Swan Hills Healthcare Centre.
- For information about wildfire resources, including mental health, visit Wildfire Resources | Alberta Health Services.
Education
- Six schools are currently closed in response to community evacuations:
  
  Dene Tha’ Community School, in Chateh
  
  Kateri School, in Trout Lake
  
  Elizabeth Quintal School, in Peerless Lake
  
  Clarence Jaycox School, in Loon Lake
  
  Red Earth Creek School, in Red Earth Creek
  
  Chipewyan Lake School, in Chipewyan Lake
- Swan Hills School, in Swan Hills, reopened on Monday, June 9.
- Parents and guardians should reach out to local school authorities for the most current information on impacts to schooling.
- All impacted school authorities had plans in place to ensure displaced students have access to educational programming.
Child care
- One child-care centre is currently closed in response to community evacuations:
  
  Opportunity Childcare, in Red Earth Creek
- Licensed child-care programs are required to notify Child Care Connect if they close unexpectedly.
- Parents and guardians should reach out to their child-care provider for information on closures.
Justice and Court Services
- The Chateh and Red Earth Creek courthouses are closed until further notice due to evacuations. Visit the Alberta Courts website for the most current information regarding court scheduling.
Related information
- Active emergency updates
- Alberta Emergency Alerts
- Download the Alberta Emergency Alerts app
- Download the Alberta Wildfire app
- How to prepare for an emergency
- Wildfire smoke information
- Emergency evacuation payments
- Free admission to provincial museums and historic sites
MIL OSI Canada News –
June 18, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Jaws at 50: how two musical notes terrified an entire generation

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Cole, Composer and Lecturer in Screen Composition, Sydney Conservatorium of Music, University of Sydney

Universal Pictures

Our experience of the world often involves hearing our environment before seeing it. Whether it’s the sound of something moving through nearby water, or the rustling of vegetation, our fear of the unseen is rooted in our survival instincts as a species.

Cinematic sound and music taps into these somewhat unsettling instincts – and this is exactly what director Steven Spielberg and composer John Williams achieved in the iconic 1975 thriller Jaws. The sound design and musical score work in tandem to confront the audience with a mysterious killer animal.

In what is arguably the film’s most iconic scene, featuring beach swimmers’ legs flailing underwater, the shark remains largely unseen – yet the sound perfectly conveys the threat at large.

Creating tension in a soundtrack

Film composers aim to create soundscapes that will profoundly move and influence their audience. And they express these intentions through the use of musical elements such as rhythm, harmony, tempo, form, dynamics, melody and texture.

In Jaws, the initial encounter with the shark opens innocently with the sound of an offshore buoy and its clanging bell. The scene is established both musically and atmospherically to evoke a sense of isolation for the two characters enjoying a late-night swim on an empty beach.

But once we hear the the low strings, followed by the central two-note motif played on a tuba, we know something sinister is afoot.

This compositional technique of alternating between two notes at an increasing speed has long been employed by composers, including by Antonín Dvořák in his 1893 work New World Symphony.

John Williams reportedly used six basses, eight cellos, four trombones and a tuba to create the blend of low frequencies that would go on to define his entire Jaws score.

The bass instruments emphasise the lower end of the musical frequency spectrum, evoking a dark timbre that conveys depth, power and intensity. String players can use various bowing techniques, such as staccato and marcato, to deliver dark and even menacing tones, especially in the lower registers.

Meanwhile, there is a marked absence of tonality in the repeating E–F notes, played with increasing speed on the tuba. Coupled with the intensifying dynamics in the instrumental blend, this accelerating two-note motif signals the looming danger before we even see it – tapping into our instinctive fear of the unknown.

The use of the two-note motif and lower-end orchestration characterises a composition style that aims to unsettle and disorientate the audience. Another example of this style can be heard in Bernard Herrmann’s car crash scene audio in North by Northwest (1959).

Similarly, in Sergei Prokofiev’s Scythian Suite, the opening of the second movement (Dance of the Pagan Gods) uses an alternating D#–E motif.

The elasticity of Williams’ motif allows the two notes to be played on different instruments throughout the soundtrack, exploring various timbral possibilities to induce a kaleidoscope of fear, panic and dread.

The psychology behind our response

What is it that makes the Jaws soundtrack so psychologically confronting, even without the visuals? Music scholars have various theories. Some suggest the two notes imitate the sound of human respiration, while others have proposed the theme evokes the heartbeat of a shark.

Williams explained his approach in an interview with the Los Angeles Times:

I fiddled around with the idea of creating something that was very … brainless […] Meaning something could be very repetitious, very visceral, and grab you in your gut, not in your brain. […] It could be something you could play very softly, which would indicate that the shark is far away when all you see is water. Brainless music that gets louder and gets closer to you, something is gonna swallow you up.

Williams plays with the audience’s emotions throughout the film’s score, culminating in the scene Man Against Beast – a celebration of thematic development and heightened orchestration.

The film’s iconic soundtrack has created a legacy that extends beyond the visual. And this suggests the score isn’t just a soundtrack – but a character in its own right.

By using music to reveal what is hidden, Williams creates an intense emotional experience rife with anticipation and tension. The score’s two-note motif showcases his genius – and serves as a sonic shorthand that has kept a generation behind the breakers of every beach.

Alison Cole 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.

– ref. Jaws at 50: how two musical notes terrified an entire generation – https://theconversation.com/jaws-at-50-how-two-musical-notes-terrified-an-entire-generation-258068

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

June 18, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: How high can US debt go before it triggers a financial crisis?

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Luke Hartigan, Lecturer in Economics, University of Sydney

rarrarorro/Shutterstock

The tax cuts bill currently being debated by the US Senate will add another US$3 trillion (A$4.6 trillion) to US debt. President Donald Trump calls it the “big, beautiful bill”; his erstwhile policy adviser Elon Musk called it a “disgusting abomination”.

Foreign investors have already been rattled by Trump’s upending of the global trade system. The eruption of war in the Middle East would usually lead to “flight to safety” buying of the US dollar, but the dollar has barely budged. That suggests US assets are not seen as the safe haven they used to be.

Greg Combet, chair of Australia’s own sovereign wealth fund, the Future Fund, outlined many of the new risks arising from US policies in a speech on Tuesday.

As investors turn cautious on the US, at some point the surging US debt pile will become unsustainable. That could risk a financial crisis. But at what point does that happen?

The public sector holds a range of debt

When talking about the sustainability of US government debt, we have to distinguish between total debt and public debt.

Public debt is owed to individuals, companies, foreign governments and investors. This accounts for about 80% of total US debt. The remainder is intra-governmental debt held by government agencies and the Federal Reserve.

Public debt is a more correct measure of US government debt. And it is much less than the headline total government debt amount that is frequently quoted, which is running at US$36 trillion or 121% of GDP.

Are there limits to government debt?

Governments are not like households. They can feasibly roll over debt indefinitely and don’t technically need to repay it, unlike a personal credit card. And countries such as the US that issue debt in their own currency can’t technically default unless they choose to.

Debt also serves a useful role. It is the main way a government funds infrastructure projects. It is an important channel for monetary policy, because the US Federal Reserve sets the benchmark interest rate that affects borrowing costs across the economy. And because the US government issues bonds, known as Treasuries, to finance the debt, this is an important asset for investors.

There is probably some limit to the amount of debt the US government can issue. But we don’t really know what this amount is, and we won’t know until we get there. Additionally, the US’s reserve currency status, due to the US dollar’s dominant role in international finance, gives the US government more leeway than other governments.

Interest costs are surging

What is important is the government’s ability to service its debt – that is, to pay the interest cost. This depends on two components: growth in economic activity, and the interest rate on government debt.

If economic growth on average is higher than the interest rate, then the government’s effective interest cost is negative and it could sustainably carry its existing debt burden.

The interest cost of US government debt has surged recently following a series of Federal Reserve interest rate hikes in 2022 and 2023 to quell inflation.

The US government is now spending more on interest payments than on defence – about US$882 billion annually. This will soon start crowding out spending in other areas, unless taxes are raised or further spending cuts made.

Recent policy decisions not helping

The turmoil caused by Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs and heightened uncertainty about future government policy are expected to weaken US economic growth and raise inflation. This, coupled with the recent credit downgrade of US government debt by ratings agency Moody’s, is likely to put upward pressure on US interest rates, further increasing the servicing cost of US government debt.

Moody’s cited concerns about the growth of US federal debt. This comes as the US House of Representatives passed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, which seeks to extend the 2017 tax cuts indefinitely while slashing social spending. This has caused some to question the sustainability of the US government’s fiscal position.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill will add a further US$3 trillion to government debt over the ten years to 2034, increasing debt to 124% of GDP. And this would increase to US$4.5 trillion over ten years and take debt to 128% of GDP if some tax initiatives were made permanent.

Also troubling is Section 899 of the bill, known as the “revenge tax”. This controversial provision raises the tax payable by foreign investors and could further deter foreign investment, potentially making US government debt even less attractive.

A compromised Federal Reserve is the next risk

The passing of the tax and spending bill is unlikely to cause a financial crisis in the US. But the US could be entering into a period of “fiscal dominance”, which is just as concerning.

In this situation, the independence of the Federal Reserve might be compromised if it is pressured to support the US government’s fiscal position. It would do this by keeping interest rates lower than otherwise, or buying government debt to support the government instead of targeting inflation. Trump has already been putting pressure on Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, demanding he cut rates immediately.

This could lead to much higher inflation in the US, as occurred in Germany in the 1920s, and more recently in Argentina and Turkey.

Luke Hartigan receives funding from the Australian Research Council (DP230100959)

– ref. How high can US debt go before it triggers a financial crisis? – https://theconversation.com/how-high-can-us-debt-go-before-it-triggers-a-financial-crisis-258812

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

June 18, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Would a corporate tax cut boost productivity in Australia? So far, the evidence is unclear

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Isaac Gross, Lecturer in Economics, Monash University

The Conversation, CC BY-NC

The first term of the Albanese government was defined by its fight against inflation, but the second looks like it will be defined by a need to kick start Australia’s sluggish productivity growth.

Productivity is essentially the art of earning more while working less and is critical for driving our standard of living higher.

The Productivity Commission, tasked with figuring out how to get Australia’s sluggish productivity back on track, is pushing hard for corporate tax cuts as a key part of their plan for building a “dynamic and resilient economy”.

The idea? Lower taxes will attract more foreign investment, get businesses spending again and eventually boost workers’ productivity.

Commission chair, Danielle Wood, said last week while the commission wanted to create more investment opportunities, it was aware this would hit the budget bottom line:

So we’re looking at ways to spur investment while finding other ways we might be able to pick up revenue in the system.

The general company tax rate is currently 30% for large firms, and there’s a reduced rate of 25% for smaller companies with an overall turnover of less than A$50 million.

What the textbooks and other countries tell us

The Productivity Commission’s theory makes sense: if you make capital cheaper and you should get more of it flowing in.

A larger stock of capital means there is more to invest in Australian workers. This should make us more productive and help boost workers’ wages. And looking overseas, the evidence mostly backs this up.

A meta-analysis of 25 studies covering the US, UK, Japan, France, Germany, Canada, Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, Switzerland,
Denmark, Portugal and Finland found every percentage point you slice off the corporate tax rate brings in about 3.3% more foreign direct investment.

Other research shows multinational companies really do move their operations to places with lower tax rates. This explains why we’re seeing this race to the bottom across Europe and North America, with countries constantly trying to undercut each other.

Research on location decisions shows how multinationals reshuffle their operations based on effective average tax rates.

Even within the United States, a US study found increases in corporate tax rates lead to big reductions in employment and wage income. However, corporate tax cuts can boost economic activity – though typically only if they are implemented during recessions.

Australia’s limited track record

Here in Australia we don’t have much local evidence to go on, and what we do have is pretty puzzling.

This matters because Australia’s corporate tax system has some unique features that may make overseas evidence less relevant. We have dividend imputation (franking credits), different treatment of capital gains, access to immediate reimbursement for some small business expenses and complex capitalisation rules that limit debt deductions for multinationals.

The Federal Government is focussed on improving productivity. In this five-part series, we’ve asked leading experts what that means for the economy, what’s holding us back and their best ideas for reform.

A study by a group of Australian National University economists looked at how the tax system affects business investment. They examined the [2015 and 2016 corporate tax cuts] for small businesses using data on business investment from the Australian Bureau of Statistics combined with tax data from the Australian Tax Office.

The findings were mixed. After the 2015 cut, firms already investing in buildings and equipment spent more — that is, the policy boosted investment only at the intensive margin.

By contrast, there was no evidence it enticed firms that had not been investing to start doing so. The follow-up cut in 2016 had even less bite. Its estimated effect on investment was so small it is statistically indistinguishable from zero.

It remains unclear why the previous corporate tax reductions largely failed to produce a measurable increase in investment. Perhaps the tax cut itself was simply too modest. Or the available data was too volatile to capture its effects.

But it runs contrary to what economic theory tells us to expect. This should give us pause for thought.

The big questions nobody can answer yet

For politicians thinking about another round of corporate tax cuts, this creates an uncomfortable situation. We’ve got solid evidence from overseas it works, but only one weak data point from Australia, plus a lot of head-scratching about why the second cut didn’t move the dial.

Fortunately, the Productivity Commission has the in-house expertise to further investigate this question.

Before we make further cuts to the company tax rate, we should have an in-depth study of these two tax cuts replicating and extending the previous work to see what effect – if any – they had on investment, employment, productivity and Australian living standards.

Until we can solve these puzzles, Australia’s debate over corporate tax rates will keep spinning its wheels. Much like our national productivity itself.

Isaac Gross 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.

– ref. Would a corporate tax cut boost productivity in Australia? So far, the evidence is unclear – https://theconversation.com/would-a-corporate-tax-cut-boost-productivity-in-australia-so-far-the-evidence-is-unclear-258575

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

June 18, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: Australia could become the world’s first net-zero exporter of fossil fuels – here’s how

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Frank Jotzo, Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy and Director, Centre for Climate and Energy Policy, Australian National University

Photo by Jie Zhao/Corbis via Getty Images

Australia is the world’s third largest exporter of gas and second largest exporter of coal. When burned overseas, these exports result in 1.1 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a year – almost three times Australia’s domestic emissions.

Emissions embedded in Australia’s exports do not count towards our national emissions targets. But they contribute to climate change – and they’re the reason for Australia’s international reputation as a fossil-fuel economy.

On the bright side, Australia boasts huge potential for low-cost renewable energy and a knack for resource industries.

We can, and should, become a “renewable energy superpower”. This term refers to the potential for Australia to use its bountiful renewable energy resources to make commodities such as iron, ammonia and other products and fuels in “green” or low-emissions ways.

So how does Australia give salience to this idea on the global stage, while our fossil fuel exports continue? The solution could be a new net-zero target for Australia, in which emissions from green exports are tallied up against those from fossil fuel exports.

Australia can become a renewable energy superpower.
Brook Mitchell/Getty Images

Reinvigorating Australia’s climate policy

If the clean energy transition eventuates, green exports from Australia will rise over time. This will help reduce the use of coal, gas and oil elsewhere in the world.

Meanwhile, coal exports – and later, gas exports – will fall. This will happen irrespective of Australia’s policies, as the world economy decarbonises and demand for fossil fuels slows.

At some point, we can expect emissions avoided by our green commodity exports to surpass those from remaining coal and gas exports. Australia would then reach what could be termed “net-zero export emissions”.

Adopting this net-zero target as a national policy would give a concrete yardstick to Australia’s green-export ambitions. It could also invigorate Australia’s climate policy and boost investor confidence.

A different approach would be to set targets only for green exports, and this could be how we get started. Ultimately, a net-zero target wrapping up both green and fossil-fuel exports would speak most directly to the goal of tackling climate change, and is likely to have more impact on the international stage.

A net-zero export target would give a concrete yardstick to Australia’s ambition to develop green export industries.
Brook Mitchell/Getty Images

Getting to net-zero exports

The below chart shows an illustrative decline in emissions embedded in Australia’s coal and LNG (liquified natural gas) exports, out to 2050.*

Authors’ calculations based on Australian Energy Update 2024, Australian National Greenhouse Accounts Factors 2024, IEA World Energy Outlook 2024

It’s hard to pin down when Australia might reach net-zero exports. It depends on several factors. How quickly will the cost of clean energy and green-commodity technologies fall? How competitively can Australia produce green goods compared to other nations? What policies will be adopted in Australia and overseas – and will they work?

The magnitudes are sobering. Take iron, for example. Australia currently exports 900 million tonnes of iron ore a year. This is processed overseas to about 560 million tonnes of iron.

To fully compensate for emissions currently embedded in Australia’s coal and gas exports, Australia would need to process about the same amount of green iron – around 550 million tonnes – on home soil every year.

To reach this figure, we assume 0.1 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent is created per tonne of green iron, compared to about 2.1 tonnes of CO₂-equivalent per tonne of iron resulting from conventional blast furnace production.

Achieving this would require keeping iron ore production at current levels and processing it all in Australia, which is unlikely to be realistic.

Thankfully, the task of reaching net-zero export emissions will be smaller in future, as global coal and gas demand falls. But exactly how this will translate to Australian exports is highly uncertain.

Let’s suppose Australia’s exports evolved on the same trajectory as they might under current climate policies and pledges for the global coal and gas trade.

In this case, embedded emissions from Australia’s coal and gas exports would be about 360 million tonnes in 2050. This includes about 120 million tonnes from LNG exports – much of it locked in by the extension to Woodside’s North West Shelf project off Western Australia.

Hypothetically, the 360 million tonnes of emissions could be negated by a mix of green exports. They include 102 million tonnes of green iron (saving 204 million tonnes of CO₂), and 11 million tonnes of green ammonia (saving about 23 million tonnes of CO₂), and the remainder covered by a combination of green aluminium, silicon, methanol and transport fuels.

Judgement calls would be needed about which commodities to include in the target. The composition of green exports suggested above is akin to assumptions about Australia’s potential global market share outlined by The Superpower Institute.

Importantly, it’s hard to predict with certainty the greenhouse gas emissions displaced elsewhere in the world by Australia’s green exports. So, the estimates should be understood as broad illustrations, and not as exact as the accounting used to calculate countries’ domestic emissions.

The precise year chosen for reaching a net-zero target for export emissions may well be less important than the commitment that, at some point, Australia’s green energy exports will exceed fossil fuel exports. This would establish the notion that Australia has the capacity and willingness to help the world decarbonise.

At some point, Australia’s green energy exports will exceed fossil fuel exports.
David Gray/Getty Images

A positive agenda for change

The export target could be part of Australia’s updated emissions pledge due to be submitted to the United Nations by September this year. The pledge, known as a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), is required by signatories to the Paris Agreement.

Each nation is expected to detail its national emissions target for 2035. But nations can make additional pledges towards the world’s climate change effort. You could call it an “NDC+”.

So Australia could outline an indicative goal for net-zero exports – perhaps alongside other pledges such as leveraging climate change finance for developing countries, or helping our Pacific neighbours adapt to climate change impacts.

As a large fossil fuels exporter, Australia would earn kudos for showing it has a positive agenda for change.

And if Australia wins the bid to host the COP31 climate conference next year, a plan to reduce export emissions could be a major rallying point.

* Underlying data for the chart showing an expected decline in future emissions embedded in Australia’s coal and LNG exports:

Exports in 2022–23: coal, 9.6 exajoules (EJ); LNG, 4.5 EJ, from Australian Energy Update. This was multiplied by an emissions factor 90.2 for coal (MtCO₂-e/EJ) and 51.5 for LNG (MtCO₂-e/EJ), as drawn from the Australian National Greenhouse Accounts Factors

Exports for 2035 and 2050: this assumes a trend aligned with the IEA’s Announced Pledges Scenario, as outlined in the World Energy Outlook 2024. Note the percentage changes from 2023 to 2035 and 2050 for coal (-45% and -73% respectively) and for LNG (+9% and -47% respectively.) These figures do not distinguish between steam coal for power and metallurgical coal.

Frank Jotzo leads research projects on climate, energy and industry policy. He is a commissioner with the NSW Net Zero Commission and chairs the Queensland Clean Economy Expert Panel.

Annette Zou works on research projects on climate policy and decarbonisation and has previously worked with The Superpower Institute

– ref. Australia could become the world’s first net-zero exporter of fossil fuels – here’s how – https://theconversation.com/australia-could-become-the-worlds-first-net-zero-exporter-of-fossil-fuels-heres-how-259037

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

June 18, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: We tracked Aussie teens’ mental health. The news isn’t good – and problems are worse for girls
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Scarlett Smout, Postdoctoral Research Fellow at The Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use and Australia’s Mental Health Think Tank, University of Sydney

skynesher/Getty Images

We know young people in Australia and worldwide are experiencing growing mental health challenges.

The most recent national survey from the Australian Bureau of Statistics found nearly two in five (38.8%) 16- to 24-year-olds experienced symptoms of a mental disorder in the previous 12 months.

This was substantially higher than the last time the survey was run in 2007, when the figure was 26%.

We’ve published a new study today looking at the rates of mental health problems among Australian high school students specifically. We found almost one in four high school students report mental health problems by Year 10 – and things are worse for girls and gender-diverse teens.

Tracking teens’ mental health

In our study, published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, we looked at mental health symptoms in more than 6,500 Australian teens, and how these symptoms changed over time.

We surveyed high school students from 71 schools annually from Year 7 (age 12/13) to Year 10 (age 15/16). Our sample, while not nationally representative, includes a large cross-section of schools in New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia.

We found symptoms of mental health problems increased steadily over time:
- in Year 7, 17% of students we surveyed reported symptoms which met the criteria for probable depression, increasing to 28% by Year 10
- some 14% of students reported high psychological distress in Year 7, rising to 24% in Year 10
- the proportion reporting moderate-to-severe anxiety grew from 16% in Year 7 to 24% by Year 10.
Which teens were hardest hit?

We looked at how mental health symptoms over time were linked to different social factors, such as gender, cultural background and family affluence. We also looked at school factors, such as how advantaged a student’s school is.

We found clear differences in mental health by gender, affluence, and school advantage. Girls and gender diverse teens had higher symptoms in Year 7 and a steeper rise in symptoms over the four years, when compared to their male peers.

By Year 10, compared to males, females had average symptom scores that were 88% higher for depression, 34% higher for anxiety, and 55% higher for psychological distress (in models that adjusted for other factors).

Again compared to males and in adjusted models, gender diverse teens had symptom scores at Year 10 that were 121% higher for depression, 55% higher for anxiety, and 89% higher for psychological distress.

Teens from the least affluent families had 7% higher depressive symptoms than those from the most affluent families in adjusted models, while teens attending the least advantaged schools had 9% higher anxiety symptoms than teens attending the most advantaged schools.

We then examined how gender and affluence interacted to influence mental health. Girls in the lowest affluence group experienced heightened anxiety and depressive symptoms over and above the effects of affluence or gender alone.

This shows how multiple factors can stack up, creating greater risk of poor mental health for certain young people.

Gender-diverse teens were more likely to have poor mental health in our study.
SeventyFour/Shutterstock

While we were able to explore a wide range of factors, a limitation of our study was that we could not examine all social factors that may impact mental health. For example, we couldn’t ascertain the potential differences experienced by Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander teens or those living in remote and very remote areas.

How does this data compare to other studies?

Recent Australian data from similar-aged adolescents is scarce. However, the 2015 Young Minds Matter study found 14.4% of 12- to 17-year-olds experienced a mental disorder in the prior 12 months.

The higher rates of mental health challenges we observed in our study are likely consistent with recent evidence suggesting “cohort effects” – where each generation has worse mental health than the one before it. Research is still investigating the reasons behind these trends, with avenues of inquiry spanning everything from social media to climate change. But it appears no single factor is to blame.

The COVID pandemic has also played a role, with young people seeming to be hit particularly hard by mental health impacts of the pandemic.

Notably, the gender differences between girls and boys are supported by data from global studies, showing this is not a uniquely Australian phenomenon.

What can we do about the gender divide in mental health?

With a mental health-care system stretched beyond capacity, it’s crucial we prevent and address mental health problems early. While this requires a multilayered approach, aiming to reduce these gender inequities in mental health is an important place to start.

While outside the scope of this study, a growing field of research is interrogating why there are gender differences in mental health. Factors identified include:
- experiences of gender-based violence
- gender differences in lifestyle behaviours (for example, diet, physical activity and screen time)
- gendered norms that place pressure on girls to meet unrealistic gender standards
- gender differences in family and social relationships
- biological differences related to hormones and menstruation.
These areas indicate avenues for potential solutions, but addressing these factors requires wraparound investment.

Promisingly, many of these factors are mentioned in the National Women’s Health Strategy. With women’s health a central platform for the Albanese government’s election campaign, hopefully we will see more investment in research and policy to address these issues.

Importantly, our study found gender inequities in mental health were even more stark for gender diverse teens, so focus should not solely be on girls and women.

We must design solutions with young people

Adolescent mental health isn’t something we can tackle with a one-size-fits-all approach. We need strategies that are meaningfully co-designed with young people themselves. Initiatives can then be tailored to meet their unique needs and reflect their diverse experiences.

When we work directly with priority groups, such as girls, gender diverse teens and those experiencing socio-economic disadvantage, we can offer safe, culturally appropriate and affirming solutions. This helps teens feel seen, heard and supported – all key ingredients for better mental health.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14 or Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800.

Scarlett Smout receives funding from the BHP Foundation and provides academic support for Australia’s Mental Health Think Tank.

Katrina Champion receives funding from the Medical Research Future Fund and via University of Sydney Horizon Fellowship.

– ref. We tracked Aussie teens’ mental health. The news isn’t good – and problems are worse for girls – https://theconversation.com/we-tracked-aussie-teens-mental-health-the-news-isnt-good-and-problems-are-worse-for-girls-259044
MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –
June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: SPC Tornado Watch 429

Source: US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Note: The expiration time in the watch graphic is amended if the watch is replaced, cancelled or extended.Note: Click for Watch Status Reports.
SEL9

URGENT – IMMEDIATE BROADCAST REQUESTED
Tornado Watch Number 429
NWS Storm Prediction Center Norman OK
340 PM CDT Tue Jun 17 2025

The NWS Storm Prediction Center has issued a

* Tornado Watch for portions of
Southern Kansas
Northern Oklahoma
Northeast Texas Panhandle

* Effective this Tuesday afternoon and evening from 340 PM until
1000 PM CDT.

* Primary threats include…
A couple tornadoes possible
Scattered damaging winds and isolated significant gusts to 75
mph likely
Scattered large hail and isolated very large hail events to 3
inches in diameter likely

SUMMARY…Thunderstorms are expected to rapidly develop this
afternoon along an axis from the northeast Texas Panhandle into
southeast Kansas. Supercell thunderstorms are expected with a risk
of very large hail, damaging winds, and a few tornadoes.

The tornado watch area is approximately along and 70 statute miles
north and south of a line from 110 miles west southwest of Alva OK
to 10 miles southeast of Chanute KS. For a complete depiction of the
watch see the associated watch outline update (WOUS64 KWNS WOU9).

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS…

REMEMBER…A Tornado Watch means conditions are favorable for
tornadoes and severe thunderstorms in and close to the watch
area. Persons in these areas should be on the lookout for
threatening weather conditions and listen for later statements
and possible warnings.

&&

OTHER WATCH INFORMATION…CONTINUE…WW 428…

AVIATION…Tornadoes and a few severe thunderstorms with hail
surface and aloft to 3 inches. Extreme turbulence and surface wind
gusts to 65 knots. A few cumulonimbi with maximum tops to 500. Mean
storm motion vector 28030.

…Hart

SEL9

URGENT – IMMEDIATE BROADCAST REQUESTED
Tornado Watch Number 429
NWS Storm Prediction Center Norman OK
340 PM CDT Tue Jun 17 2025

The NWS Storm Prediction Center has issued a

* Tornado Watch for portions of
Southern Kansas
Northern Oklahoma
Northeast Texas Panhandle

* Effective this Tuesday afternoon and evening from 340 PM until
1000 PM CDT.

* Primary threats include…
A couple tornadoes possible
Scattered damaging winds and isolated significant gusts to 75
mph likely
Scattered large hail and isolated very large hail events to 3
inches in diameter likely

SUMMARY…Thunderstorms are expected to rapidly develop this
afternoon along an axis from the northeast Texas Panhandle into
southeast Kansas. Supercell thunderstorms are expected with a risk
of very large hail, damaging winds, and a few tornadoes.

The tornado watch area is approximately along and 70 statute miles
north and south of a line from 110 miles west southwest of Alva OK
to 10 miles southeast of Chanute KS. For a complete depiction of the
watch see the associated watch outline update (WOUS64 KWNS WOU9).

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS…

REMEMBER…A Tornado Watch means conditions are favorable for
tornadoes and severe thunderstorms in and close to the watch
area. Persons in these areas should be on the lookout for
threatening weather conditions and listen for later statements
and possible warnings.

&&

OTHER WATCH INFORMATION…CONTINUE…WW 428…

AVIATION…Tornadoes and a few severe thunderstorms with hail
surface and aloft to 3 inches. Extreme turbulence and surface wind
gusts to 65 knots. A few cumulonimbi with maximum tops to 500. Mean
storm motion vector 28030.

…Hart

Note: The Aviation Watch (SAW) product is an approximation to the watch area. The actual watch is depicted by the shaded areas.
SAW9
WW 429 TORNADO KS OK TX 172040Z – 180300Z
AXIS..70 STATUTE MILES NORTH AND SOUTH OF LINE..
110WSW AVK/ALVA OK/ – 10SE CNU/CHANUTE KS/
..AVIATION COORDS.. 60NM N/S /32WSW MMB – 26NNW OSW/
HAIL SURFACE AND ALOFT..3 INCHES. WIND GUSTS..65 KNOTS.
MAX TOPS TO 500. MEAN STORM MOTION VECTOR 28030.

LAT…LON 37160049 38589535 36559535 35130049

THIS IS AN APPROXIMATION TO THE WATCH AREA. FOR A
COMPLETE DEPICTION OF THE WATCH SEE WOUS64 KWNS
FOR WOU9.

Watch 429 Status Report Message has not been issued yet.

Note: Click for Complete Product Text.Tornadoes

Probability of 2 or more tornadoes

Mod (40%)

Probability of 1 or more strong (EF2-EF5) tornadoes

Low (20%)

Wind

Probability of 10 or more severe wind events

High (70%)

Probability of 1 or more wind events > 65 knots

High (70%)

Hail

Probability of 10 or more severe hail events

High (70%)

Probability of 1 or more hailstones > 2 inches

Mod (60%)

Combined Severe Hail/Wind

Probability of 6 or more combined severe hail/wind events

High (>95%)

For each watch, probabilities for particular events inside the watch (listed above in each table) are determined by the issuing forecaster. The “Low” category contains probability values ranging from less than 2% to 20% (EF2-EF5 tornadoes), less than 5% to 20% (all other probabilities), “Moderate” from 30% to 60%, and “High” from 70% to greater than 95%. High values are bolded and lighter in color to provide awareness of an increased threat for a particular event.

MIL OSI USA News –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: NATO Secretary General attends G7 Summit, welcomes Canada’s commitment to defence spending

Source: NATO

The NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, participated in the G7 Leaders’ Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, on Tuesday (17 June 2025). The event was hosted by the Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney.

Speaking alongside Prime Minister Carney, Mr Rutte welcomed Canada’s decision to meet NATO’s defence investment target this year. “The fact that you decided to bring Canada to the 2% spending when it comes to NATO this year is really fantastic,” he said. He noted that, together with Portugal’s recent announcement to reach 2% of GDP this year, all NATO Allies will meet the benchmark in 2025. “That is really great news,” the Secretary General said.

In addition to discussions with G7 leaders, Secretary General Rutte held a number of bilateral meetings ahead of the upcoming NATO Summit in The Hague, including with the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese.

MIL Security OSI –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: NATO Secretary General attends G7 Summit, welcomes Canada’s commitment to defence spending

Source: NATO

The NATO Secretary General, Mark Rutte, participated in the G7 Leaders’ Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, Canada, on Tuesday (17 June 2025). The event was hosted by the Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney.

Speaking alongside Prime Minister Carney, Mr Rutte welcomed Canada’s decision to meet NATO’s defence investment target this year. “The fact that you decided to bring Canada to the 2% spending when it comes to NATO this year is really fantastic,” he said. He noted that, together with Portugal’s recent announcement to reach 2% of GDP this year, all NATO Allies will meet the benchmark in 2025. “That is really great news,” the Secretary General said.

In addition to discussions with G7 leaders, Secretary General Rutte held a number of bilateral meetings ahead of the upcoming NATO Summit in The Hague, including with the President of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and the Prime Minister of Australia, Anthony Albanese.

MIL Security OSI –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: Kananaskis Wildfire Charter
Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

We, the Leaders of the G7, are deeply concerned that the world has experienced record-breaking wildfires across every forested continent over the past decade, often overwhelming available national resources and requiring governments to request assistance from other countries. These increasingly extreme wildfires are endangering lives, affecting human health, destroying homes and ecosystems, and costing governments and taxpayers billions of dollars each year.

We resolve to boost global cooperation to prevent, fight and recover from wildfires by taking integrated action to reduce the incidence and negative impacts of wildfires and ensure our readiness to help each other, and partners, when needed.

We will take steps to prevent and mitigate the occurrence of wildfires by:
- Adopting a whole of society approach, including different levels of government, Indigenous Peoples, local communities, international and non-governmental organizations, academia, and the private sector, to share knowledge and drive research on reducing risks.
- Implementing mitigation and adaptation actions, grounded in scientific research and local knowledge, that reduce the risk of extreme wildfires, such as sustainable forest management, nature-based solutions, Indigenous land management practices including cultural or controlled burning, and adopting fire risk reduction measures around communities, buildings, and infrastructure.
- Raising awareness of the different causes of wildfires and measures to prevent them, including to reduce the number of wildfires started accidentally or maliciously.
We will strengthen global capacity to prepare for and respond to wildfires when they happen by:
- Leveraging research, tools and technology that forecast, identify, and monitor wildfires, such as fire danger rating systems, geospatial technologies, and systems to provide early warnings when wildfire moves towards inhabited areas or infrastructure.
- Collaborating on data collection and information sharing to better understand and respond to wildfires and their impacts, including on different population groups.
- Building our shared capacity to mitigate and respond to the impacts of wildfire exposure on human health and well-being.
- Enhancing interoperability, through sharing best practices and where relevant, developing common protocols, capabilities, and procedures related to wildfire response, including on training.
- Exploring ways to improve timely access to basic firefighting equipment and capabilities that help meet country-specific needs.
We will rebuild for resilience to recover from wildfires by:
- Identifying areas for active restoration efforts versus those where natural regeneration works best, taking actions that support biological diversity and restore nature and deploying nature-based solutions to strengthen resilience and reduce risks.
- Rebuilding with wildfire-resilient infrastructure, including strengthening the wildland-urban interface through resilient urban design, landscape, and infrastructure planning.
- Encouraging research to better understand local conditions to support and scale-up ecological restoration, finding best methods for sustainable forest management to help prevent and mitigate wildfires, including in rapidly shifting conditions, and using community-based, whole of society approaches that incorporate local and, where opportunities exist, Indigenous practices, and increased participation by women.
We will seek synergies with work underway at the G20. Interested signatories will also work through forums like the United Nations Global Fire Management Hub. We will align with commitments to halt and reverse deforestation and forest and land degradation by 2030 globally.

Together, we will achieve a stronger and more coordinated global approach to wildfire resilience.

We welcome the endorsement of the Kananaskis Wildfire Charter by the Leaders of Australia, India, Mexico, the Republic of Korea, and South Africa.

MIL OSI Canada News –
June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: G7 Critical Minerals Action Plan

Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

We, the Leaders of the G7, recognize that critical minerals are the building blocks of digital and energy secure economies of the future. We remain committed to transparency, diversification, security, sustainable mining practices, trustworthiness and reliability as essential principles for resilient critical minerals supply chains, and acknowledge the importance of traceability, trade, and decent work in contributing to our economic prosperity and that of our partners.

We have shared national and economic security interests, which depend on access to resilient critical minerals supply chains governed by market principles. We recognize that non-market policies and practices in the critical minerals sector threaten our ability to acquire many critical minerals, including the rare earth elements needed for magnets, that are vital for industrial production. Recognizing this threat to our economies, as well as various other risks to the resilience of our critical minerals supply chains, we will work together and with partners beyond the G7 to swiftly protect our economic and national security. This will include anticipating critical minerals shortages, coordinating responses to deliberate market disruption, and diversifying and onshoring, where possible, mining, processing, manufacturing, and recycling.

We are launching a G7 Critical Minerals Action Plan, building on the Five-Point Plan for Critical Minerals Security established during Japan’s G7 Presidency in 2023 and advanced by Italy in 2024. The Action Plan will focus on diversifying the responsible production and supply of critical minerals, encouraging investments in critical mineral projects and local value creation, and promoting innovation.

We are committed to action in the following areas:

Building standards-based markets

We recognize that critical minerals markets should reflect the real costs of responsible extraction, processing, and trade of critical minerals, while ensuring labour standards, local consultation, anti-bribery and corruption measures and addressing negative externalities, including pollution and land degradation.

We will develop a roadmap to promote standards-based markets for critical minerals, in collaboration with industry, international organizations, resource producing nations, Indigenous Peoples, local communities, unions, and civil society. The roadmap will establish a set of criteria that constitute a minimum threshold for standards-based markets, strengthening traceability as a necessary measure. As part of these efforts, we will evaluate potential market impacts.

We task relevant ministers to produce this roadmap, setting out milestones to be met in fulfilling this commitment, before the end of the year.

Mobilizing capital and investing in partnerships

We recognize the need to work together to increase investment in responsible critical minerals projects within the G7 and around the world. Immediate and scaled investment is required to secure future supply chains and ensure promising mining and processing projects overcome barriers such as delays in permitting and approvals processes, market manipulation, and price volatility.

Critical minerals are an opportunity to build mutually beneficial partnerships and drive economic development, innovation and shared prosperity. We will continue to work with emerging market and developing country partners to develop quality infrastructure, such as economic corridors. We will address investment barriers and support policy and regulatory reforms that improve the investment climate of our partners and empower entrepreneurs in low- and middle-income countries, including through the G20 Compact with Africa. Our approach will support local economic growth, build community trust, and reduce investment risks, creating the necessary conditions to attract responsible private capital.

We will continue to support the development of responsible critical minerals projects through direct partnerships with each other and by promoting private sector investment. We encourage our export credit agencies and development finance institutions (DFIs) to identify more opportunities for collaboration. We also welcome the work of the G7 DFIs to enhance coordination on critical minerals projects as an important step.

To build on this momentum, we encourage multilateral development banks, as well as private sector lenders, to make further capital available for investment in standards-based critical minerals projects, including through innovative financing. We also encourage them to leverage existing financing mechanisms to de-risk projects, maximize and mobilize private capital, and increase the resilience and security of global critical minerals supply chains.

We are committed to deepening our cooperation with mineral-rich emerging market and developing country partners. We will help build their capacity; foster local value creation; create opportunities for all; promote responsible mining practices; combat gender-based violence in the mining industry; support the improvement of artisanal mining; and diversify global critical minerals value chains.

In this spirit, to promote responsible mining-related activities in emerging mining nations, we welcome the G7 Finance Ministers commitment to strengthen the World Bank-led Resilient and Inclusive Supply Chain Enhancement (RISE) Partnership. Interested G7 members will also support initiatives such as the Minerals Security Partnership and its MSP Forum, and the Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development.

Recalling our commitment to promote debt sustainability and transparency, we acknowledge the challenges faced by developing countries with mounting debt levels, including to finance infrastructure. We will promote debt sustainability through transparent and fair development finance, and we will support countries facing debt challenges including near-term liquidity challenges. We call on all international providers of finance to do the same. This includes working within the G20 to improve the implementation of the Common Framework.

Promoting innovation

We have rich public and private innovation ecosystems with untapped potential to address strategic technology and processing gaps essential to bringing critical minerals to market.

We will intensify our collaboration to fill targeted innovation gaps in critical minerals research and development, with a focus on processing, licensing, recycling, substitution and redesign, and circular economy. We will work with partner organizations to showcase new technologies and production processes.

We look forward to the upcoming Conference on Critical Materials and Minerals, to be chaired by the United States in Chicago, in September 2025, in order to advance this work.

We welcome the endorsement of the G7 Critical Minerals Action Plan by the Leaders of Australia, India, and the Republic of Korea.

MIL OSI Canada News –

June 18, 2025
Canadian PM Mark Carney welcomes PM Narendra Modi for G7 summit

Source: Government of India

Source: Government of India (4)

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was on Tuesday welcomed by his Canadian counterpart Mark Carney as the Indian leader arrived for the G7 Outreach Summit.

Confirming the meeting between Carney and PM Modi at the G7 Summit, the Ministry of External Affairs Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal on social media platform X said: “Building bridges for global progress and cooperation. PM @MarkJCarney of Canada welcomed PM @narendramodi at the #G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada.”

Earlier, PM Modi met with Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, Australian PM Anthony Albanese and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa separately on the sidelines of the G7 Summit.

These interactions came just weeks after India’s Operation Sindoor, a targeted strike on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-oOcupied Kashmir, following the Pahalgam terror attacks on April 22.

The MEA said, “At the Summit, the Prime Minister will exchange views with leaders of G-7 countries, other invited outreach countries and Heads of International Organisations on crucial global issues, including energy security, technology and innovation, particularly the AI-energy nexus and Quantum-related issues.”

Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in Calgary on Monday morning to attend the G7 Summit at Kananaskis, his first visit to Canada in a decade.

He is set to discuss various topics of development, such as energy security, technology and innovation with world leaders.

PM Modi said he will discuss important global issues and emphasise the priorities of the Global South.

The Kananaskis gathering on June 16 to 17 is the Prime Minister’s sixth consecutive participation in the G7 Summit.

Canadian PM Carney had extended an invite to PM Modi in an attempt to rebuild ties after India-Canada relations nosedived following former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegations on the killing of a Khalistani terrorist.

In the last few months, the security officials of India and Canada resumed contact and both sides were looking at the possibility of appointing new High Commissioners.

During his nearly 24-hour stay in Canada, Prime Minister Modi will not only attend the Outreach Session of the Summit but also hold several significant bilateral meetings with various world leaders before leaving for Zagreb early Wednesday, India time.

The three-nation visit, PM Modi had stated while leaving New Delhi, is also to thank partner countries for their steadfast support to India in its fight against cross-border terrorism, and to galvanise global understanding on tackling terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.

“Landed in Calgary, Canada, to take part in the G7 Summit. Will be meeting various leaders at the Summit and sharing my thoughts on important global issues. Will also be emphasising the priorities of the Global South,” PM Modi posted on his X handle after arriving in Canada.

The Group of Seven (G7) is an informal grouping of seven of the world’s advanced economies — France, United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, Italy and Canada and the European Union.

At the Summit, PM Modi will be interacting with G7 leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian PM Giorgia Meloni, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen along with Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney.

(With IANS inputs)

June 18, 2025
Canadian PM Mark Carney welcomes PM Narendra Modi for G7 summit

Source: Government of India

Source: Government of India (4)

Prime Minister Narendra Modi was on Tuesday welcomed by his Canadian counterpart Mark Carney as the Indian leader arrived for the G7 Outreach Summit.

Confirming the meeting between Carney and PM Modi at the G7 Summit, the Ministry of External Affairs Spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal on social media platform X said: “Building bridges for global progress and cooperation. PM @MarkJCarney of Canada welcomed PM @narendramodi at the #G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Canada.”

Earlier, PM Modi met with Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, Australian PM Anthony Albanese and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa separately on the sidelines of the G7 Summit.

These interactions came just weeks after India’s Operation Sindoor, a targeted strike on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-oOcupied Kashmir, following the Pahalgam terror attacks on April 22.

The MEA said, “At the Summit, the Prime Minister will exchange views with leaders of G-7 countries, other invited outreach countries and Heads of International Organisations on crucial global issues, including energy security, technology and innovation, particularly the AI-energy nexus and Quantum-related issues.”

Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in Calgary on Monday morning to attend the G7 Summit at Kananaskis, his first visit to Canada in a decade.

He is set to discuss various topics of development, such as energy security, technology and innovation with world leaders.

PM Modi said he will discuss important global issues and emphasise the priorities of the Global South.

The Kananaskis gathering on June 16 to 17 is the Prime Minister’s sixth consecutive participation in the G7 Summit.

Canadian PM Carney had extended an invite to PM Modi in an attempt to rebuild ties after India-Canada relations nosedived following former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s allegations on the killing of a Khalistani terrorist.

In the last few months, the security officials of India and Canada resumed contact and both sides were looking at the possibility of appointing new High Commissioners.

During his nearly 24-hour stay in Canada, Prime Minister Modi will not only attend the Outreach Session of the Summit but also hold several significant bilateral meetings with various world leaders before leaving for Zagreb early Wednesday, India time.

The three-nation visit, PM Modi had stated while leaving New Delhi, is also to thank partner countries for their steadfast support to India in its fight against cross-border terrorism, and to galvanise global understanding on tackling terrorism in all its forms and manifestations.

“Landed in Calgary, Canada, to take part in the G7 Summit. Will be meeting various leaders at the Summit and sharing my thoughts on important global issues. Will also be emphasising the priorities of the Global South,” PM Modi posted on his X handle after arriving in Canada.

The Group of Seven (G7) is an informal grouping of seven of the world’s advanced economies — France, United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, Italy and Canada and the European Union.

At the Summit, PM Modi will be interacting with G7 leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Italian PM Giorgia Meloni, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen along with Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney.

(With IANS inputs)

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: Eliminating the bureaucratic vortex in hospitals
Since Alberta’s government announced plans to refocus the health care system in November 2023, a consistent message has emerged from patients, front-line health care workers and concerned Albertans alike about the flaws of the prior system. Alberta Health Services’ current zone-based leadership structure is overly complex and bureaucratic. It lacks the flexibility and responsiveness needed to effectively support facilities and staff – particularly when it comes to hiring, securing supplies and adopting necessary technologies.

That’s why Alberta’s government is changing to a hospital-based leadership structure. On-site leadership teams will be responsible for hiring staff, managing resources and solving problems to effectively serve their patients and communities. Hospitals will now have the flexibility to respond, freedom to adapt and authority to act, so they can meet the needs of their facilities, patients and workforce in real time.

“What works in Calgary or Edmonton isn’t always what works in Camrose or Peace River. That’s why we’re cutting through bureaucracy and putting real decision-making power back in the hands of local hospital leaders, so they can act fast, hire who they need and deliver better care for their communities.”

Danielle Smith, Premier

“Hospital-based leadership ensures decisions on hiring, supplies and services are made efficiently by those closest to care – strengthening acute care, supporting staff and helping patients get the timely, high-quality care they need and deserve.”

Matt Jones, Minister of Hospital and Surgical Health Services

“By rethinking how decisions are made, we’re working to improve health care through a more balanced and practical approach. By removing delays and empowering our on-site leaders, we’re giving facilities the tools to respond to real-time needs and ultimately provide better care to Albertans.”

Adriana LaGrange, Minister of Primary and Preventative Health Services

AHS’ health zones will be eliminated, and acute care sites will be integrated into the seven regional corridors. These sites will operate under a new leadership model that emphasizes site-level performance management. Clear expectations will be set by Acute Care Alberta, and site operations will be managed by AHS through a hospital-based management framework. All acute care sites will be required to report to Acute Care Alberta based on these defined performance standards.

“Standing up Acute Care Alberta has allowed AHS to shift its focus to hospital-based services. This change will enable the local leadership teams at those hospitals to make site-based decisions in real and tangible ways that are best for their patients, families and staff. Acute Care Alberta will provide oversight and monitor site-level performance, and I’m confident overall hospital performance will improve when hospital leadership and staff have more authority to do what they know is best.”

Dr. Chris Eagle, interim CEO, Acute Care Alberta

“AHS is focused on reducing wait times and improving care for patients. By shifting to hospital-based leadership, we’re empowering hospital leaders to make real-time decisions based on what’s happening on the ground and respond to patient needs as they arise. It also means leaders can address issues we know have been frustrating, like hiring staff where they’re needed most and advancing hospital operations. This change enables front-line teams to act on ideas they see every day to improve care.”

Andre Tremblay, interim president & CEO, Alberta Health Services

The Ministry of Hospital and Surgical Health Services, Acute Care Alberta and Alberta Health Services will work collaboratively to design and establish the new leadership and management model with an interim model to be established by November 2025, followed by full implementation by summer 2026.

Quick facts
- Countries like the Netherlands and Norway, and parts of Australia have already made the shift to hospital-based leadership.
- The interim hospital-based leadership model will be implemented at one site before being implemented provincewide.
- Hospital-based leadership, once implemented, will apply only to AHS acute care facilities. Other acute care organizations will not be affected at the time of implementation.
Related information
- Hospital-based Leadership
- Refocusing health care in Alberta
Multimedia

Related news
- Ensuring a successfully refocused health system (Nov. 18, 2024)
MIL OSI Canada News –
June 18, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Debates – Monday, 16 June 2025 – Strasbourg – Revised edition

Source: European Parliament

Verbatim report of proceedings

427k

841k

Monday, 16 June 2025 – Strasbourg

IN THE CHAIR: ROBERTA METSOLA
President

1. Resumption of the session

President. – I declare resumed the session of the European Parliament adjourned on 22 May 2025.

2. Opening of the sitting

(The sitting opened at 17:00)

3. Statement by the President

President. – Dear colleagues, welcome back to Strasbourg for our plenary session. I’ll start with a sad communication on what happened in Austria.

Last week, we learned of the horrific school shooting in Graz, where a former pupil killed 10 students and staff, and severely injured many others. This was a senseless act of violence that has deeply shaken Austria and all of Europe. Our thoughts are with the victims, their families and the entire school community. We stand with everyone in Austria at this terrible time.

That same day, we learned of another brutal attack, as a 31-year-old teaching assistant was stabbed to death outside a school in Nogent in France. La victime et ses proches sont dans nos pensées.

Violence and hatred, dear colleagues, have no place in Europe and no place in our schools. Schools must remain safe spaces of learning and growth – never of fear. So I ask you to please join me in observing a minute’s silence in honour of the victims and all those affected.

(The House rose and observed a minute’s silence)

4. Approval of the minutes of the previous sittings

President. – The minutes and the texts adopted of the sitting of 21 and 22 May 20205 are available.

Are there any comments? No?

The minutes are therefore approved.

5. Composition of Parliament

President. – Following the resignation of Ondřej Kovařík, and on the proposal of the Committee on Legal Affairs, Parliament takes note of the vacancy of his seat from 31 July 2025, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure, and will inform the national authority concerned thereof.

6. Requests for waivers of immunity

President. – I have received a request from the competent authorities in Poland for the parliamentary immunity of Grzegorz Braun to be waived.

This request is referred to the Committee on Legal Affairs.

7. Request for the waiver of parliamentary immunity – closure of procedure

President. – I have received a letter from the competent authorities in Belgium withdrawing the request for the waiver of the parliamentary immunity of our colleague Giusi Princi. The procedure is therefore closed.

8. Requests for the defence of the immunity of a former Member – termination of procedure

President. – The Committee on Legal Affairs has informed me that the request for defence of the parliamentary immunity of Helmut Geuking is inadmissible, so the procedure is therefore closed.

9. Composition of political groups

President. – Fernand Kartheiser is no longer a member of the ECR Group and sits with the non attached Members as of 4 June 2025.

10. Composition of committees and delegations

President. – The ECR Group has notified me of a decision relating to changes to appointments within delegations.

This decision will be set out in the minutes of today’s sitting and take effect on the date of this announcement.

11. Interpretation of the Rules of Procedure

President. – The AFCO Committee has proposed interpretations of the first subparagraph of Article 3(5) and Article 8 of Annex I to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure. The texts are available on the plenary webpage and will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

Pursuant to Rule 242(4), Members or a political group reaching at least the low threshold may contest the committee’s interpretations within a period of 24 hours following this announcement. If the interpretations are not contested, they shall be deemed approved.

12. Negotiations ahead of Parliament’s first reading (Rule 72)

President. – The LIBE Committee has decided to enter interinstitutional negotiations, pursuant to Rule 72(1) of the Rules of Procedure. The report which constitutes the mandate for the negotiations is available on the plenary webpage and the title will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

Pursuant to Rule 72(2), Members or political groups reaching at least the medium threshold may request in writing by midnight tomorrow, Tuesday, 17 June, that the decision be put to the vote. If no request for a vote in Parliament is made within the deadline, the committee may start the negotiations.

13. Negotiations ahead of Council’s first reading (Rule 73)

President. – The SANT Committee has decided to enter into interinstitutional negotiations ahead of Council’s first reading, pursuant to Rule 73 of the Rules of Procedure.

The position adopted by Parliament at first reading, which constitutes the mandate for those negotiations, is available on the plenary webpage and its title will be published in the minutes of the sitting.

14. Delegated acts (Rule 114(6))

President. – I was informed that no objections have been raised within the Conference of Committee Chairs to the recommendation by the AGRI Committee not to oppose a delegated act, pursuant to Rule 114(6) of our Rules. The recommendation is available on the plenary webpage.

If no objections are raised by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold within 24 hours, the recommendation shall be deemed to have been approved.

15. Corrigenda (Rule 251)

President. – The ECON Committee has transmitted a corrigendum to a text adopted by Parliament. Pursuant to Rule 251(1), this corrigendum will be deemed approved unless, no later than 24 hours after its announcement, a request is made by a political group or Members reaching at least the low threshold that it be put to the vote.

The corrigendum is available on the plenary webpage. Its title will be published in the minutes of this sitting.

16. Signature of acts adopted in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (Rule 81)

President. – I would like to inform you that, since the adjournment of Parliament’s session on 22 May 2025, I have signed, together with the President of the Council, one act adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure, in accordance with Rule 81 of Parliament’s Rules.

I would also like to inform you that tomorrow I shall sign, together with the President of the Council, five acts adopted under the ordinary legislative procedure.

The titles of the acts will be published in the minutes of this sitting.

⁂

Now we move to the points of order. I have received 11, so we will go through them in the order that I received them.

As always, I ask you, please, dear colleagues, we know there’s a little bit of flexibility on Mondays – and it’s also been a few weeks since we met in Strasbourg – but it’s becoming longer and longer. So, please, I ask you for responsibility.

Γιάννης Μανιάτης (S&D). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, πριν από λίγες εβδομάδες, με απόφαση αιγυπτιακού δικαστηρίου, από την Ιερά Μονή της Αγίας Αικατερίνης του Σινά —που είναι το αρχαιότερο συνεχώς κατοικούμενο μοναστήρι στον κόσμο— αφαιρέθηκε η ιδιοκτησία του ίδιου του μοναστηριού, καθώς και των παρακείμενων γαιών. Έτσι, η λειτουργία της Μονής εξαρτάται αποκλειστικά από την καλή θέληση του αιγυπτιακού κράτους, το οποίο είναι πλέον ο ιδιοκτήτης. Οι μοναχοί είναι απλοί φιλοξενούμενοι, αφού σχεδόν όλοι τους βρίσκονται εκεί με άδειες παραμονής ενός έτους. Η απόφαση αυτή θέτει σε κίνδυνο τη βιωσιμότητα και τη λειτουργία αυτού του μοναδικού μοναστηριού, που έχει ιστορία 15 αιώνων.

Ως σοσιαλιστική ομάδα, καταθέσαμε αίτημα για να συζητηθεί στην Ολομέλεια του Κοινοβουλίου, αλλά αυτό δεν ήταν δυνατό για αυτήν την εβδομάδα. Θα επιμείνουμε, όμως, και στην Ολομέλεια του Ιουλίου, καθώς είναι ένα εξαιρετικά σημαντικό ζήτημα, ιδιαίτερα μάλιστα στο πλαίσιο της μακροοικονομικής βοήθειας προς την Αίγυπτο.

Michele Picaro (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il 13 giugno scorso a Francavilla Fontana il brigadiere Carlo Legrottaglie è stato ucciso mentre inseguiva i responsabili di una rapina. Un colpo d’arma da fuoco lo ha strappato alla vita. Aveva 59 anni. Mancavano pochi giorni alla pensione, dopo oltre trent’anni di onorato servizio nell’arma dei carabinieri. Eppure, fino all’ultimo istante, Carlo ha fatto ciò che aveva sempre amato fare: servire lo Stato, proteggere i cittadini, onorare la divisa con disciplina, umanità e incrollabile senso del dovere.

Ma oggi il nostro pensiero va alla sua famiglia. A loro giunga da quest’Aula il nostro abbraccio più sincero e commosso. È tempo che l’Unione europea riconosca questi sacrifici.

Per questo chiedo l’istituzione di una Giornata della memoria per gli appartenenti alle forze dell’ordine caduti in servizio, affinché ogni Carlo, in ogni paese d’Europa, trovi posto nella coscienza collettiva delle nostre democrazie. Onore a Carlo Legrottaglie per sempre.

Rima Hassan (The Left). – Madame la Présidente, le 1ᵉʳ juin, j’ai été kidnappée dans les eaux internationales par l’armée israélienne alors que je me trouvais à bord d’un navire humanitaire en route vers Gaza. Nous étions douze à bord du navire, dont dix citoyens européens. Nous avons tous été enlevés, déportés de force par Israël, puis détenus illégalement pendant plusieurs jours dans le silence assourdissant de ce Parlement. Aucune condamnation, aucun appel à libération sans condition. J’ai été menottée, fouillée à nu, menottée aux mains et aux pieds, mise à l’isolement pour avoir inscrit «Free Palestine» dans ma cellule.

Je veux rappeler, au-delà de nos clivages politiques, chers collègues, que l’action de la flottille est parfaitement légale. Elle a été soutenue par dix rapporteurs spéciaux des Nations unies, des millions de citoyens européens, des centaines de parlementaires et des ONG internationales.

Non seulement Gaza a le droit de recevoir de l’aide humanitaire, mais les États et les responsables politiques ont le devoir moral et légal de faire cesser la famine et le génocide qui y sévit. Ce silence, Madame la Présidente, est une faute politique grave. Il alimente l’impunité d’Israël et compromet la crédibilité de cette institution. Tant que ce Parlement se taira, l’Europe ne sera plus une voix pour les droits humains, mais l’écho de sa propre complicité et de sa propre lâcheté politique.

Jordan Bardella (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Mme Hassan vient de démontrer une fois de plus qu’elle n’était, dans cet hémicycle, pas une députée française au Parlement européen, mais bien l’ambassadrice du Hamas auprès de l’Union européenne. Je souhaiterais donc faire un rappel au règlement intérieur, s’il vous plaît, sur la base de l’article 10, paragraphe 7.

À l’occasion des Rencontres des jeunes européens qui se sont tenues dans ces murs le week-end dernier, le Parlement a reçu une fois de plus, Madame la Présidente, l’association Femyso. Cette officine s’est illustrée à de nombreuses reprises par des prises de position communautaristes, par des campagnes de promotion du voile islamique, le tout avec le financement public et l’argent des contribuables européens. Il y a quelques semaines, un rapport du ministère de l’Intérieur français identifiait cette association comme un proxy des Frères musulmans en Europe, décrivant cette organisation comme – je cite – une «structure de formation des cadres à haut potentiel de la mouvance».

Nous ne cessons de vous alerter, Madame la Présidente, sur l’influence grandissante des Frères musulmans au sein même des institutions européennes. Ma question est donc simple: combien de temps allons-nous encore tolérer, financer, légitimer les ennemis de la civilisation européenne?

Saskia Bricmont (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, colleagues, I refer to Rule 39.

Autocratic leaders and anti-democratic forces across our continent and worldwide are violently attacking minorities and vulnerable communities. There is no worse moment for the Commission to withdraw the Horizontal Anti-Discrimination Directive, key legislation to protect all Europeans – older people, people with disabilities, women, LGBTQIA+ people and the most vulnerable – from all forms of discrimination. Part of the EPP joined forces with the far-right to stop the European Parliament from contesting this withdrawal, going against the recommendation of the Conference of Committee Chairs and LIBE Committee.

Madam President, we urge you to preserve the integrity of our procedures, the reputation and fundamental rights agenda of Parliament. Prove to the Commission, civil society and EU citizens that the European Parliament remains committed to fight against all forms of discrimination.

Rihards Kols (ECR). – Madam President, I would like to make a point of order under Rule 202.

The EU sanctioned Kremlin propaganda outlets like Russia Today and Sputnik, banning their broadcasts for spreading disinformation and justifying Russia’s aggression. And yet, today, these same sanctioned outlets remain freely accessible inside this Parliament on the internal network, Wi‑Fi and visitor devices.

After months of notification, letters and discussions to the President and Bureau, nothing has changed. This is not a technical issue. This is an institutional failure. When we demand sanctions enforcement across the EU but fail inside our own House, we move from double standards into complicity.

The legal basis is clear. The EU Court of Justice upheld the sanctions. National regulators have acted. The European Parliament must not be the last safe haven for sanctioned Kremlin propaganda. We call again for immediate action, a full blocking and compliance audit, binding internal guidelines and accountability.

Željana Zovko (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, while the world’s attention is turned to conflicts shaking the foundation of our global order, another atrocity has unfolded almost unnoticed before our eyes.

In the early hours of Saturday, more than 200 people were brutally massacred in Yelwata, Nigeria, sheltered in a local Catholic mission, in a region already ravaged by religious violence. This is the single worst atrocity in recent times, part of an orchestrated militant campaign to forcibly uproot Christian communities from their ancestral land. Entire families were slaughtered. Militants attacked the displaced people, who had already fled violence, attempting to burn them alive. Over 6 500 people have been forced to flee again, many now without shelter or hope.

Freedom of religion is paid with blood across the world, and in Nigeria, Christians are the most persecuted group. Since 2009, over 52 000 Christians have been killed, 18 000 churches and 2 000 Christian schools destroyed. I think it is about time we do something for Christians who are being persecuted all around the world with the same effort that we have done for other persecuted religions.

Αφροδίτη Λατινοπούλου (PfE). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, αύριο συμπληρώνονται επτά χρόνια από τη ντροπιαστική και μειοδοτική Συμφωνία των Πρεσπών, που υπέγραψαν χέρι-χέρι Τσίπρας και Καμμένος. Ως περήφανη Μακεδόνισσα, δεν έχω νιώσει μεγαλύτερη ντροπή απ’ ό,τι με την αναγνώριση μακεδονικής γλώσσας και εθνότητας στους Σκοπιανούς —κάτι που ούτε καν η Βουλγαρία δεν δέχτηκε ποτέ.

Εμείς, επτά χρόνια τώρα, ανεκτικά και αδιαμαρτύρητα παρακολουθούμε τις συνεχείς προκλήσεις των Σκοπίων, που παραβιάζουν τη συμφωνία σε κάθε επίπεδο —πολιτικό, αθλητικό και ιστορικό. Ο Κυριάκος Μητσοτάκης είχε δεσμευτεί δημόσια πως, αν δεν τηρούνται τα συμφωνηθέντα, θα την καταργήσει. Έξι χρόνια τώρα, ούτε μία καταγγελία, ούτε μία λέξη. Σιωπή και από τον κύριο Δένδια. Και ο Άδωνις Γεωργιάδης, που κάποτε δήλωνε ότι δεν θα την αποκαλέσει ποτέ «Βόρεια Μακεδονία», σήμερα την αποκαλεί μόνον έτσι.

Δίνω τον λόγο μου, λοιπόν, στους υπερήφανους Μακεδόνες, πως όταν μας δοθεί η δύναμη, θα κάνουμε τα πάντα για να καταργηθεί αυτή η εθνικά ταπεινωτική συμφωνία. Η Μακεδονία είναι μία και είναι ελληνική.

Sebastian Tynkkynen (ECR). – Madam President, referring to Rule 10(3) of the Rules of Procedure, I would like to bring to your attention to the fact that equal treatment of Members was not upheld during the last plenary session concerning the Israel‑Gaza debate.

My ECR colleague Kristoffer Storm had a very small pin removed from his jacket – a pin calling for the release of hostages kidnapped by Hamas who had been tortured and raped.

Meanwhile, when MEP Lynn Boylan from The Left Group approached the podium to deliver her speech wearing a Palestine lanyard, it was not removed. And this despite the fact that I had informed the President well in advance that the MEP in question would soon be speaking and was wearing that lanyard.

She was allowed to wear that political symbol throughout her entire speech and only after she had finished did the President simply remark that political symbols are not permitted while speaking.

How can it be that some MEPs are stripped of political expressions while others are not?

The plenary is the most sacred arena of democracy in the European Parliament. That is why I urge the President to ensure that Members are treated equally in the future and that such blatant double standards become a thing of the past.

President. – Thank you, Ms Scuderi. And as I told your colleague, Mr Bardella, this will be discussed in the Bureau tonight.

17. Order of business

President. – With the agreement of the political groups, I wish to put to the House the following proposal for a change to the final draft agenda.

On Tuesday, the Council and Commission statements on ‘The assassination attempt on Senator Miguel Uribe and the threat to the democratic process and peace in Colombia’ will be changed to a statement by the Vice-President of the Commission / High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

If there are no objections, the change is approved.

We now move to changes requested by the political groups.

For Tuesday, the EPP, S&D and Renew groups have requested that a joint debate on ‘The situation in the Middle East’, including a statement by the Vice-President / High Representative on ‘Risk of further instability in the Middle East following the Israel-Iran military escalation’ and a statement by the Vice-President / High Representative on ‘Review of the EU-Israel Association Agreement and the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza’, be added as the ninth point in the afternoon, after the debate on air passenger rights.

I give the floor first to Mr Gahler to move the joint request.

President. – Thank you Mr Botenga.

So does The Left Group ask that in any case the debate be wound up with a resolution? I see.

So first we will vote by roll call on the joint proposal by the EPP, S&D and Renew groups to add a joint debate on ‘Situation in the Middle East’ as a ninth point in the afternoon.

(Parliament approved the request)

Now we vote on the request by The Left Group to have a resolution.

(Parliament rejected the request)

Therefore, the agenda is adopted and the order of business is thus established. Thank you very much.

18. Statement by the President – 40th anniversary of the Schengen area agreement

President. – The next item is a statement and a group of speakers on the 40th anniversary of the Schengen Agreement.

This past Saturday, 14 June 2025, marked 40 years since the signing of the agreement that established the Schengen area – a defining achievement of European unity, of cooperation and freedom. What began in 1985 with just five countries has grown into the largest free travel area in the world, making life easier for over 400 million people across the European Union, as well as in Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland.

This year, we warmly welcomed Bulgaria and Romania into our Schengen family, which is now made up of 29 countries. It was a long-awaited step towards a more united, prosperous and secure Union. And work continues to extend those same benefits to all Member States.

Today, the Schengen area allows 3.5 million people each day to cross internal borders freely – to live, love, work and explore Europe without barriers. It boosts our economy by making trade between countries easier, cutting red tape for businesses and helping our single market work better.

Schengen, as I’m sure we’ll hear throughout this debate, also makes us safer. It helps to keep us safe through closer cooperation between police, customs and border authorities to protect our borders and fight crime.

Around the world, the Schengen area is looked at with admiration, and it’s really a clear and tangible example of what European cooperation can achieve.

But we should never take it for granted, because the preservation and the strengthening of Schengen takes constant commitment and effort from all of us. So this Parliament will keep working with Member States and the other EU institutions to modernise and to reinforce the Schengen area so that it stays fit for the future and true to its promise: that we always achieve more together than alone.

Tomas Tobé, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Madam President, colleagues, the Schengen Area is one of the EU’s greatest achievements. For 40 years, it has meant freedom, prosperity and opportunity to millions of people in Europe. Schengen drives our economy and competitiveness and unites us as Europeans. Without it, we would be weaker and poorer. But let’s be clear: the freedom of Schengen can only survive if we protect it, and the growing threats to our internal security needs a strong European answer.

The EPP Group calls for a pact for security. We see three major security challenges. Firstly, migration and border security: we need to regain control over our external border. This means fully implementing the migration pact and ensuring effective returns of those who do not have the right to stay in Europe. Secondly, the rise of cross-border organised crime: Schengen is for citizens, not for criminals. We cannot allow the freedom of Schengen to be exploited. Europol must be transformed into a truly operational police agency, with more tools and resources. Thirdly, we need to be ready to counter hybrid attacks from hostile actors.

We have seen how migration is being used as a weapon to undermine our borders and to destabilise our union, and here we need to face those threats and we need to do it together. Security must be a top priority – because a safe Europe is also a free Europe, with a strong Schengen.

Birgit Sippel, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! 40 Jahre Schengen-Abkommen – wie kam es dazu, und warum ist das heute noch wichtig? Nach Jahrhunderten voller Kriege hat sich nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg endlich eine andere Idee in Europa durchgesetzt: miteinander reden und ja, auch miteinander streiten, um gemeinsame Interessen und Lösungen zu finden; das ist gerade angesichts der aktuellen Krisen und Kriege von unschätzbarem Wert. Zugleich war diese Zusammenarbeit dann die Grundlage für die größte Errungenschaft unserer Union: die Vereinbarung von Schengen, die Abschaffung von Schlagbäumen und Kontrollen an unseren Binnengrenzen. Das hat nicht nur den schnellen Austausch von Waren und Dienstleistungen befeuert und Vorteile gebracht. Es vereinfacht grenzüberschreitende Begegnungen von Menschen für Arbeit, Austauschprogramme, Freizeit, lässt gemeinsame Interessen konkret erkennen. Das wollen wir auch für die Mitgliedstaaten erreichen, die daran arbeiten, dem Schengen-Raum beizutreten, denn diese Begegnungen und ihre Folgen sind eine wichtige Voraussetzung für ein starkes Europa, das sich und seine Werte global selbstbewusst vertritt.

Aber die zunehmenden Grenzkontrollen in Mitgliedstaaten legen die Axt an bisherige Erfolge. Sie bauen neue Barrieren auf und können letztlich unser gemeinsames Europa zerstören. Dabei werden durch diese Kontrollen keine Probleme gelöst, im Gegenteil: Sie sind Vortäuschung einer Lösung auf der Basis von Hass, Ausgrenzung, Abschottung, sie sind das Ende der guten Nachbarschaft in Europa und kosten uns viel Vertrauen.

Deshalb ist es angesichts dieses 40. Jahrestages ganz klar: Wir müssen die echten Herausforderungen angehen, die Gründungsidee Europa neu stärken, uns Hass und Ausgrenzung entgegenstellen und Grenzkontrollen endlich beenden. Das wäre der beste Beitrag zur Feier von 40 Jahren Schengen.

Fabrice Leggeri, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, l’Union européenne célèbre en ce moment les 40 ans de l’accord de Schengen, mais que fête-t-on exactement? L’échec programmé d’un système incapable de protéger les peuples. Ce système, à l’origine fondé sur une coopération internationale, reposait pourtant sur une idée simple: la libre circulation ne pouvait exister qu’à condition de protéger strictement les frontières extérieures. Cette promesse n’a jamais été tenue.

La Commission s’est arrogé les pouvoirs au détriment des États et n’a jamais assuré sa mission. Depuis 2022, plus d’un million de franchissements illégaux des frontières extérieures ont été détectés, sans compter les vagues précédentes. Pendant ce temps, le nombre de retours de migrants illégaux dans leur pays d’origine est ridicule. Aujourd’hui, seuls les passeurs et les ONG complices ont de quoi se réjouir. En face, et face à cette submersion migratoire nourrie par l’idéologie pro-migrants de Mme von der Leyen, les États n’ont d’autre choix que de rétablir leurs frontières nationales. La Commission ose écrire – je cite – que «Schengen est devenu un système résilient […], fondé sur une gestion efficace des frontières extérieures».

Bruxelles vit hors sol. Mon groupe, les Patriotes pour l’Europe, exige le retour au réel. Nous voulons que les frontières extérieures de l’Union européenne soient enfin protégées strictement pour que la libre circulation soit véritablement possible, que les demandeurs d’asile soient renvoyés dans des centres situés à l’extérieur du continent, que les migrants illégaux soient renvoyés dans leur pays d’origine, que les ONG complices des passeurs soient sanctionnées, que la coopération policière à travers l’agence Europol soit renforcée et, enfin, que le pacte asile et migration soit abandonné. Si Bruxelles refuse de faire le travail, les électeurs peuvent compter sur mon groupe pour le faire.

Nicola Procaccini, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, oggi celebriamo i quarant’anni di una grande vittoria europea. Schengen è la storia di un’Europa che ha rimosso le barriere interne per garantire a quasi mezzo miliardo di persone la libertà di viaggiare, vivere, lavorare e crescere oltre i propri confini nazionali. Ricordiamo le vicende, i volti dei primi pendolari transfrontalieri, delle famiglie non più divise da un passaporto, delle piccole imprese che hanno potuto allargare il loro mercato senza ostacoli.

Ma questa libertà non è un fatto acquisito: è il risultato di un patto fra popoli europei che va rispettato giorno dopo giorno. Questo patto, purtroppo, è stato già violato diverse volte. Per rispondere alle giuste proteste popolari di fronte alla pressione migratoria, alcuni governi hanno deciso di reintrodurre le dogane e i controlli alla frontiera. Paradossalmente, a farlo per primi sono stati quei governi che per anni hanno sostenuto politicamente ed economicamente le ONG immigrazioniste e l’ideologia no borders.

Si è voluto imporre agli Stati europei posti sul confine a sud e ad est del continente l’accoglienza indiscriminata dei migranti e contemporaneamente sono state chiuse le frontiere interne per impedire i movimenti secondari fra uno Stato europeo e l’altro. Una decisione ipocrita che ha scaricato tutto il peso dell’immigrazione sulle nazioni di primo ingresso, provocando poi una serie di analoghe decisioni da parte di mezza Europa.

Ora, io vi domando: si è mai vista nella storia un’entità politica aperta all’esterno e chiusa al suo interno? Questo approccio è stato un tradimento clamoroso non solo del trattato di Schengen, ma dell’idea stessa di Europa in senso politico e culturale. Io mi auguro che questa lezione sia stata appresa: senza il contrasto dell’immigrazione illegale, senza confini esterni solidi, la nostra libertà vacilla e con essa le ragioni del nostro stare insieme.

Malik Azmani, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, colleagues, today in this House, we celebrate a milestone that defines the very essence of our European Union: the 40th anniversary of the Schengen Agreement.

40 years ago, the Schengen area was born out of a shared vision. A vision where borders would no longer divide us, where freedom of movement would be a fundamental right for every European citizen. This was not just a policy. It was a promise of unity, opportunity and peace.

And as a Member of Renew Europe, I stand before you proud of our commitment to this vision. We have championed the principles of openness, cooperation and mutual respect. However, we must also acknowledge the challenges that have tested this vision: security issues, migration pressure and the rise of nationalism.

Let us be clear, the answer is not to retreat behind walls. The answer is to strengthen our external border management, to enhance the cooperation among Member States and with third countries, and to modernise our systems to ensure that Schengen remains a beacon of what Europe can achieve when we stand together.

Let this anniversary remind us of our shared responsibility to protect and uphold the freedoms that Schengen has granted us. Let it inspire us to work towards a Europe that is not just united in policy, but also united in purpose.

Terry Reintke, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Schengen ist ein Versprechen – ein Europa ohne Mauern, weder auf der Straße noch in den Köpfen. Vor 40 Jahren haben wir gemeinsam beschlossen: Alle Europäerinnen und Europäer sollen sich frei bewegen können. Meine Generation und die Menschen, die noch jünger sind, können sich, ehrlich gesagt, gar nicht an eine andere Zeit erinnern. Es gab immer ein Europa ohne Grenzen, ein Europa der Freiheit, und Schengen war für uns ein Versprechen, auf das wir uns verlassen konnten.

Ich möchte das in der Vergangenheit sagen, denn gerade heute gibt es die eine oder andere Regierung – und ich möchte da insbesondere die deutsche Bundesregierung unter Kanzler Merz erwähnen –, die daran erinnert werden muss: Wer Grenzkontrollen wieder einführt, wer Notlagen erfindet und Gerichtsurteile ignoriert, der beschädigt Schengen und der beschädigt damit die europäische Einigung, der schikaniert Menschen auf dem Weg zur Arbeit, erschwert den Handel und belastet mutwillig die Beziehungen zu unseren Nachbarstaaten, und der bricht am Ende dieses europäische Versprechen.

Als jemand, der ohne Grenzen in Europa aufgewachsen ist, sage ich: Schluss damit! Wir wollen nicht zurück, nicht in die Kleinstaaterei der Schranken und nicht in die Vergangenheit des Stacheldrahts. Wenn wir heute 40 Jahre Schengen feiern, sollten wir das ernst meinen – und nicht nur dadurch, dass wir große Reden schwingen, während direkt nebenan hier an der Grenze zu Kehl Grenzstaus ganze Regionen lahmlegen.

Das Schengener Abkommen ist unsere Realität und unsere Zukunft. Lassen Sie uns feiern, dass wir vor 40 Jahren zusammengewachsen sind, und heute versprechen, dass dieses Europa ein Europa der Freiheit bleibt!

Pernando Barrena Arza, en nombre del Grupo The Left. – Señora presidenta, señorías, hace cuarenta años el Acuerdo de Schengen se presentó como el gran avance que iba a dar forma práctica al Derecho europeo de libre circulación de personas y mercancías y, de hecho, hoy en día los ciudadanos todavía consideran que la libre circulación de personas es uno de los logros más tangibles de la Unión Europea.

La realidad es que, cuarenta años más tarde, algunos Estados miembros —como Alemania, Francia, Austria, Dinamarca, Suecia, Eslovenia e Italia— establecen controles temporales fronterizos de carretera y dificultan el libre tránsito de personas. Son especialmente llamativos los casos de Alemania, que tiene en vigor controles fronterizos terrestres en nueve puntos hasta el 15 de septiembre, y Francia, que lleva comunicando de manera concatenada avisos de excepcionalidad en sus fronteras desde antes de la pandemia de COVID-19 y, la última vez, hasta octubre de este año.

Constatamos, por lo tanto, que hay Estados miembros que vienen abusando del Reglamento relativo a Schengen, que trasladan una situación de excepcionalidad permanente para controlar fronteras, lo que causa un grave perjuicio a las comunidades transfronterizas, que sufren retrasos innecesarios e incomodidades en su día a día, además de crear condiciones de inseguridad para los migrantes que desean acceder a la Unión Europea.

Es un abuso que, además de molestias, crea peligro y está costando vidas, como en la frontera del Bidasoa, donde han muerto ya diez personas migrantes.

René Aust, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! 40 Jahre Schengen-Abkommen bedeutet Rückkehr zur Normalität. Stefan Zweig sagte einmal: „Die Welt und Europa vor dem Ersten Weltkrieg gehörte jedem.” Jeder sei gegangen, wohin er wollte, und blieb, solange er wollte. Tatsächlich, Grenzschutz und Passkontrollen im heutigen Verständnis gab es nur ausnahmsweise, nicht systematisch. Und wenn, dann gab es Warenkontrollen, nicht Personenkontrollen, mit dem Ziel, Zölle zu erheben. Aber diese Freiheit in Europa nach innen hatte zwei Bedingungen, die die Europäische Union heutzutage systematisch verletzt.

Erstens: Statt an der Staatsgrenze zu kontrollieren, galt früher die Kontrolle im Landesinneren. Städte und Gemeinden übten Niederlassungsrecht aus. Wer erwerbslos war, erhielt keine Sozialhilfe, sondern musste die Gemeinde verlassen. Im Kontrast dazu heute: Heute gilt aufgrund der naiven und viel zu weit ausgelegten Sozialrechtsprechung auf der europäischen Ebene und daraus abgeleiteten nationalen Rechtsprechung de facto ein Einwanderungsrecht in das deutsche Sozialsystem – das lehnen wir ab. Freizügigkeit für Erwerbstätige und Unternehmer – ja, innereuropäische Sozialmigration – nein.

Zweitens: Gegen äußere, historische Gefahren stand Europa immer zusammen. Ob es die Athener und Spartaner gegen die Perser waren oder die Franken gegen die Mauren bei Poitiers, und vor Wien verteidigten österreichische Milizen, deutsche Landsknechte und kroatische Adelsheere gemeinsam mit dem polnisch-litauischen König Sobieski Europa.

Die Freizügigkeit nach innen bedeutet, dass wir die Festung Europa nach außen brauchen. Wer Schengen erhalten möchte, der muss den Missbrauch nach innen vermeiden, und er muss Europa nach außen verteidigen.

PRÉSIDENCE: YOUNOUS OMARJEE
Vice-Président

19. State of play and follow-up two years after the PEGA recommendations and the illegal use of spyware (debate)

Adam Szłapka, President of the European Council. – Mr President, Madam Commissioner, honourable Members, let me start by thanking the Parliament for this debate.

The EU institutions and Member States have a joint responsibility to uphold the fundamental values on which the Union is based. It is clear that unjustified and disproportionate interference with individuals’ fundamental rights are not acceptable. We need to ensure that any limitations of fundamental rights are applied under very strict conditions. Furthermore, democracy is based on the exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, and the freedom of information. We must create an environment that protects journalists and media professionals in delivering on these rights.

The EU Media Freedom Act contributes to such an environment. The illegal use of spyware also highlights the importance of developing measures to protect our cybersecurity. The Cyber Resilience Act is an important step in this regard, but we also need preventive measures to ensure individual protection by raising awareness among individuals on the existing risks.

Enhancing democratic resilience has been one of the Polish presidency’s priorities. The Council remains committed to tackling the current threats to our democratic institutions, as well as to strengthening the role of civil society in this process. This is an issue at the core of the recent presidential conclusions on strengthening EU democratic resilience. I am looking forward to the European Democracy Shield proposals to be put forward by the Commission later this year.

In concluding, let me refer back to the joint responsibility which the EU institutions and Member States have on these issues. On the one hand, it is the responsibility of the Commission to oversee and assess the implementation of acceptable EU law. On the other, each Member State must also carry out investigations regarding possible illegal surveillance in accordance with Union and national law.

Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you for putting this very crucial issue on the plenary agenda.

The Commission strongly condemns any illegal access to interpersonal communications and other data stored on user devices. Any illegal access to the data of our citizens, including journalists and political opponents, is unacceptable. It undermines our core European values, such as the fundamental rights to privacy and data protection.

The Commission has been looking at the illegal use of spyware from various angles of the EU law. It is important to address spyware in a holistic way because it poses challenges in many ways. First, in terms of rule of law and fundamental rights, but also data protection, media freedom, trade, cybersecurity, foreign interference and manipulation of information.

Some of these issues have already been addressed through legislation adopted by the Parliament and the Council. Others are addressed through non‑legislative tools. So what other existing measures do we have?

First, our data protection rules. They are very clear. They ensure that personal data is processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner. They also limit personal data collection for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes.

Second, the European Media Freedom Act is another important part of our legal framework. It includes safeguards to protect journalists’ sources and conventional communications against the illegal use of spyware. These rules on media freedom will enter into application this August.

They also include a general prohibition for intrusive surveillance software in devices used by media service providers, including journalists and related persons. We are currently working with Member States to ensure proper implementation of this and other provisions.

And third, in addition, we continue to report – when appropriate – on the issue of spyware, also in the annual Rule of Law report from the perspective of checks and balances and the protection of journalists.

In addition, the ePrivacy Directive prohibits the interception of communications as well as the access to and storage of information on user devices without their consent. Moreover, there is the Cyber Resilience Act, which sets cybersecurity requirements for hardware and software placed on the EU market. It introduces obligations for manufacturers, which will help to reduce system vulnerabilities often exploited by spyware.

It’s also important to note that the investigations into the earliest misuse of spyware are a matter for national authorities, not for the Commission. And we expect, of course, national authorities to examine to the core any spyware allegations.

We have also been following with the European External Action Service the Pall Mall Process. This is an international initiative addressing various aspects related to the use of commercial cyber intrusion capabilities. We see this as a very important initiative, the first of its kind at international level and with a very broad scope. Many Member States have already committed to the Pall Mall Process. We are now carefully also exploring options for any further action to decide on the most appropriate way forward.

It’s important to underline that we must, however, clearly separate the illegal use of spyware from the lawful access to data for law enforcement authorities. When law enforcement authorities use spyware for their purposes, the Law Enforcement Directive applies.

We must also acknowledge matters of national security, which are the responsibility of the Member States. However, in line with the case law of the Court of Justice, it is not possible for Member States to invoke national security in a general way. Member States must be able to demonstrate that national security would be compromised in the specific circumstances.

Furthermore, the legal use of spyware is only acceptable if it is non-discriminatory, justified by an overriding reason of public interest, proportionate and also in compliance with legal certainty and also our Charter of Fundamental Rights. And we expect, of course, national authorities to examine any allegations of illegal use of spyware as this is their responsibility.

So, honourable Members, the Commission and the co-legislators have in recent years addressed the multiple issues of spyware. This Parliament has played a key role in this process. The issue remains complex and further work is needed here, also in view of the changing security landscape and also the emergence of new technologies. The recommendations of the European Parliament’s PEGA Committee have been very helpful to guide this work. I can assure you that the Commission is determined to protect the fundamental rights of our citizens to privacy, data protection and security.

Jeroen Lenaers, on behalf of the PPE Group. – Mr President, Madam Executive Vice-President, imagine for a moment that someone is reading every message you’ve ever sent. Somebody is watching every video you’ve ever watched, listening into your private conversations with your children, your doctor, your partner. And this isn’t fiction. It’s happening also today. Also in Europe.

Spyware like Pegasus doesn’t just intercept data, it invades our dignity. And yes, there can be, of course, exceptional circumstances where it can be used by authorities to fight terrorism, to fight serious organised crime. But what we’ve learned in this Parliament after speaking to over 200 people, numerous fact finding missions and several elaborate studies is that, also in the EU, it is abused by certain Member States to spy on opposition colleagues, to spy on journalists, and to spy on activists.

And it requires a strong response because this is not only about national security, it is also about protecting the rule of law and the EU and the European Commission. It has a role. It has competences when it comes to protecting the rule of law. Even better, we have a responsibility to do so.

And we also know what to do because our recommendations were very clear. Set up effective a democratic and judicial oversight mechanism, as well as provide citizens with access to legal remedies, regulate the trade in and the use of spyware based on the conditions that we have formulated together here, make sure that the invocation of national security is indeed always subject to independent review and oversight, and several more recommendations. They’re all there.

What we need is action. And this is where I am a little bit disappointed in the European Commission. Two years ago, the Commission, in its response to our investigation, said that they were exploring the possibility of a non-legislative initiative. Now, this doesn’t sound very ambitious in itself, but still you managed to overpromise and under deliver.

Sadly, I have to conclude that the previous Commission did not do its job in this regard. So I’m really counting on you also, Executive Vice-President Virkkunen, to make a difference here. I welcome your clear condemnation today, and I agree with you that further work is needed. So let’s get to action. Let’s do this further work and let’s protect all of our citizens from abuse.

Hannes Heide, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissionsvizepräsidentin, Herr Minister! Schon wieder erschüttert Missbrauch von Spionage- und Überwachungssoftware unsere Demokratie in ihren Grundfesten. Und wieder zeigt sich – dieses Mal mit dem Paragon-Fall in Italien: Es handelt sich schon längst nicht mehr um Einzelfälle, vielmehr hat die Europäische Union ein Strukturproblem.

Nach wie vor ist die Europäische Kommission leider säumig. Wiederholt haben wir die Kommission aufgefordert, den Empfehlungen des PEGA-Untersuchungsausschusses nachzukommen und einen Rechtsakt mit klaren Regelungen vorzulegen. Was muss passieren, dass die Kommission entsprechend handelt?

Nationale Sicherheit kann und darf nicht als Begründung für die Aushebelung rechtsstaatlicher Prinzipien dienen. Rechtswidrige Überwachung von Journalistinnen und Journalisten, von Oppositionellen oder Juristinnen und Juristen höhlt unsere Demokratie aus.

Es braucht gemeinsame Mindeststandards für den Einsatz von Spyware, und was wir nicht brauchen, ist weiteres Zögern auch der neuen Kommission. Gerade jetzt ist ein Vorschlag überfällig, um unsere Bürgerinnen und Bürger wirksam zu schützen und damit das Vertrauen in unsere demokratischen Institutionen zu stärken.

Maciej Wąsik, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Policja i służby muszą dysponować nowoczesną technologią, bo inaczej będą ślepe i głuche wobec handlarzy narkotyków, przemytników ludzi czy skorumpowanych polityków. Ale oczywiście muszą być zachowane stosowne procedury.

W Polsce pierwszy taki system typu Pegasus pojawił się w latach 2012–2015, kiedy premierem był Donald Tusk. Pomimo szaleństwa medialnego w moim kraju – w Polsce – nie stwierdzono ani jednego przypadku, żeby służby stosowały takie narzędzia z pominięciem niezbędnych zgód sądowych. Powołana w Polsce do badania nieprawidłowości przy stosowaniu Pegasusa komisja sejmowa od 1,5 roku nie potrafi wykazać żadnych nieprawidłowości. Mało tego – okazuje się, że sama komisja działa nielegalnie, co stwierdził polski Trybunał Konstytucyjny.

Pegasusa najzacieklej atakują osoby, które mają najwięcej do ukrycia. Atakował go rosyjski szpieg uchodzący za dziennikarza, atakował go komisarz, wobec którego belgijska policja prowadzi postepowanie w sprawie brudnych pieniędzy, atakowała go była wiceprzewodnicząca Parlamentu Europejskiego oskarżona o korupcję.

W Polsce atakowany jest przez osoby, którym prokuratura zarzucała pranie brudnych pieniędzy albo które organizowały za publiczne pieniądze hejterskie farmy trolli. Będą mówiły, że są ofiarami. Nie dajcie się nabrać!

Służby nie mogą być ślepe i głuche. To kwestia bezpieczeństwa nas wszystkich.

Moritz Körner, im Namen der Renew-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Exekutiv-Vizepräsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Stellen Sie sich für einen Moment mal vor, Pegasus, diese Überwachungssoftware, ist auf Ihrem Handy drauf. Was kann da alles passieren? Man kann Kamera und Mikrofon heimlich einschalten, Livemitschnitte von Gesprächen machen; man kann die Standortdaten des Handys abrufen, also wissen, wo Sie überall sind; alle Nachrichten lesen; Kalender, Fotos, Passwörter, App-Daten – auf all das zugreifen. Ziemlich krass, oder? Und genau das wurde in 14 Mitgliedstaaten der Europäischen Union eingesetzt, oft auch illegal, um Journalisten, Oppositionelle und deren Familien auszuspähen.

Jetzt haben wir gerade von den Rechten hier gehört, dass das alles völlig in Ordnung ist, aber ich finde, das ist nicht in Ordnung, denn meistens ist es unter dem Deckmantel der nationalen Sicherheit passiert. Aber es ist eben ein krasses Eindringen in die Privatsphäre, es ist ein Ausspähen unserer Demokratie.

Dann fragt man sich, nachdem wir das alles ermittelt haben, in langer Arbeit im Untersuchungsausschuss, und zwei Jahre später: Was ist eigentlich passiert? Was tut Europa? Es schaut zu. Was tut die Kommission? Sie schaut zu. Sie kündigt an, sie ist besorgt, aber es gibt immer noch keinen Rechtsrahmen, keinen Schutz für die Opfer und vor allem keinen Schutz für unsere Demokratie. Die Kommission muss sich jetzt endlich durchsetzen, auch mal gegen die Mitgliedstaaten. Sie wollen das nicht, ja, das wissen wir. Aber wir brauchen hier Schutz, denn wer in Europa Demokratie ausspäht, der wird zur Rechenschaft gezogen – das muss in dieser Europäischen Union wieder gelten.

Saskia Bricmont, au nom du groupe Verts/ALE. – Monsieur le Président, je voudrais d’abord exprimer tout mon soutien aux citoyens, journalistes, activistes et élus victimes d’espionnage illégal en Italie, en Grèce, en Hongrie, en Pologne, en Espagne et ailleurs, et qui restent toujours sans réponse.

Se faire espionner via cette petite chose (l’oratrice montre un téléphone portable) laisse une empreinte indélébile sur la vie personnelle, professionnelle, l’entourage. C’est un viol des droits fondamentaux, du droit à la vie privée, de se rassembler et de la liberté de la presse. C’est la démocratie, l’état de droit, la sécurité des citoyens et de l’Union européenne qui sont attaqués.

Quatre ans se sont écoulés depuis que Forbidden Stories, Amnesty et Citizen Lab ont révélé les scandales d’espionnage illégal et une industrie cannibale de surveillance basée en Israël, avec l’aval du gouvernement Netanyahou, qui l’utilise pour menacer les gouvernements qui dénoncent son génocide à Gaza. Cela fait deux ans que ce Parlement a adopté les recommandations de la commission d’enquête pour légiférer et pour mettre fin aux abus, qui ont continué depuis à cause de l’inaction du Conseil et de la Commission européenne, qui vient une fois de plus les mains vides.

Où en est la communication promise il y a plus d’un an? Vous n’en parlez même plus. Qu’attendez-vous donc pour: 1) réguler l’achat, la vente, l’utilisation de ces technologies, 2) créer un laboratoire technologique européen pour soutenir les victimes et la société civile, 3) ouvrir des enquêtes dans les États membres qui, au nom de la sécurité nationale, mettent la sécurité des citoyens et de l’Union européenne en danger et ne répondent à aucune des conditions que vous avez énumérées? Des actes, s’il vous plaît, Madame la Commissaire!

Γιώργος Γεωργίου, εξ ονόματος της ομάδας The Left. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κύριε Lenaers, χαίρομαι πραγματικά που, εκ μέρους του Ευρωπαϊκού Λαϊκού Κόμματος, κάνετε και εσείς την παραδοχή ότι, παρόλο που εργαστήκαμε πάρα πολύ σκληρά ως Επιτροπή PEGA και τους δώσαμε τα πάντα —γεγονότα, αμαρτωλές εταιρείες, ονόματα και διευθύνσεις— και τους κάναμε και συστάσεις, τα ένοχα κράτη δεν έκαναν τίποτα. Ή μάλλον, έκαναν: επέτρεψαν τη χρήση κατασκοπευτικού λογισμικού εναντίον των δημοσιογράφων. Αυτή είναι η αλήθεια, κυρία Επίτροπε και κύριε Υπουργέ.

Τα λόγια και οι ανέξοδες ρητορείες δεν αρκούν πλέον. Η κατάσταση τώρα είναι χειρότερη από την προηγούμενη. Το λογισμικό Predator εξακολουθεί να χρησιμοποιείται ενεργά. Μάθαμε και για το Graphite, το οποίο αποτελεί εξέλιξη του Pegasus που αναπτύχθηκε από την ισραηλινή NSO. Εδώ, ο ίδιος ο Ισραηλινός πρέσβης στην Ισπανία προειδοποίησε με περισσό θράσος τη χώρα με αποκαλύψεις από παρακολουθήσεις, επειδή η Ισπανία αναγνώρισε την Παλαιστίνη. Πείτε μας, τι δεν καταλαβαίνετε; Δείξτε επιτέλους θάρρος· απαγορεύστε τα. Διαφορετικά, είστε συνένοχοι —όπως βέβαια και σε τόσα άλλα.

Christine Anderson, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Pegasus war doch nur die Spitze des Eisberges. Sie schrecken doch schon lange nicht mehr davor zurück, Kritiker, Journalisten und Oppositionelle auszuspionieren – mit Militärsoftware, ganz so wie in autoritären Staaten. Als Freiheitsrechte während Corona durch Lockdowns, QR‑Codes und Denkverbote in Serie fielen, da waren Sie doch alle ganz vorne mit dabei und haben das totalitäre Gebaren des Staates gefeiert. Pegasus verdammen Sie, die COVID‑Überwachungsapps, die haben Sie aber gefeiert.

Die systematische Verfolgung der Opposition ist doch schon lange keine Randerscheinung mehr, sie ist doch längst politischer Alltag geworden. Während der Corona‑Jahre wurde die Opposition pauschal diffamiert, ausgegrenzt und medial vernichtet. Wer Fragen hatte, galt als Gefährder, wer widersprach, als Demokratiefeind. Das erleben wir auch heute – bei Marine Le Pen, in Rumänien und in Deutschland, wo offen über ein Verbot der größten Oppositionspartei, der AfD, gesprochen wird.

Schreiben Sie sich eines hinter die Ohren: Die Demokratie wird nicht von der Opposition bedroht, sondern von denen, die die Opposition bekämpfen. Ich sage es auch noch einmal: Sie haben nicht Angst um die Demokratie, Sie haben Angst vor der Demokratie, und dafür sollten Sie sich was schämen.

Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! 2 év telt el a PEGA-jelentés óta, és mi, magyarok sajnos pontosan tudjuk, miért volt szükség erre a vizsgálatra.

A jelenlegi kormánypárt, a Fidesz visszaélt a Pegazus szoftverrel. Újságírókat és ellenzéki politikusokat figyeltek meg nemzetbiztonságra hivatkozva. Valójában a hatalmukat védték, nem az államot és nem a magyarokat.

Most ugyanez a rendszer új szintre lépett. Az elmúlt napokban kiszivárgott adatbázisok és hackertámadások, amikről maga a jelenlegi miniszterelnök számolt be, világossá tették: a Tisza közösségét célzott támadás éri digitális eszközökkel, megfélemlítési céllal.

Ez az orosz módszerek bevezetése Magyarországon. A Fidesz által épített Harcosok Klubja koncepciója és az önkénteseket célzó adatgyűjtések az orosz titkosszolgálati pszichológiai műveletek logikáját követik. Már nem csak politikusokat és újságírókat figyelhetnek meg, hanem aktivistákat és civileket is.

A Tisza semmilyen szenzitív adatot nem ad ki harmadik félnek, minden törvényt betartva a legbiztonságosabb módszerrel dolgozik. De világos, Orbán Viktor pánikban van, és bármilyen fegyvert bevetne, hogy a hatalmát megtartsa. Ezért támogatjuk a PEGA bizottság ajánlásait.

Erős szabályokra van szükség, mert az állambiztonság nem lehet ürügy a demokrácia leépítésére. A hatalom nem játszhat a félelem eszközeivel. A Tisza egy új, jogállami Magyarországért dolgozik.

Evin Incir (S&D). – Mr President, sometimes I wonder if the Commission thinks we are a Mickey Mouse Parliament. Two years have passed since the Parliament’s PEGA Committee issued a forceful recommendation to combat the illegal use of spyware within the EU. Yet two years on, the Commission has utterly failed to take decisive actions. It seems like we have a Mickey Mouse Commission – because it is either that or that the Commission refused to defend the people of Europe and uphold democracy, rule of law and human rights. In fact, some Member States, such as Italy and Hungary, are now in an even worse state than before: Hungary has been caught spying on EU officials and Italy on activists – clear violations of fundamental rights that remain unpunished.

The European Media Freedom Act was passed, but it protects only journalists and only narrowly. What about political opponents? What about activists, lawyers, ordinary citizens? It is high time for bold, unwavering actions from the Commission. Accountability must be enforced and Member States must be held to strict standards. It is time to end the Big Brother society some of our Member States have turned into.

Stefano Cavedagna (ECR). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, approfitto di questo dibattito di quest’oggi per denunciare un fatto grave, che mette in luce tutta l’incoerenza della sinistra italiana ed europea. Mi riferisco, in particolare, all’Italia, al caso Paragon, una tempesta mediatica scatenata ad hoc contro il governo italiano a seguito della scoperta dell’utilizzo dello spyware Graphite eventualmente su giornalisti e attivisti.

Per settimane, il governo Meloni è stato attaccato e accusato di violare i diritti fondamentali. Quello che noi abbiamo sempre detto è di aspettare che dichiari il Copasir, il Comitato per la sicurezza parlamentare della Repubblica, che, alla fine dei conti, che cosa ha detto? Non solo che non c’è stato alcun tipo di iniziative da parte del governo Meloni, ma ancor di più, che se sono state fatte delle iniziative contro alcuni giornalisti, queste sono state tenute durante il governo precedente di Giuseppe Conte, gestito dai Cinque Stelle e dal Partito Democratico.

Addirittura, alcuni colleghi hanno presentato un’interrogazione chiedendo se davvero il governo italiano stava minando la sicurezza della nostra democrazia. Chiediamo che vengano in Aula e in commissione a chiedere scusa, perché forse gli oscurantisti sono altri.

Hannah Neumann (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, dear colleagues, spyware abuse is a massive threat to our fundamental rights, it corrodes democracy from within – we all know it. Yet, Member States again and again say they need it for ‘national security’. Well fine, then let’s talk national security, because spyware companies claim they make us safer, while evidence proves the opposite. The exploits they use are later on picked up by Russia and others and used against us. The highest number of targets are lawmakers, military officials, even governments – the odds are high that people in this very room are infected right now.

This is absurd, dear colleagues, given the security threats Europe is already facing. And AI is just turbocharging this danger: combining, analysing, exploiting data at a scale we have never seen.

If we don’t act now, the problem will be a hundred times worse in a year’s time. And we know how to stop this – we spelled it out in the Pegasus report two years ago. So to the Council: get your act together and fix this before it is too late. You in Poland above all should know this.

Pernando Barrena Arza (The Left). – Señor presidente, señorías, el listado de recomendaciones elaborado por la Comisión PEGA de este Parlamento fue apoyado por una amplia mayoría: apoyos de izquierda a derecha. Pero hoy, dos años más tarde, no tenemos constancia alguna de que esas recomendaciones hayan servido para algo.

Para empezar, hay que constatar que las víctimas del uso de este software de espionaje no han obtenido ningún tipo de reparación. Ninguno de los Gobiernos europeos implicados —particularmente Polonia, Hungría, España y Grecia— ha dado explicaciones ni se han depurado responsabilidades de ningún tipo. Y, además, sabemos que Marruecos ha utilizado ese software contra cargos políticos y periodistas, principalmente de España y Francia, y no se ha adoptado ningún tipo de acción jurídica o queja diplomática como consecuencia de esa injerencia por parte de un país ajeno a la Unión.

Así, la sensación final, como decía, es que las nuevas herramientas digitales permiten usos no legítimos contra la ciudadanía y sus derechos, y que, finalmente, nadie rinde cuentas por ello.

Quiero aprovechar para recordar que Israel es hoy día referente en la producción de herramientas tecnológicas para la vulneración de derechos humanos y en el despliegue de tecnología militar para el genocidio de Palestina. Ambos deben terminar ya. ¡Suspensión del Acuerdo de Asociación UE‑Israel ya!

Krzysztof Brejza (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Szanowni Państwo! Mówię do Państwa jako ofiara Pegasusa z 2019 roku, kiedy startowałem w wyborach do Parlamentu Europejskiego i do parlamentu polskiego. Przez pół roku byłem atakowany przez tych ludzi. Przez tego człowieka również, który dzisiaj zabierał głos, czyli przez polskich populistów. Przez pół roku ukradziono mi dziewięćdziesiąt tysięcy wiadomości, sfałszowano je i publikowano w ich rządowej, populistycznej telewizji w formie zafałszowanej. Wygrałem w tej sprawie 5 procesów, ale to jest dowód, jak Pegasus może być użyty do podsłuchiwania, do niszczenia ludzi, do niszczenia jednostki. Oni wysyłali nam nawet jako Koalicji Obywatelskiej fałszywe analizy wyborcze. Do tego był używany Pegasus.

Szanowni Państwo, niełatwo jest mi o tym mówić w sytuacji, kiedy przede mną przemawiał człowiek, który siedział w więzieniu w Polsce za zorganizowanie nielegalnej operacji przeciwko swojemu koledze. Ten człowiek, Maciej Wąsik siedział w więzieniu. On został skazany, on jest przestępcą za nielegalną operację. Jest tutaj tylko dlatego, że jego kolega z partii populistycznej, który jest prezydentem, go ułaskawił.

Także to narzędzie służyło populistom w Polsce do niszczenia niezależnych sędziów, adwokatów, polityków, do organizowania prowokacji, podsłuchiwania sztabu opozycji, wpływania na wyniki wyborów. To, co oni zrobili w Polsce, nie może się powtórzyć w żadnym państwie europejskim. A dziś wiemy, że w Polsce ich telewizja publikuje materiały z Pegasusa przeciwko byłemu przewodniczącemu Rady Europejskiej Donaldowi Tuskowi. To są ich populistyczne metody. Musimy być temu przeciw.

Sandro Ruotolo (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, parliamo di PEGA. Dopo due anni, la Commissione non ha ancora proposto una normativa vincolante contro l’abuso degli spyware, né pubblicato la comunicazione promessa. Lo faccia ora, perché c’è un nuovo caso che scuote l’Europa: lo spyware Paragon Graphite. Secondo Meta, 17 paesi europei coinvolti, 61 utenze infettate, di cui 7 italiane. Apple parla di 150 paesi nel mondo.

Io faccio un appello a chi è stato spiato illegalmente: uscite allo scoperto, aiutateci! Dobbiamo proteggere giornalisti, oppositori e attivisti dallo spionaggio illegale, spiati da un software israeliano finanziato da fondi americani. Citizen Lab conferma che almeno due giornalisti italiani e uno europeo sono stati spiati.

La Commissione ha risposto alla mia interrogazione dicendo che l’uso illegale di spyware è inaccettabile, ma servono azioni concrete. Il 30 maggio, con i gruppi S&D e Verdi, siamo stati a Roma e abbiamo parlato con le vittime. Questo caso non è solo italiano, è europeo. Mi dispiace per il collega Cavedagna, ma non è aggiornato sui fatti. Non c’è democrazia senza libertà di stampa.

Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Może na początek mojemu rozentuzjazmowanemu przedmówcy z Polski mogę odpowiedzieć polskim przysłowiem: „Diabeł w ornat się ubrał i ogonem na mszę dzwoni”. Zarzuty wobec Polski od początku były polityczną kreacją. Działania, które były podejmowane przez polskie służby, zawsze były podejmowane pod nadzorem sądów i wymierzone były wobec osób, które realnie stanowiły zagrożenie dla bezpieczeństwa państwa, albo wobec osób, które były podejrzane o działania przestępcze.

Najlepszym przykładem jest tu osoba rosyjskiego szpiega GRU Pawła Rubcowa, który działał pod przykryciem hiszpańskiego dziennikarza, a jego zatrzymanie spowodowało wręcz histerię, również w tej Izbie, i przedstawiane było przez lewicowy establishment, jako przykład represji rządu PiS wobec dziennikarzy. Ten dziennikarz okazał się bardzo groźnym szpiegiem, a ci, którzy brali go w obronę, po raz kolejny okazali się pożytecznymi idiotami Putina.

Ale, Szanowni Państwo, o hipokryzji i podwójnych standardach świadczy to, że instytucje Unii Europejskiej nie reagują dzisiaj na łamanie praw podstawowych w Polsce przez obecny rząd Tuska za naruszenie fundamentalnych elementów demokracji, chociażby za nielegalne zajęcie mediów publicznych i finansowanie kampanii wyborczej w Polsce przez ośrodki polityczne spoza Unii Europejskiej, przestępcze wstrzymanie finansowania największej partii opozycyjnej. Jesteście hipokrytami.

Leoluca Orlando (Verts/ALE). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signora Commissaria, grazie per aver ammesso che la Commissione nulla ha fatto dopo richieste e denunce sul caso Pegasus.

Grazie per aver ammesso che nulla inoltre risulta la Commissione ha fatto su ostacoli e condizionamenti da parte del governo italiano contro la libertà dei giornalisti, certificati al report Brunner 2024 sul Rule of Law. Legga il report del 2024, signora Commissaria. Nulla la Commissione continua a fare sulle accertate responsabilità del governo italiano che ha sostanzialmente autorizzato lo spionaggio da parte della società israeliana Paragon di operatori sociali, responsabili soltanto di salvare vite umane nel Mediterraneo e avrebbe fatto avere le intercettazioni ai criminali libici finanziati dal governo italiano e guidati dal torturatore Almasri, esponendo quegli operatori sociali a rappresaglie di ogni genere.

Il governo italiano risulta ancora avere impedito alla società Paragon, che ha denunciato ciò formalmente, di individuare gli spyware mercenari che hanno spiato i giornalisti italiani. Nessuna contestazione, nessuna procedura di infrazione da parte della Commissione, pur dopo tante denunce e tante affermazioni. Signora Commissaria, la cosiddetta relazione Copasir, provi a leggerla e vedrà, da questa relazione l’imbarazzante contraddizione di dover ammettere quello che ho appena finito di affermare.

Konstantinos Arvanitis (The Left). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρία Επίτροπε, μας είπατε ότι έχουμε κάνει πάρα πολύ καλή δουλειά. Σας ευχαριστούμε πάρα πολύ. Και τι την κάνατε αυτή τη δουλειά; Αυτό είναι το μεγάλο ερώτημα. Στην περασμένη θητεία συστήσαμε την εξεταστική επιτροπή, βγάλαμε πορίσματα, εργαστήκαμε πολύ, και το 2025 έχουμε το Paragon στην Ιταλία.

Να σας ενημερώσω πως η δικαστική έρευνα στην Ελλάδα για το σκάνδαλο των παρακολουθήσεων μέσω του λογισμικού Predator εξελίσσεται σε θεσμική παρωδία. Ο αντεισαγγελέας του Αρείου Πάγου απέκλεισε κάθε ευθύνη της Εθνικής Υπηρεσίας Πληροφοριών, η οποία —άκουσον, άκουσον— υπάγεται στο γραφείο του πρωθυπουργού της Ελλάδας, και χαρακτήρισε «σύμπτωση» το ότι 27 πρόσωπα, ανάμεσά τους υπουργοί, ευρωβουλευτές, πολιτικοί και δημοσιογράφοι, παρακολουθούνταν ταυτόχρονα από το Predator με εντολή της Εθνικής Υπηρεσίας Πληροφοριών.

Παρά το ότι εντόπισε τους ιδιώτες πίσω από το λογισμικό, τους δίωξε μόνο για πλημμέλημα. Γιατί; Επειδή η δίωξη για κακούργημα θα οδηγούσε σε έρευνα από εφέτη ανακριτή, κάτι που η κυβέρνηση δεν ήθελε.

Έτσι, ένα από τα μεγαλύτερα πολιτικά σκάνδαλα έκλεισε χωρίς να περάσει ποτέ σε χέρια ανακριτή. Το παράδειγμα της Πολωνίας θα μπορούσε, βεβαίως, να το ακολουθήσει και η Ελλάδα. Νομίζω ότι είμαστε μετέωροι, πραγματικά, και είμαστε ανοχύρωτοι όταν τα όργανα δεν λαμβάνουν θέση και δεν κάνουν τη δουλειά τους.

Interventions à la demande

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wysoka Izbo! Rozmawiamy o sprawie absolutnie najważniejszej, chodzi o to, czy państwa członkowskie mają prawo inwigilować bez uzasadnienia swoich obywateli? Czy kraje członkowskie, w tym rządy, mają prawo używać oprogramowania szpiegowskiego dla celów politycznych? Odpowiedź z tej Izby jest jednoznaczna i taka musi być. Nie mają prawa.

Dlatego też do dna trzeba rozliczyć wszystkie afery, które dotyczą tego, jak rządy krajów członkowskich, w tym były polski rząd, który był rządem partii PiS, używał tego oprogramowania wobec polityków, wobec prokuratorów, wobec adwokatów po to, żeby wpływać na decyzje i mieć informacje. To są oprogramowania takie jak Pegasus, które mają być wykorzystywane przeciwko terrorystom z Hamasu, z Hezbollahu, nie przeciwko własnej opozycji demokratycznej. Te sprawy muszą być wyjaśnione i ta rola instytucji europejskich w tym procesie jest kluczowa.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, doamnă comisară, stimați colegi, iată, vorbim de un subiect atât de important ‑ programe de spionaj ‑ într-un spațiu democratic, când știm bine că spionajul era caracteristic statelor în care era dictatură.

Eu vin dintr-un stat comunist și este greu de înțeles de către cetățenii europeni cum putem să nu avem măsuri de contracarare a acestor programe. Dacă Comisia se mișcă atât de greu, după doi ani nu se reușește a se găsi măsuri. Trebuie protejați nu numai presa sau jurnaliștii, sau, eu știu, prim-miniștrii, ci și cetățenii, doamna comisar, pentru că sunt cetățeni care lucrează în mediul privat, sunt companii spionate, sunt oameni de afaceri spionați, șantajați, sunt cetățeni care nu mai doresc să intre în politică pentru că le e teamă că sunt urmăriți și spionați. Ce facem? Ce răspuns să dăm acasă? Dacă nu reușim să punem capăt, să nu ne mirăm de euroscepticism și de faptul că nu există încredere în instituțiile europene.

Trebuie să dați răspuns concret: se poate sau nu se poate face ceva, pentru că altfel democrația este pur și simplu dărâmată și nu putem să ne așteptăm la cei mai buni politicieni dacă oamenii sunt suspectați și sunt spionați.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, vicepresidenta Virkkunen, el único sentido de una comisión de investigación en este Parlamento Europeo, ya sea sobre Pegasus en la pasada legislatura —hace dos años ya—, ya sea como, en estos momentos, sobre el Escudo Europeo de la Democracia, es deducir lecciones de las malas experiencias, plasmarlas en un documento de conclusiones y que ese documento de conclusiones sea un mandato de iniciativa para la Comisión Europea, que brilla penosamente por su ausencia ante la gravedad de que un programa Pegasus —o Predator en Grecia— haya sido utilizado no para perseguir delitos graves —terrorismo—, con autorización judicial, en la medida en que es intrusivo sobre los derechos más fundamentales de la confidencialidad de datos personales y de las comunicaciones, sino para espiar a jueces, fiscales, oponentes políticos, activistas de derechos humanos, profesionales del Derecho, etc. Es una situación completamente inaceptable.

Por tanto, vicepresidenta Virkkunen, es absolutamente imperioso que la Comisión, en estos momentos, ponga en vereda esas actuaciones manifiestamente irregulares de los Estados miembros que espían a personas que nada tienen que ver con atentados contra la seguridad colectiva y deduzca también lecciones en relación con la empresa matriz en Israel, que es la que ha suministrado el software.

Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Domnule președinte, da, dumneavoastră vorbiți de spionaj și de democrație, hai să fim serioși, în Europa nu mai e demult democrație. În România nici nu a fost vreodată. În România de pe vremea comunismului eram înregistrați, spionați, iar în calitate de avocat vă spun că toți avocații din România sunt spionați și înregistrați. Fostul președinte Băsescu a plătit vreo 500 000 de euro pentru aparatură de înregistrare non-stop a avocaților din România.

Absolut tot ceea ce se întâmplă în România în politică și aici nu e vorba numai de a apăra jurnaliștii, cei mai mulți jurnaliști sunt cumpărați de către guvern și de către partidele care guvernează. Aici este vorba de avocați, de politicieni, și eu sunt urmărită și spionată, nenumărate mesaje ale mele sunt publice, dar în România este legal și chiar dacă este ilegal, în justiție judecătorii sunt urmăriți, spionați, sunt amenințați, sunt șantajați, la fel ca și oamenii politici.

Și da, doamna Grapini, are dreptate, oamenii nu mai vor să vină în politică, inclusiv din cauza acestor dosare penale cu șantaj.

Lukas Sieper (NI). – Herr Präsident, liebe Menschen Europas! In der DDR reichte ein Verdacht und die Stasi hörte mit. Heute braucht es nur ein paar Klicks und Pegasus infiltriert das Handy einer Journalistin, eines Menschenrechtlers, eines Abgeordneten – auch in EU‑Staaten. Doch was fast so gefährlich ist wie diese Software, ist die Tatsache, wer darüber entscheidet, wer sie erhält – ein einzelnes Unternehmen. Ein Unternehmen, das mit autoritären Regierungen Geschäfte macht, sich jeder demokratischen Kontrolle entzieht und aus Angst ein Geschäftsmodell gebaut hat.

Solche Unternehmen verkaufen keine Software, sie verkaufen Zugänge zu Gedanken, zu Leben, zu Strategien von Menschen, die sich für die Freiheit einsetzen. Sie tun das mit einer Preisliste, aber ohne Transparenz, ohne Ethik, ohne Reue. Wenn Europa das zulässt, dann werden wir bald nicht mehr überwacht trotz Demokratie, sondern wegen ihr. Demokratie braucht Schutz und nicht Spionagesoftware und keinen freien Markt für Überwachung.

(Fin des interventions à la demande)

Henna Virkkunen, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, honourable Members, thank you very much for this very topical debate; it clearly shows the complex nature of the illegal use of spyware we are facing.

Let me state again that the Commission’s view is very clear here: any attempt to illegally access data of citizens, including journalists and political opponents, is unacceptable. We are determined to protect the fundamental rights of our citizens to privacy, data protection and security.

We already have many rules in place: we have data protection rules, we have the ePrivacy directive and, just recently, we have adopted the Media Freedom Act, that comes into force in August, and also the Cyber Resilience Act. So we have already many, many rules in place. But I very much agree with you that when we look at the security environment where we are, the attacks against our democracies and also the very fast development of different technologies, I see that it is also important to see that further work in this field is needed. I am very grateful for the support from Parliament.

Le Président. – Le débat est clos.

20. The human cost of Russia’s war against Ukraine and the urgent need to end Russian aggression: the situation of illegally detained civilians and prisoners of war, and the continued bombing of civilians (debate)

Adam Szłapka, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, madam Commissioner, honourable Members, our last discussion on the Russian aggression against Ukraine took place only a month ago. The EU has firmly and repeatedly condemned the Russian aggression as a manifest violation of the EU Charter and international law. It is a global security and stability threat reaching well beyond Europe’s borders.

I take this opportunity to express my respect for this House. The very first resolution adopting during this term, last July, was on the need of EU continued support for Ukraine. It represented a strong political message from Parliament.

This unjustified war is especially tragic for the Ukrainian population. Let me recall the devastating impact of this brutal aggression on Ukraine. So many civilians and soldiers killed, millions of Ukrainians displaced or having fled abroad. Millions of Ukrainians lack basic humanitarian aid, especially food, water, healthcare, illegally detained civilians and numerous prisoners of war.

The fate of Ukrainian children who are lawfully deported and transferred to Russia and Belarus is particularly close to our hearts. The Council clearly expressed that Russia and Belarus must immediately ensure their safe return to Ukraine.

Let me be clear on the main topic of today’s debate. Russia commits war crimes and crimes against humanity by executing Ukrainian prisoners of war, and by subjecting Ukrainian prisoners and civilians to torture and other inhuman treatment. The Council has been very explicit on this matter. No crime can remain unpunished and international humanitarian law must be respected at all items.

Last week we saw Ukraine brought home the bodies of 1212 soldiers killed in the war of aggression by Russia. Last week too, Russia and Ukraine exchanged dozens of prisoners fathers exchange of prisoners expected to take place soon. Furthermore, thousands of Ukrainian civilians are detained in Russia whose families do not even know about their fate.

But let us face the reality. Russia does not want peace. On the contrary, Russia is escalating its war in Ukraine. Rather than focusing on the Istanbul peace talks, Moscow has increased its large scale attack on civilians in Kyiv and other Ukrainian cities. The situation is only worsening. This is why we should continue to call for a comprehensive, just and lasting peace based on the UN Charter and international law.

A full and unconditional ceasefire is essential to stop human suffering. It is also a precondition for meaningful peace talks. Ukraine has accepted it and now it is for Russia to do the same.

We need to act now to further support Ukraine and further put pressure on Russia. Our position is clear and consistent. Ukraine needs to be in a position of strength to be able to negotiate a sustainable, comprehensive and just peace.

We are ready to support this effort with the tools that the EU has at its disposal. It is why we will treat the 18 package of sanctions against Russia as a priority in the last weeks of our presidency in the Council.

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, dear honourable Members, dear Minister Adam Szłapka, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has had a devastating impact – the killing and suffering of civilians whose cities are subjected to air raids targeting civilian infrastructure; the suffering of those illegally detained by Russia, of prisoners of war, subjected to torture and inhuman treatment and of forcibly transferred Ukrainian children to Russia; the suffering of those who struggle to earn their living among war-induced hardship.

The Commission stands firm in its condemnation of the numerous well-documented violations of international humanitarian law by Russia. This principled position translates into concrete action in support of the efforts of Ukraine and other members of the international community to ensure accountability.

First, supporting the International Criminal Court in its ongoing investigations against Russian perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity – this has been possible since 2014, with Ukraine’s recognition of the court’s jurisdiction under Article 12(3) of the Rome Statute. This has become even more straightforward, with Ukraine having completed the ratification of the Rome Statute and becoming a full-fledged state party of the ICC on 1 January this year – a long-standing point of EU-Ukraine political dialogue and a commitment under the Association Agreement with the EU.

Second, supporting Ukraine’s own capacity to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity – as part of its commitments stemming from the ratification of the Rome Statute, Ukraine has recently adopted relevant amendments to its Criminal Code and Criminal Procedure Code. The EU has actively participated in the international Atrocity Crimes Advisory Group, which supports the office of the Prosecutor-General of Ukraine in investigating and prosecuting international crimes committed during Russia’s full-scale invasion. The Commission also supports numerous non-governmental initiatives in Ukraine, engaged in activities such as on-the-ground documentation of atrocities, collection of witness testimonies and support to civilians illegally detained by Russia.

Third, given the current gap in the ICC’s jurisdiction over Russia’s crime of aggression against Ukraine, the Commission and the VP/HR, Kaja Kallas, have been actively involved in work on the establishment of the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine. Most recently, VP/R Kallas and Commissioner McGrath joined representatives of an international coalition of states gathered in the core group at their high-level meeting in Lviv on 9 May, endorsing texts agreed by legal experts which will lead to the establishment of this tribunal. This text will subsequently be transformed into legal acts of the Council of Europe.

Fourth, the Commission supports efforts to establish an international claims commission for Ukraine. On 4 February this year, the Commission adopted a recommendation to the Council in this regard.

Finally, let me stress that the human cost of this war goes beyond the immediate suffering. The war has left Ukraine with a diminished workforce and a severely strained economy. This will profoundly affect the country’s ability to rebuild. Reconstruction is not just a financial task, it is a human one, and the long-term social and economic consequences must be acknowledged alongside the legal and political efforts. The Commission remains committed to engage in reforms that will enable rebuild the economy and infrastructure in Ukraine once the war is over, keeping rule of law in its very centre.

Next month, I will be in the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Rome, where I will also be discussing the human aspects of Ukraine’s reconstruction – because behind every shattered school, every ruined hospital and every empty village is a life interrupted, and it is in our responsibility to help restore the future they were forced to put on hold.

Michael Gahler, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Im Zusammenhang mit Russlands Angriffskrieg gegen die Ukraine wird vieles thematisiert: die Kampfhandlungen, Waffenlieferungen, die Zerstörung der Infrastruktur, die Millionen Flüchtlinge aus der Ukraine in Europa, die Binnenvertriebenen und richtigerweise unsere umfängliche Unterstützung. Weitaus seltener thematisieren wir das Schicksal der Ukrainer unter russischer Kontrolle.

Da sind zum einen die Kriegsgefangenen. Wenn man anlässlich von Gefangenenaustauschen den körperlichen Zustand der meisten freigelassenen Ukrainer betrachtet und anschließend deren Erzählungen hört, muss man zu der Schlussfolgerung kommen, dass Russland seiner Verpflichtung zur menschlichen Behandlung dieser Gefangenen in keiner Weise nachkommt. Wir müssen daher verlangen, dass Russland internationalen Vertretern des Roten Kreuzes jederzeit Zugang zu den Gefangenenlagern gewährt und diejenigen Wachmannschaften bestraft, die sich schwerster Menschenrechtsverletzungen gegenüber den Kriegsgefangenen schuldig gemacht haben.

Noch weniger Aufmerksamkeit gilt den willkürlich verhafteten Zivilisten in der russisch besetzten Zone der Ukraine. Am besten macht man das an einem Beispiel deutlich, und ich erwähne hier das Schicksal von Kostjantyn Sinowkin aus Melitopol, der am 12. Mai 2023 unter dem Vorwand der Verletzung der Ausgangssperre verhaftet wurde. Am 14. Juni 2023 wurde der Familie mitgeteilt, er habe gestanden, einen Mann in die Luft sprengen zu wollen. Am 29. Oktober 2023 wurde er im russischen Fernsehen vorgeführt. Mehrere Gerichtsverhandlungen fanden in diesem Frühjahr in Rostow statt. Er muss, weil er unschuldig ist, wie Tausende andere freigelassen werden. Lassen Sie diese Menschen frei, Herr Putin!

Thijs Reuten, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Mr President, Commission, Council, dear colleagues, let me say upfront that I am a little bit impatient, angry even, in particular with the Member States, not with you personally, but with the paralysis.

A few weeks ago, European leaders spoke bravely in the presence of President Zelenskyy, but now Europe waits passively for America to realise that Putin’s peace negotiations are just a smokescreen and delaying tactics. We know this yields no results. We cannot speak of wake up calls anymore – we are awake, right? Are we? Because we lack focus, we lack courage, we lack resolve to stop the assault on Ukraine and on the rules-based international order.

We see the cruelty against thousands of prisoners of war, political prisoners, even abducted children. We see the daily barbaric attacks on innocent civilians. We see the pure terror of targeting hospitals, schools, markets, playgrounds. Putin’s goal is not peace; he seeks the defeat of European democracy, the rule of law and human rights. He remains an existential threat to all of democratic Europe.

Ukraine’s courageous resistance is our strongest answer. But we are too passive. For example, where are the Patriot systems some EU and NATO allies have enough of? We need them in Ukraine. What Europe needs to do to achieve sustainable peace remains very clear, yet every moment of passivity only increases the risk of our collective failure.

So I call on the Commission and the Council to be bolder, braver and faster. Equip Ukraine with everything it needs to fight back: militarily, financially and politically. Prioritise justice, accountability and reparations. Impose our most powerful peace-enforcing sanctions package on Russia. Speed up our independence from Russian fossil fuels, and seize frozen assets to support Ukraine. Seize them!

Do not wait for America’s approval on everything; Europe must lead decisively. Ukrainians are survivors – I’m not worried about that. But Europe? We control how deep the suffering will be for that survival.

Pierre-Romain Thionnet, au nom du groupe PfE. – Monsieur le Président, nous avons l’habitude de dire que les guerres font toujours des victimes civiles, mais qu’en est-il lorsque, sous les missiles, sous les drones et sous les décombres, ce sont des frères qui sont tués?

Parler de frères pour parler des Russes et des Ukrainiens, ce n’est évidemment pas remettre en question l’existence d’une nation, d’une identité et d’un peuple ukrainien. C’est faire remarquer leur proximité objective, celle d’une langue certes distincte, mais issue de la famille slave orientale, celle d’un même mythe fondateur, celle d’une même foi orthodoxe, quand bien même elle est déchirée entre deux Églises.

Nous, Européens, savons très bien à quel point les guerres fratricides sont les plus terribles. Nos croyances et nos mythes en sont les témoins: Caïn et Abel, Romulus et Rémus, Etéocle et Polynice.

Pourquoi Poutine, qui affirme à longueur de discours qu’Ukrainiens et Russes forment un seul et même peuple, s’est-il donc lancé dans une guerre d’anéantissement? Pour lui, l’Ukraine est un petit frère, mais c’est un frère inégal, un frère illégitime. On le sait depuis 2014, Poutine veut régner en maître dans son domaine impérial, il refuse que les Ukrainiens puissent choisir un autre destin que celui qui est décidé pour eux. Il préfère une Ukraine anéantie à une Ukraine libérée de la tutelle russe.

Ainsi, alors que les néoconservateurs américains bombardaient au nom de l’humanité, les Faucons russes pilonnent au nom de la fraternité; alors que les Occidentaux changeaient les régimes au nom des droits de l’homme, les Russes veulent le faire au nom de pseudo-droits historiques. À chaque fois, c’est notre conception d’un monde fondé sur les relations entre nations qui est battue en brèche et c’est l’Empire qui s’affirme au détriment des nations.

Chers collègues, la paix reste possible, mais elle devra s’accompagner aussi d’un changement de mentalité au sommet du pouvoir russe: considérer l’Ukrainien comme un frère, non pas pour mieux le ligoter et le détruire, mais pour reconnaître en lui un égal.

Michał Dworczyk, w imieniu grupy ECR. – Panie Przewodniczący! Traktowanie jeńców wojennych, jak również ludności cywilnej przez Rosjan wywodzi się niewątpliwie z tradycji sowieckiej i oznacza przemoc, tortury i śmierć. Jako Polacy wielokrotnie doświadczyliśmy tego barbarzyństwa, jak choćby w 1940 r., kiedy na rozkaz Stalina rozstrzelano ponad 22 000 polskich oficerów.

Dzisiaj ta zbrodnicza działalność jest kontynuowana. Licznie napływające z Ukrainy doniesienia o nieludzkim traktowaniu oraz mordach dokonywanych na jeńcach i więźniach są nie tylko naruszeniem wszelkich norm międzynarodowych, ale przede wszystkim rażącym pogwałceniem podstawowych praw człowieka. Takie czyny są hańbą dla ludzkości i nie mogą pozostać bezkarne. I choć trwająca wymiana jeńców między Rosją a Ukrainą jest krokiem w dobrym kierunku, to musimy jako Parlament Europejski wywrzeć presję na Rosję, aby zgodziła się na wymianę jeńców w formacie „wszystkich za wszystkich”.

Wobec tej poważnej kwestii prosimy, jako grupa Europejskich Konserwatystów i Reformatorów, o wsparcie naszej propozycji przyjęcia przez Parlament Europejski na następnej sesji plenarnej odpowiedniej rezolucji w tej sprawie.

Petras Auštrevičius, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Mr President, Minister, Madam Commissioner, autocratic Russia is waging an aggressive war to destroy Ukraine’s sovereignty and the whole Ukrainian nation.

As well as committing unspeakable war crimes and ecocide, Russia is illegally detaining and deporting Ukrainian civilians, including children.

The appearance of those who have been returned from Russian captivity best reflects what Ukrainians are experiencing. They look as if they have been through hell, reliving the horrors of the Holodomor, Nazi and Soviet concentration camps altogether at the same time.

The whereabouts of less than 2 000 Ukrainian civilians in Russian captivity have been identified. I am a guardian of one of them, Dmytro Khyliuk, a civilian journalist who was captured in his own garden near Kyiv in March 2022.

He remains a Russian hostage to this day, imprisoned in Correctional Colony No. 7 near Moscow, today’s Russian capital, without any contact with the outside world.

His father, Vasyl, has recently been diagnosed with stage four cancer and his only wish is to hear his son’s voice once again.

Russia must be held accountable to the war crimes it has committed and continues to commit. To bring Russia to the negotiation table, dear colleagues, we need all possible means, including international pressure, additional sanctions and unambiguous political signals.

Slava Ukraini!

Sergey Lagodinsky, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, when Victoria Roshchyna, a Ukrainian journalist, returned home in February 2025, she had broken ribs, electrical burns, missing eyes and part of her throat gone. Now we know what happened to her – she was severely tortured and finally strangulated to death. Just one of many. Civilians, prisoners of war, Crimean Tatars accused of being terrorists, journalists who dared to speak Ukrainian – this is a war waged in torture chambers, psychiatric wards and filtration camps.

People – we know their names, we know their stories, and we know that silence equals complicity. That is why our resolution during the next session will expose the scale of these atrocities, from the abduction of thousands of children to the use of psychiatry as a weapon against free will. Our Parliament demands action, access and active involvement of the International Red Cross coordinated EU response. I assure you, we will do our best to stand on the side of Ukrainians.

PRZEWODNICTWO: EWA KOPACZ
Wiceprzewodnicząca

Özlem Demirel, im Namen der Fraktion The Left. – Frau Präsidentin! Wir reden heute zu den menschlichen Kosten des Krieges in der Ukraine. Dazu gehören die tausenden zivilen Opfer und die hunderttausenden Männer, die auf dem Schlachtfeld auf beiden Seiten gestorben sind. Dieser Krieg hat, ebenso wie viele andere Kriege auch, unvorstellbare Gräueltaten mit sich gebracht. Dieser Krieg muss enden. Stattdessen sagen Kommission und Rat heute wieder, wir sollten nicht auf Friedensverhandlungen setzen, sondern Sanktionen und Waffenlieferungen vorantreiben.

Die, die über Krieg entscheiden, trifft es in der Regel nicht. Dort auf dem Schlachtfeld kämpft weder ein Herr Putin noch ein Herr Selenskyj noch eine Frau von der Leyen oder ein Herr Trump, dafür aber die Armen aus Russland und der Ukraine: Arme Männer, die sich dem Krieg nicht entziehen können.

Übrigens können sich die Männer und auch die Frauen in Israel dem Krieg auch nicht ohne Weiteres entziehen. Ja, Russland hat das Völkerrecht gebrochen. Niemand hat das Recht, das Völkerrecht zu brechen. Aber warum redet die Kommission nicht über die Gräuel und die unmenschlichen Taten der israelischen Regierung in Gaza? Warum reden Sie nicht über den Völkerrechtsbruch im Iran mit den Bombardierungen? Warum reden Sie nicht über Frieden, sondern über Krieg, Krieg, Krieg? Sie tun es, weil Sie Geopolitik verfolgen. Ich verfolge Menschlichkeit.

Hans Neuhoff, on behalf of the ESN Group. – Madam President, colleagues, Donald Trump is a prudent statesman: he upholds the time-honoured principle of audiatur et altera pars – let the other side be heard as well. Trump speaks with Putin.

The European Union, by contrast, wants to end the bloodshed in Ukraine and bring the war to a close, but in doing so, it listens only to itself and to the Ukrainian side. No one has seriously attempted to consider the Russian perspective. No effort has been made to understand why Russian leaders perceive NATO’s eastward expansion – reaching as far as the Donbas – as an existential threat. The deliberate ignorance, I predict, is precisely why the EU is doomed to fail in the matter.

Trump is a realist; the EU acts blindly. George F. Kennan, the architect of the containment strategy, once called NATO’s expansion to Russia’s border a fateful error. Yet we continue to repeat it. History will judge us with utter harshness.

Sandra Kalniete (PPE). – Cienītā sēdes vadītāja! Godātie kolēģi! Rit Krievijas agresijas ceturtais gads. Diendienā ukraiņi tiek nogalināti, sakropļoti, aplaupīti, pakļauti vardarbībai. Īpaši smaga situācija ir okupētajās teritorijās, kur Ukraina cieš no Krievijas administratīvās varas un drošības dienestu noziegumiem, tiek patvaļīgi ieslodzīti un spīdzināti.

Šī Krievijas koloniālā politika ir noziegums, kuru nekad nevar [ne] aizmirst, ne piedot. Putins ir atjaunojis Staļina metodes – uz Krievijas tālākajiem novadiem tiek deportēti simtiem tūkstošu nevainīgu okupēto apgabalu cilvēku.

Taču vislielākais Kremļa noziegums ir 20 000 Ukrainas bērnu nolaupīšana. Viņu atrašanās vieta nav zināma, jo daudzi bērni ir piedzīvojuši adopciju, vārda un pilsonības maiņu. Lielākie tiek nometināti pāraudzināšanas nometnēs un pakļauti masīvai rusifikācijai un militārai indoktrinācijai. Kremļa mērķis acīmredzot ir viņus izaudzināt par karavīriem Krievijas armijai, kas cīnīsies pret savu dzimteni.

Tāda ir Putina Krievijas patiesā seja – agresija, deportācijas, bērnu nolaupīšana un nogalinātu civiliedzīvotāju masu kapi. Starptautiskajai sabiedrībai ir jāsauc pie atbildības Krievija par tās pastrādātajām zvērībām. Nesodāmība nedrīkst atkārtoties, kā tas notika pēc komunistu komunistiskā režīma sabrukuma.

Heléne Fritzon (S&D). – Fru talman! Kriget i Ukraina är inte bara en kamp om territorium. Det är en kamp om frihet, fred och demokrati. För varje dag bombas civila hem, barn växer upp i skyddsrum och människor fängslas och torteras. Enligt UNICEF har barn vid frontlinjen tillbringat över ett halvår i skyddsrum, och var tredje ungdom känner hopplöshet, särskilt flickor.

Precis nu när vi debatterar här så hålls civila och krigsfångar olagligt fängslade och det bombas över bostäderna i Ukraina. Vi får aldrig, aldrig någonsin vänja oss vid den här verkligheten, och vi kan göra skillnad. Vårt stöd till Ukraina måste vara tydligt och kraftfullt. Vi måste göra allt vi kan för att öka stödet till Ukraina ekonomiskt, militärt och humanitärt.

Jag vill därför att alla EU-länder nu, redan i år, når upp till minst en halv procent av sitt BNP i stöd till Ukraina. Det ser väldigt olika ut och jag vill att alla EU:s medlemsstater slutar att köpa den ryska gasen. Den göder Putins krigskassa. Vi kan göra skillnad, vi kan agera här och nu. Slava Ukraini.

Reinis Pozņaks (ECR). – Cienītā sēdes vadītāja! Labdien, kolēģi! Kopš iepriekšējās debates par Krievijas kara noziegumiem ir pagājušas 77 dienas. Tie ir aptuveni 2500 droni un 160 raķetes, ko Krievija raidījusi pa Ukrainas pilsētām. Vairāki simti bojāgājušu civiliedzīvotāju, vairāki desmiti bērnu.

Vairākas sarunas dažādos formātos ir bijušas, taču Krievija turpina darīt vienīgo, ko tā prot – terorizēt civiliedzīvotājus, deportēt un spīdzināt. Darīt visu, lai iznīcinātu vai vismaz salauztu tās tautas, kuras nevēlas pakļauties krievu pasaulei. Tas nav nekas jauns. Gan Baltijas valstis, gan Ukraina un daudzas citas valstis tam ir gājušas cauri padomju okupācijas laikā.

Un kāpēc Krievija to dara? Jo viņi var! Jo nekad iepriekš nav sodīti par šādiem noziegumiem, un ir pārliecināti, ka tas nenotiks arī šobrīd. Un nenotiks tāpēc, jo mēs nevaram joprojām atteikties no Krievijas resursiem un mēs joprojām nevaram nodrošināt Ukrainu ar visu, kas tai ir nepieciešams, lai sakautu un sodītu agresoru.

Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Minister, Frau Kommissarin! Kateryna Korovina ist eine 28-jährige Ukrainerin aus der Region Luhansk. Sie wurde im März letzten Jahres auf dem Weg zur Apotheke vom russischen Inlandsgeheimdienst verschleppt und ist jetzt in einer Haftanstalt im russischen Rostow am Don. Zu zehn Jahren Haft ist sie verurteilt worden, weil sie angeblich kleine Spenden an die ukrainischen Streitkräfte überwiesen haben soll. Und während der Verhöre wurde sie unter Druck gesetzt, ein Geständnis zu unterschreiben, um für ein erzwungenes Propagandavideo gefilmt zu werden, in dem sie einen vorgehaltenen Text ablas. Vor Gericht widerrief sie mutig ihre Aussagen und erklärte, diese seien unter psychischem und physischem Druck gemacht worden. Sie bekannte sich als nicht schuldig und schloss ihre Erklärung mit einem selbstgeschriebenen Gedicht mit dem Titel „Horror in meinem Zuhause“.

Es ist gut, dass wir heute darüber sprechen, denn die Opfer haben einen Namen; sie sind nicht anonym. Und diese Menschen in den besetzten Gebieten haben unsere Aufmerksamkeit genauso verdient wie all die Opfer in der Ukraine. Und mir wird schlecht, wenn ich dann am rechten Rand jemanden höre, der sich Soziologe nennt, wie hier das mit Füßen getreten wird. Putin ist der Verbrecher und kein anderer mehr.

Virginijus Sinkevičius (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, every day Russia’s war against Ukraine brings new pain. Civilians are killed in their homes, children lose their parents. Russian bombs hit schools, hospitals and energy plants. Cities are left in darkness and people continue to live in fear.

And the suffering does not end at the frontline. Thousands of civilians and prisoners of war are held illegally by Russian forces. Many of them face torture, abuse, rape and even execution, including children. At least 75 of those cases are documented, and this is not a single event. This is a systemic terror against Ukrainian people. And these are not just numbers. These are lives. So every attack, every act of cruelty is a crime against humanity.

But words are not enough. We must act. We must deliver aid, secure the immediate release of all detainees, support Ukraine’s defence and demand accountability. The Council must tighten sanctions and close every loophole that fuels Russia’s war machine. The world cannot be silent. The human cost is too high. And it’s time to bring justice to Ukraine.

Petar Volgin (ESN). – Г-жо Председател, главните виновници за продължаването на войната в Украйна се намират в Брюксел. Ръководителите на Европейския съюз постоянно заблуждават украинския народ, че е възможна победа срещу Русия, че дори и Съединените щати да оттеглят подкрепата си за Киев, Европейският съюз ще предостави също толкова, ако не и повече пари и оръжия на Зеленски.

Другата голяма лъжа, която лидерите на ЕС не спират да повтарят, е, че има някаква ужасна руска заплаха и че ако Русия не бъде спряна сега, в следващите години тя ще завладее цяла Европа.

Защо евроначалниците говорят подобни обидни за здравия разум глупости? Защото са убедени, че ако уплашат достатъчно силно европейските държави, тези държави ще се свият страхливо и покорно ще изпълняват заповедите на Брюксел.

Евролидерите смятат, че оттук-насетне ще могат да прокарат всяка идиотска политика с оправданието, че тя „спасява Европа от руснаците“. Ето защо висшите брюкселски бюрократи, а не обитателите на Кремъл са основната пречка пред постигането на мир в Украйна.

Ако Европейският съюз се сгромоляса, това ще бъде не заради действията на Москва, а заради неадекватната политика на Брюксел.

Ľuboš Blaha (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, vážení kolegovia, to vám naozaj nepríde trápne, že tu tárate o sankciách proti Rusku, ale nedokážete ani len odsúdiť Izrael za to, že napadol suverénny Irán a ešte aj pácha genocídu na palestínskom národe? Kde sú sankcie proti Izraelu, pani Callasová? Kde sú dodávky zbraní pre Irán? Vojenská agresia odrazu nevadí? Von der Leyenová hanebne vyhlásila, že má pre izraelskú agresiu pochopenie, ale v prípade Ruska nikto nechce chápať, že sa Západ vojensky rozťahoval k hraniciam Ruska a že Rusko sa muselo brániť. Čo je toto za dvojaký meter? Moralizujete o stave ruskej demokracie, ale nevadí vám, že v Estónsku zavreli na šesť rokov novinárku za to, že mala proruské názory? Tomuto hovoríte sloboda slova, kolega? Tvárite sa, že protiruské sankcie niečo riešia, ale v skutočnosti tým iba Európa pácha kolektívnu ekonomickú samovraždu. Ak zakážete dovoz všetkých energií z Ruska, nepotrestáte Rusov, ale nás Slovákov či Maďarov. Ale to je vám jedno, že? Zobuďte sa, vážení, prestaňte s tým dvojitým kilometrom, prestaňte s nenávisťou voči Rusku, prestaňte s tým rinčaním zbraňami.

(Rečník súhlasil, že odpovie na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty)

João Oliveira (The Left), Pergunta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhor Deputado Blaha, ouvi com atenção a sua intervenção e queria fazer-lhe uma pergunta. Depois de todas as intervenções que ouvimos ao longo deste debate expressarem preocupação com a perda de vidas humanas, com a destruição da Ucrânia, a pergunta que lhe quero fazer é simples: o senhor deputado acha mesmo que a União Europeia e as suas Instituições estão comprometidas com uma solução de paz e de segurança coletiva, não apenas na Ucrânia, mas para toda a Europa?

O senhor deputado acha que, quando as Instituições da União Europeia apontam o caminho do militarismo, da corrida aos armamentos, do reforço das medidas de confrontação, é mesmo esse o caminho da paz? Ou, pelo contrário, a União Europeia está a incentivar a guerra para que ela se prolongue indefinidamente?

Ľuboš Blaha (NI), odpoveď na otázku položenú zdvihnutím modrej karty. – Vážená pani predsedajúca, vážený pán kolega, som presvedčený, že Európska únia, ktorá bola kedysi projektom mieru, sa premenila na vojnovú inštitúciu. Jediným cieľom týchto ľudí, čo po mne kričia, je zbrojiť, zbrojiť a zbrojiť a nenávidieť Rusko a zároveň obhajovať Izrael a genocídu na Palestíne. Absolútne pokrytectvo. Tí ľudia sú absolútne smiešni a máte absolútnu pravdu aj v tom, že dneska už celý svet hovorí o tom, že jediná cesta k mieru na Ukrajine je rokovať s ruskou stranou. Aj preto sme boli my piati alebo šiesti poslanci Európskeho parlamentu v Moskve, aby sme rokovali aj s ruskou stranou, lebo iným spôsobom mier dosiahnuť nevieme.

Nicolás Pascual de la Parte (PPE). – Señora presidenta, la guerra en Ucrania está alcanzando unos niveles de crueldad y de inhumanidad impensables. Putin y su ejército están bombardeando sistemáticamente y voluntariamente hospitales, escuelas, infraestructuras básicas, centrales de electricidad, depósitos de agua… claramente con el objetivo de romper la voluntad de resistencia del heroico pueblo ucraniano y de provocar olas de inmigración hacia Europa. No lo va a conseguir: ni va a romper la voluntad del pueblo ucraniano ni va a conseguir sus objetivos.

Exigimos que se libere a los más de 35 000 niños deportados forzosamente a Rusia y adoctrinados. Exigimos que se libere a los más de 16 000 prisioneros adultos que están en cárceles rusas torturados, masacrados, con desnutrición y que son asesinados. Exigimos el intercambio de los miles de prisioneros que están en campos de concentración en Rusia —en el siglo XXI, sí, campos de concentración—. Exigimos su liberación. Y exigimos ante todo que se permita el acceso incondicional e ilimitado al Comité Internacional de la Cruz Roja y a otros organismos internacionales humanitarios para que exijan el cumplimiento de los términos de los Convenios de Ginebra que amparan a los soldados y a los civiles retenidos. Y, en cuarto y último lugar, exigimos que Europa mantenga un sistema de sanciones cada vez más robusto, que seamos capaces de cerrar todas las vías de escape para que el precio de seguir la guerra le sea insoportable a Putin y le obliguemos a venir a la mesa de negociación.

Tobias Cremer (S&D). – Madam President, dear colleagues, on my last trip to Ukraine, I met a remarkable young man named Vlad. Vlad is not a Rambo‑like soldier, but a skinny teenager from Kherson. But still, Putin fears Vlad so much that, alongside 20 000 other Ukrainian children, he had him abducted from his home, sent him into a reeducation camp deep inside Russia and submitted him to violence and solitary confinement.

Colleagues, why is Putin so afraid of Ukrainian children? It’s because this isn’t a normal war against a government or against an army. It’s a war conducted against the Ukrainian civilian population. Putin is so afraid of these children because they are the future of Ukraine’s European future. They symbolise the freedom that cannot be broken.

Vlad himself has shown this will to freedom when one night in the camp, he went up to the flagpole and tore down the Russian flag and pulled up his own underwear instead. In this sign of resistance that could have cost him his life, he has shown real courage and real strength.

Colleagues, if Western leaders had shown even half of that courage in their support for Ukraine that Vlad and so many Ukrainian civilians have shown to their tormentors, this war could already be over. So let us finally muster up our own courage, put Ukraine in a position of strength, seize Russia’s frozen assets and force Putin to the negotiating table, so that Vlad and every single Ukrainian child can regain not only their freedom, but the future of their country.

Dan Barna (Renew). – Doamnă președintă, să vorbim despre adevăr. De mai bine de 1000 de zile, Ucraina se luptă cu un agresor scelerat. Zilnic, bombe rusești lovesc spitale, locuințe, grădinițe, școli. Civilii ucraineni sunt răpiți și torturați. Prizonierii de război sunt supuși la tratamente de o cruzime îngrozitoare și le sunt refuzate cele mai elementare drepturi din legislația internațională.

Acesta este costul uman pe care îl vedem în fiecare zi, iar nevoia de acțiune devine mai importantă ca niciodată.

În primul rând, accelerarea integrării europene a Ucrainei este un imperativ moral și un scut pentru protecția viitorului acestei țări. În al doilea rând, acest scut are nevoie de energie, de forță. Sprijinul nostru militar pentru Ucraina trebuie susținut și mărit. Apărarea Ucrainei este apărarea Europei. Iar în al treilea rând, trebuie să învățăm din curajul ucrainenilor. Experiența lor directă de luptă trebuie integrată în strategiile noastre de securitate colectivă.

Istoria ne privește astăzi. Ce trebuie să rețină este că ne-am ridicat la înălțimea acestui moment. Că am luptat pentru libertate și am făcut tot ce a stat în puterea noastră pentru a obține această libertate și pace justă. Slava Ucraina!

Ville Niinistö (Verts/ALE). – Madam President, an essential part of Russian warfare in Ukraine is war of terror against civilians. Use of rape, torture, detentions illegally and illegal deportations of children are a big part of Russian warfare. This is systematic. Russian propaganda tries to dehumanise Ukrainians. They try to strip their nationhood and they try to strip their identity. This is part of Putin’s imperialism that must be held accountable.

Total civilian casualties since February 2022 stand at 13 134 deaths and nearly 32 000 injured, as per the UN. Over 19 500 children have been deported and 16 000 Ukrainian civilians remain illegally detained by Russia, subject to torture and mock trials.

We must demand immediate, unconditional release of all civilians and POWs, including the children. We must demand full humanitarian access to Red Cross, we must increase sanctions, and we must hold Putin accountable also to the war crimes in the special tribunal, in the Council of Europe and in the ICC.

Michał Szczerba (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Ukraińskie siły zbrojne walczą o przyszłość Ukrainy w Europie, ale ukraińskie siły zbrojne również walczą o obecność Ukrainy w sojuszach Zachodu, które zagwarantują w przyszłości trwały pokój i rozwój. Ta droga do NATO jest zgodna z deklaracjami szczytu waszyngtońskiego i powinna pozostać nieodwracalna. Komisja, jak również polska prezydencja w Radzie Unii Europejskiej wspierała nowe programy uzbrojenia oraz rozwoju przemysłu obronnego i zabiegała o uwzględnienie w nich Ukrainy.

Ukraina posiada unikalne doświadczenie wynikające z trwającej i pełnoskalowej wojny. Rozwinęła nowe technologie, rozwinęła przemysł obronny, w szczególności produkcję dronów, które mogą być również użyteczne dla naszego sektora przemysłowego. Kluczowy będzie Szanowni Państwo, o tym trzeba bardzo wyraźnie powiedzieć, szczyt NATO w Hadze.

Szczyt NATO w Hadze, który dzieje się w okolicznościach również geopolitycznych, bo ta rosyjska agresja nie dzieje się w próżni. Za Moskwą stoi Iran, stoi Korea Północna. Iran dostarcza drony, Korea pociski – to wspólnicy z osi zła. Dlatego też szczyt NATO w Hadze powinien po pierwsze podkreślić naszą kolektywną gotowość do obrony, ale również przyjąć nową strategię NATO dotyczącą Rosji, która stanowi strategiczne zagrożenie dla naszego bezpieczeństwa.

Evin Incir (S&D). – Madam President, Putin’s tyranny can only be brought to an end through EU unity and decisive actions. The continued import of coal and oil by some Member States directly enables Putin’s war efforts, filling his war machine and enabling him to escalate missiles and drone attacks against Ukrainian cities and civilians, as he has done over the last months.

It is good to condemn, but more important to act. We must support Ukraine with all available means to ensure that they not only withstand the war, but win the war. This support must be comprehensive: sanctions, military aid, humanitarian assistance, macroeconomic support – there can’t be any limits to our support. However, right now, EU Member States are pumping more money into Putin’s war machine than support to Ukraine. How is that going to ensure that Ukraine will be in a position of strength? Because a position of strength is important to ensure that Putin is forced to the negotiating table and to ensure that Ukraine wins, that we win.

Michał Kobosko (Renew). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Rosja prowadzi wojnę na wyniszczenie, wojnę obliczoną na eliminację całego narodu ukraińskiego. Rosja ma mnóstwo ludzi, takie jest od zawsze ich podejście. Jak mówił już Stalin: (poseł mówi w języku nieurzędowym) – they have lots of people. Dla Rosji ludzie to tylko liczby. Skoro nie szanowali i nie szanują życia własnych obywateli, tym bardziej nie mają szacunku dla tych, których postrzegają jako wrogów.

Nie mają szacunku dla bombardowanych ukraińskich cywili, dla przetrzymywanych w nieludzkich warunkach jeńców wojennych, dla setek porwanych do Rosji ukraińskich dzieci. To jest totalna przepaść kulturowa między nimi a nami. Nie możemy zmienić ich mentalności, uwolnić ich zniewolonych umysłów.

Możemy tylko przez nasze zdecydowane działania zniechęcać Putina do kolejnych ataków na Ukrainę, do ataku na Europę. Wszyscy ci, którzy tu w Parlamencie Europejskim sympatyzują z Putinem, uznają jego racje, jeżdżą do Moskwy i chcą z nim paktować, otwierać Nord Stream, są współodpowiedzialni za okropieństwa tej przedłużającej się wojny.

Życie ludzkie jest wartością nadrzędną. Życie każdego z nas. Miejmy to na uwadze, gdy sympatycy Putina i spadkobiercy NSDAP marzą o unicestwianiu całych narodów. Nigdy więcej takich zbrodni!

Mika Aaltola (PPE). – Madam President, dear colleagues, next year, American aid to Ukraine will evaporate; let’s stop pretending. We face a brutal truth – Europe now must finally deliver on its promises or betray everything we claim to stand for. We are brilliant at slogans, we use soaring rhetoric, brave words, yet Ukraine bleeds. We have poured more cash into Putin’s war machine for energy than goes into the fighting for Ukraine.

We promised Ukraine EU fast-tracking, but when we look closer, are we keeping those promises? The grand announcement has been nothing but PR so far. Virtue signalling, a weak-kneed avoidance of the actual gut punch needed to defeat Russia.

Consider this: Ukraine is Europe’s breadbasket, it is the most war-experienced military in Europe, a nation forged in fire. Having them as an ally would be a great promise for the security of this continent. But are we just bluffing? Are we a continent missing in action? It is time to shed illusions and face fire. When the Nuremberg War Tribunals ended, they declared that a war of aggression is the supreme war crime. All the other war crimes follow from that: detention of civilians, stealing of children. And we must now face the aggressor.

Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D). – Señora presidenta, crímenes de lesa humanidad: así, sin paliativos. Así define el informe de la ONU lo que está pasando con las desapariciones de civiles ucranianos, desapariciones forzadas, deportaciones a Rusia, desoyendo todo el Derecho internacional. Violaciones de los derechos humanos, tortura y violencia sexual: esto es lo que el Gobierno de Putin comete contra ciudadanos ucranianos que el régimen percibe como amenaza y que han sido capturados durante la guerra —políticos locales, funcionarios o periodistas, entre otros—. También se produce el asesinato y la desaparición del personal militar capturado.

Comisaria, necesitamos el retorno inmediato de los desaparecidos, especialmente de los niños ucranianos transferidos y deportados por la fuerza a Rusia. Solo la Unión Europea es la garantía para asegurar el futuro: una Ucrania democrática y con justicia social.

No podemos fallar al pueblo ucraniano. Su lucha por la libertad es nuestra lucha por la democracia.

Salvatore De Meo (PPE). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, di fronte ai gravi costi umani e alla crudeltà dell’aggressione russa, una guerra alle nostre porte che mina direttamente la nostra sicurezza, non possiamo più limitarci solo a dichiarazioni di condanna o a pacchetti di sanzioni.

L’Europa deve passare dalla solidarietà all’assunzione di responsabilità. Per questo serve una svolta concreta nella nostra capacità difensiva, dove difesa non significa solo carri armati o investimenti bellici. Difesa oggi vuol dire protezione delle infrastrutture civili, dei nostri ospedali, delle reti energetiche digitali, vuol dire sicurezza alimentare, mobilità strategica, cybersicurezza. Vuol dire costruire una capacità di risposta credibile contro minacce che non sono più convenzionali, ma ibride, asimmetriche e pervasive.

È giunto il momento di rafforzare con grande convinzione il pilastro europeo della NATO per rendere l’alleanza più forte, più equa e più credibile. L’unità transatlantica è, e resta, il nostro orizzonte strategico, ma perché sia sostenibile tutti devono fare la propria parte e l’Europa oggi deve finalmente assumersi la responsabilità della propria sicurezza.

Isabel Wiseler-Lima (PPE). – Madame la Présidente, les Ukrainiens ont montré, avec leur opération de bombardement des aéroports militaires russes, qu’ils étaient parfaitement à même de s’introduire profondément en territoire russe et de produire des dégâts conséquents, par choix des dégâts militaires. À la réaction rapportée du chef du Kremlin qu’il allait devoir riposter à ces attaques, ma première pensée a été: riposter comment? En tuant de nouveau des civils?

D’abord, difficile de qualifier quelque attaque que ce soit de la Russie contre l’Ukraine comme une riposte. C’est l’armée russe qui occupe l’Ukraine, qui l’attaque sans répit. Et puis, ce qui se passe sous mes yeux, c’est l’attaque systématique de civils par le Kremlin. Les bombardements russes ont pour objectif, de manière répétitive, quotidienne des villes ukrainiennes, et les hommes, femmes et enfants qui y vivent.

Nous parlons souvent des enfants déportés, mais jamais assez. Il faut le faire encore et encore. Et il faut aussi dénoncer, sans se lasser, le fait que les autorités russes détiennent des civils emprisonnés sans autre motif qu’ils sont ukrainiens. L’impunité ne peut gagner. Nous devons le dénoncer et faire en sorte qu’un jour les responsables soient jugés et punis.

Ingeborg Ter Laak (PPE). – Voorzitter, de schade van oorlog gaat veel verder dan gebouwen, verder dan infrastructuur. De echte littekens zitten in mensen. Mannen, vrouwen en kinderen in Oekraïne zijn slachtoffers van onvoorstelbaar geweld: verkrachtingen, gevangenneming, marteling, ontvoering. Het zijn mannen, vrouwen en kinderen die niets anders willen dan in vrede leven. Zij zien hun toekomst aan flarden worden weggeschoten.

Toch mogen we, te midden van al deze horror, niet vergeten dat achter elk uniform, aan welke kant ook, een mens zit: een zoon, een dochter, een vader, een moeder. Aan Oekraïense zijde, maar ook aan Russische zijde. Ook zij hebben recht op bescherming. Ook zij hebben recht op een toekomst.

Oorlogsgevangenen zijn geen pionnen op een schaakbord. Het zijn mensen, en mensenrechten gelden ook in tijden van oorlog. De uitruil van krijgsgevangenen en lichamen tussen Oekraïne en Rusland — recent nog — toont aan dat die rechten niet vanzelfsprekend worden gerespecteerd, en dat is onaanvaardbaar. Europa mag niet zwijgen. Wij moeten staan voor menselijke waardigheid, overal en altijd.

Zgłoszenia z sali

Marta Wcisło (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Już trzy lata trwa inwazja Rosji na Ukrainę, inwazja na wyniszczenie Ukrainy. Każdego dnia niszczone są miasta, wsie, spadają rakiety na szpitale, przedszkola, żłobki, gwałcone są kobiety i dzieci, porywane są dzieci. My doskonale wiemy, Polacy, jak niebezpieczna jest Rosja. Znamy z historii i pamiętamy, jak wyglądało porwanie ludności cywilnej, wysyłanie ludności cywilnej na Sybir i zbrodnie katyńskie.

I przestrzegaliśmy Europę, jak niebezpieczna jest Rosja. Przestrzegaliśmy i mówiliśmy, że trzeba zatrzymać Rosję. Dziś cała Europa jest zobligowana i zobowiązana do tego, aby zatrzymać imperium zła, aby zatrzymać Rosję, która zagraża Europie i światu.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señora comisaria, seguramente, entre lo mejor de la respuesta europea después de tres años de guerra de agresión en Ucrania se encuentra la activación en origen de la Directiva de protección temporal, gracias a la que once millones de personas desplazadas procedentes del conflicto en Ucrania han podido ingresar en la Unión Europea con libre circulación, residencia y acceso al mercado de trabajo.

Pero, todavía, tres años después, está por ver que la Unión Europea ponga sobre la mesa una propuesta diplomática realista, un plan de paz que dé esperanza a esos miles de niños secuestrados en Rusia y a los miles de prisioneros de guerra por ambas partes.

Por tanto, creo que, después del vacío que plantea la patética inanidad de Trump, que habló de resolver el conflicto en veinticuatro horas pero que no parece haber impresionado mucho a Putin, y después de tantos planes de sanciones, es el momento de que la Unión Europea ponga sobre la mesa un plan de paz que dé esperanza a esos miles de niños ucranianos secuestrados en Rusia y dé también una solución humanitaria a los prisioneros de guerra.

Annamária Vicsek (PfE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Az orosz–ukrán háborúnak nem lehet nyertese. A háborúnak csak vesztesei vannak: özvegyek, árvák, gyermekeiket sirató anyák. A kárpátaljai magyarság ukrajnai kisebbségként hatványozottan veszélyeztetett ebben a konfliktusban.

Ha van közösség, amely igazán érti, mit jelent kisebbségiként háborúba kényszerülni, azok mi vagyunk, vajdasági magyarok. A délszláv háborúk idején magyar férfiakat vittek el fegyverrel harcolni szerb vagy horvát oldalon, attól függően, hol éltek. Az nem a mi háborúnk volt. Ahogy a kárpátaljai magyarok is akaratukon kívül sodródtak a háborúba.

Magyarország kezdettől a béke pártján áll, és ma már nincs ebben egyedül. Elindult egy nehéz, de reményt adó párbeszéd, amelynek révén hadifoglyok térhettek haza, elesett katonák kaphattak méltó temetést. De az emberek nem temetni akarják a szeretteiket, hanem hazavárják őket élve.

Az Európai Uniónak nem szítania, hanem csillapítania kellene a háborút. Ukrajnának, a térségnek és egész Európának béke kell.

Magdalena Adamowicz (PPE). – Szanowna Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Europejczyku, zamknij oczy. Wyobraź sobie, że twoje dzieci i ty musicie patrzeć, jak twoja żona, a ich matka, jest gwałcona przez ruskich sołdatów. Wyobraź sobie, jak potem musisz patrzeć, jak ci sołdaci gwałcą twoje dzieci. A potem przychodzą inni i zabierają te dzieci. I nigdy już ich nie zobaczysz. Spędzasz miesiące zamknięty w piwnicy, torturowany i głodzony. Zazdrościsz sąsiadom z mieszkania obok, którzy umarli od razu we własnym łóżku, kiedy ruskie bomby spadły na wasz dom.

Rosja nie prowadzi wojny. Rosja dokonuje eksterminacji cywili i zrównuje Ukrainę z ziemią. To nie wojna, to apokalipsa. Niuansowanie i używanie sprawy pomocy Ukrainie do brudnej polityki to stanięcie w jednym szeregu z rosyjskimi zbrodniarzami.

Tu, w tej Izbie, przypominam słowa Einsteina: świat nie jest zagrożony przez złych ludzi, ale przez tych, którzy pozwalają złu działać. Dlatego nam nie wolno pozwolić ruskiemu złu działać dalej.

Dainius Žalimas (Renew). – Madam President, dear colleagues, we have heard many right words about the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine, including immeasurable human losses and sufferings. Regrettably, we have also heard extreme right and left representatives aligning themselves with the aggressor and spreading Russian lies.

There is no doubt that the aggression is the gravest international crime, no doubt that Russia is committing numerous crimes against humanity and war crimes, no doubt that we have to support Ukraine.

However, first and foremost, we must believe in the victory of Ukraine, in the victory of international law and justice. All the delays and shortcomings in supporting Ukraine can be explained by a lack of belief and consequently, a lack of determination.

If Israel, which is almost ten times smaller than Iran, can dismantle the latter’s aggressive potential, why couldn’t Ukraine, with our support, do the same?

Our belief in Ukraine and trust in ourselves is the most important in compelling the aggressor to peace, and it is indeed the issue of our survival. This is also a burden that history has placed on us.

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária Kos, há mais de 11 anos que a guerra se arrasta na Ucrânia.

A realidade demonstra que é urgente o diálogo; um diálogo para uma solução política do conflito, um diálogo que dê resposta aos problemas da segurança coletiva e do desarmamento na Europa, um diálogo que vise o cumprimento dos princípios da Carta da ONU e da Ata Final da Conferência de Helsínquia. O diálogo retomado em Istambul entre a Rússia e Ucrânia é um importante passo. Deve contribuir para fazer avançar um processo negocial que responda às causas do conflito e abra caminho a uma paz justa e duradoura na Europa.

Impõe-se que os Estados Unidos, a NATO e a União Europeia ponham fim às manobras que visam prolongar a guerra e obstaculizar uma solução política para o conflito.

Há que parar de insistir na confrontação e na mobilização de milhares de milhões para os armamentos e a guerra –– recursos que faltam e são retirados à coesão, aos salários, à saúde, à educação, à habitação, enfim, à resposta aos problemas dos povos.

É preciso travar este caminho para o precipício e colocar a paz como verdadeiro futuro da humanidade.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, doamnă comisară, v-am ascultat cu atenție și trebuie să spun că sunt dezamăgită. Ne-ați făcut niște informări, de fapt. Cetățenii care ne ascultă aici s-au săturat de trei ani noi să dezbatem, să facem rezoluții, Comisia să constate și de fapt să nu se întâmple nimic.

Mor oameni acolo, doamnă comisară. Țara mea a primit refugiați, și copii, și adulți. Sigur, nu putem să mutăm toată populația Ucrainei. Întreb: există o soluție pentru pace? Ați discutat la nivel internațional, cu comunitatea internațională? Se poate ca un singur om să înfrângă un glob pământesc? Nu se poate!

Eu cred că diplomația a rămas repetentă, nu s-au pus bazele unei negocieri încât să punem capăt acestui război și acestui măcel. Pentru că nu vorbim numai de obiectivele economice, vorbim aici de oameni, vorbim de copii care rămân marcați pe toată perioada.

Și sunt state ipocrite. Degeaba am votat noi aici sancțiuni, când statele din Uniunea Europeană au importat mai departe și au alimentat bugetul Rusiei cu bani și nu puțini.

Deci, doamnă comisară, eu cred că nu mai trebuie să discutăm decât atunci când veniți cu o propunere concretă. Sau ați crezut că domnul Trump face în 24 de ore pace? Iată că n-a făcut, s-a dus în Ucraina ca să pună mâna pe niște bogății acolo și pe niște zăcăminte.

Eu cred că avem responsabilitate, Uniunea Europeană, să spunem cetățenilor noștri ce putem să facem pentru încetarea războiului.

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Gerbiama posėdžio pirmininke, gerbiama komisare, kolegos. Čia daug pasakyta teisingų žodžių apie tai, ką, kokius nusikaltimus daro Putinas ir jo agresyvus ir nusikalstamas režimas. Bet mano klausimas yra kitoks. Mano klausimas yra Europos šalių, valstybių ir vyriausybių Vadovų Tarybai. Ar iš tiesų galime ir toliau elgtis taip, kaip elgiamės? Yra šalių, kurios labai smarkiai padeda Ukrainai. Bet yra didelis skaičius šalių, kurių pagalba Ukrainai yra maža. Reikia kelti klausimą [dėl] solidaraus ir vieningo pagalbos dydžio Ukrainai. Reikia didesnio biudžeto ir Europos Sąjungos valanda dabar akivaizdi. Ukrainos žmonės, kaip niekas – aš ten visai neseniai buvau ir vėl važiuosiu, – kaip niekas laukia integracijos į Europos Sąjungą. Mūsų pažadai turi remtis konkrečiais namų darbais, kad mes tikrai paspartintumėm Ukrainos integraciją į Europos Sąjungą. Tai yra vienintelis realus taikos planas.

(Koniec zgłoszeń z sali)

Marta Kos, Member of the Commission. – (start of speech off mic) … for the efforts to end the war through a comprehensive, just and sustainable peace and, of course, to ensure accountability. The diplomatic efforts to stop the war, as presented by the representative of the Council, are indeed essential to ending the ongoing suffering of the people to Ukraine. We join Ukraine and international partners, including the US, in calling for a full, unconditional ceasefire of at least 30 days.

Alongside this track, it is no less important to continue the work of ensuring accountability for war crimes. Justice must be rendered to the victims of Russian aggression and, in the long term, impunity must not be allowed to pave the way for future crimes.

It is not easy to talk about the accession process in Ukraine while the bombs are falling on the country. It is not easy to speak about the reconstruction of Ukraine when something that we already reconstructed is ruined in the next days. But the most difficult thing is to speak about the victims, about the children you have been speaking.

Therefore, dear Members of the Parliament, Mr Gahler, Mr Auštrevičius, Mr Lagodinsky and Mr Cramer, Ms Strack-Zimmermann, thank you for your personal stories – because every human has a personal story – and also thank you to Mr Kobosko, who said that human life is a supreme value. That’s why I’m proud that the European Union is supporting Ukraine. And that’s why for me, the people of Ukraine are already the winners of this war, even if the war has not ended yet.

Przewodnicząca. – Dziękuję, panie ministrze.

Zamykam debatę.

Głosowanie odbędzie się podczas następnej sesji miesięcznej.

21. Strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy (debate)

Denis Nesci, relatore. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Vicepresidente esecutivo Fitto, oggi è con profondo senso di responsabilità e sincera emozione che mi rivolgo a voi per presentare la relazione sul rafforzamento delle zone rurali nell’Unione europea attraverso la politica di coesione.

Sono figlio di una terra che conosce bene le potenzialità ma anche le difficoltà del mondo rurale. È proprio da questa consapevolezza che nasce il lavoro che oggi vi presento. La relazione vuole essere un punto di partenza per un’azione concreta verso ciò che dovrebbe essere un obiettivo condiviso da tutti noi: portare le zone rurali a essere non più marginali, ma finalmente protagoniste di una strategia di sviluppo mirata.

Le zone rurali coprono l’80 % del territorio europeo e ospitano quasi un quarto della popolazione. Eppure, sembra che non si sia mai pensato di svilupparle in modo parallelo alle zone urbane. Da troppo tempo queste aree soffrono di isolamento, spopolamento, scarsa connettività, accesso limitato ai servizi essenziali, invecchiamento demografico e difficoltà occupazionali. Ma non sono terre perse, sono risorse preziose, scrigni di cultura, biodiversità, identità e, oggi più che mai, leve strategiche per nuovi modi di produrre energia e per la sicurezza alimentare.

Il file nasce da questa convinzione: rilanciare le zone rurali non è solo un atto di giustizia territoriale, è una scelta strategica per l’intera Unione. È strategico, infatti, voler fornire alle aree rurali strumenti propri sia in termini finanziari che amministrativi. A questo proposito, la creazione di infopoint dedicati al supporto delle PMI e dei comuni risulta oggi imprescindibile per ottimizzare l’utilizzo delle risorse disponibili e garantire un sostegno concreto alle regioni.

Abbiamo lavorato con l’obiettivo di dare una cornice chiara e strumenti efficaci per valorizzare le aree rurali come motori di sviluppo. Il testo propone una strategia integrata che unisca politiche agricole, coesione territoriale, innovazione digitale, accesso ai trasporti, formazione, servizi idrici efficienti e sanità. In particolare sulla sanità invitiamo la Commissione a integrare la sua strategia per la sanità digitale, misure specifiche per le zone identificate come rurali nell’ottica di fornire ai presidi sanitari del territorio un supporto concreto per l’aggiornamento delle tecnologie, e chiediamo di potenziare i servizi offerti da tali presidi.

Sottolineiamo inoltre il ruolo centrale dello sviluppo infrastrutturale per la crescita economica e sociale delle zone rurali, vista la necessità di sistemi di trasporto, in particolare quelli pubblici, che consentano collegamenti migliori e un migliore accesso ai servizi essenziali, ma anche la necessità di reti energetiche più efficienti e resilienti.

Vogliamo che vivere in una zona definita “rurale” non significhi avere meno opportunità. Questo significa investire in infrastrutture, sostenere le imprese rurali, promuovere il turismo sostenibile, rafforzare la resilienza dei territori, incentivare il ruolo delle donne e il ritorno dei giovani alla loro terra. Il cuore pulsante della proposta è uno: la dignità delle persone. Non possiamo accettare che vivere in un borgo o in una valle significhi essere cittadini di serie B. Ogni comunità rurale ha diritto a servizi, connettività, formazione e prospettive.

Il lavoro è frutto di un ascolto attento sui territori, attraverso gli incontri con gli agricoltori, gli amministratori locali, le associazioni, i giovani. Questo perché le politiche rurali devono partire dal basso, rispettare il principio di sussidiarietà, rafforzare l’identità e la responsabilità locale.

Sostenere le zone rurali non significa solo interpretare e ampliare il principio della politica di coesione, ma rappresenta un investimento concreto per il futuro dell’Europa. E poi è un segnale chiaro che rivolgiamo ai nostri cittadini: non vi abbiamo dimenticati. Ѐ soprattutto un messaggio di speranza per chi vuole restare e ancor di più un riconoscimento del diritto dei nostri giovani di restare nella loro terra e costruire lì il proprio futuro.

Ringrazio tutti coloro che hanno contribuito, in particolare i relatori ombra, gli advisor, i tecnici, per l’efficace collaborazione e invito quest’Aula a far propria questa visione perché centinaia di migliaia di comunità rurali che aspettano da tempo un segnale chiaro dall’Europa non hanno più il tempo di aspettare.

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Madam President, honourable Members, first, I would like to thank rapporteur Nesci and all the shadow rapporteurs for this important and timely report.

I fully agree with your analysis. Rural areas are central to our European way of life, and they are essential for Europe’s competitiveness and resilience. I welcome the report’s recognition that cohesion policy plays a crucial role in strengthening rural areas.

Supporting rural areas is a high priority for the Commission. As rightly emphasised in the report, cohesion policy already delivers significant support in rural areas. This complements the rural development interventions provided by the common agricultural policy. Investment in broadband, transport, clean energy, small and medium enterprises and innovation, and in health, education and local infrastructure, enhances economic and social cohesion.

However, challenges like skills shortages, the digital divide, demographic decline and the limited access to essential services persist. As correctly underlined in the report, we need further efforts to provide our rural areas with adequate tools to overcome the considerable challenges they face, which have an increasing impact on regional competitiveness and social cohesion.

A particular priority for me is the right to stay – the right of every European to remain in the place they call home. This is also fundamental for young generations of farmers, which is one of the key challenges in our farming sector. The Commission committed to further promote generational renewal in the agricultural sector through a dedicated strategy later this year.

Several regions in the EU are facing the problem of depopulation. This has led to a sharp decline for their working-age population. Apart from the tools under cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy, social policies and social innovation can help address this. Through the Harnessing Talent Platform, we are also actively working with 82 regions, including 27 mainly rural regions, to develop local strategies that retain talent and allow for smart adjustments to demographic challenges.

In addition, the mid-term review of cohesion policy programmes puts the focus on several areas of key concern for rural areas, providing incentives and flexibilities for goals such as water resilience, housing, energy transition and greater competitiveness innovation.

For example, water resilience – we have seen regions facing water scarcity while others are affected by floods. Through the mid-term review, we propose changes to encourage investment in water resilience, including digitalisation of water infrastructure, and mitigation of drought and desertification impacts.

The mid-term review proposal will deliver a more responsive cohesion policy, aligned with today’s realities, and better addressing current and future challenges.

Earlier this year, Commissioner Hansen and I presented the new Vision for Agriculture and Food, strengthening the synergies between policies to help rural areas, updating our rural action plan and further developing rural proofing, as well as the Rural Pact.

With this in mind, the Commission collaborates with the agrifood sector, ensuring that the sector remains competitive, resilient, attractive for future generations, and profitable.

Finally, you highlighted in your report the need to simplify administrative procedures by reducing red tape for farmers and small rural businesses. Here, I am happy to point out that in May, the European Commission adopted the omnibus proposal on agriculture, responding to the need to simplify the policy.

To conclude, this report makes a valuable contribution to the future of rural areas. Collaboration is key. We need to work together. This requires action and partnership across all levels of governance to modernise, simplify and reinforce the cohesion policy, providing tailored solutions to the unique situation of every territory in Europe, with the rural regions at the heart of our efforts.

I now look forward to the debate and to hearing your views.

Cristina Guarda, relatrice per parere della commissione AGRI. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, innanzitutto vorrei ringraziare i colleghi con cui ho affrontato questo percorso sia nella commissione per l’agricoltura che nella commissione per lo sviluppo regionale, perché finalmente si parla di utilizzare la politica di coesione per sostenere davvero le aree rurali, non soltanto in agricoltura, ma anche per garantire servizi essenziali, opportunità per giovani, donne, genitori, o per investire nella transizione ecologica per difendere le piccole imprese dalla crisi climatica o progetti come le comunità energetiche, che restituiscono potere ai cittadini.

Ma attenzione all’ipocrisia: con una mano votiamo testi non legislativi che celebrano la coesione per le aree rurali, con l’altra sosteniamo modifiche legislative che rischiano di dirottare quegli stessi fondi verso difesa e grandi imprese. È una contraddizione che è grave, perché se è faticoso trovare i fondi per costruire una strategia di difesa comune, la soluzione non è incentivarne ben 27 nazionali usando gli unici fondi veri della politica sociale europea, perché le armi non combattono lo spopolamento.

La coesione deve aiutare le comunità, non industrie belliche con profitti record. E le regioni a rischio? I fondi di coesione devono garantire ai loro cittadini servizi sociali, medici e strutture sicure. Ma spostare risorse dalle aree rurali a produzioni militari, magari senza trasparenza, è un tradimento dello spirito della coesione. Troviamone altre di risorse. Domani voteremo una lucida proposta per il futuro dei fondi europei per le aree rurali. Troviamo il coraggio di essere coerenti anche nei prossimi atti.

Christian Doleschal, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Vizepräsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! In wenigen Tagen wird die Europäische Kommission ihren Vorschlag für den neuen mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen vorlegen. Jetzt ist der richtige Zeitpunkt, um mit unserem Initiativbericht zur Stärkung des ländlichen Raums ein klares Signal an die Kommission mit Blick auf den nächsten EU‑Haushalt zu senden. Denn eines ist klar: Wenn wir Europa zusammenhalten wollen, muss die Kohäsionspolitik ganz oben auf der Agenda stehen – finanziell und politisch. Sie ist unser stärkstes Instrument für gleichwertige Lebensverhältnisse in der gesamten Union. Ich bin davon überzeugt, dass unsere Politik darauf angelegt sein muss, dass die ländlichen Räume künftig Zukunftsräume in Europa werden. Ich bin dankbar, dass wir viele unserer Prioritäten in dem Bericht unterbringen konnten.

Ein Punkt, der mir besonders wichtig war, ist, dass wir Grenzregionen innerhalb der Europäischen Union gezielt unterstützen wollen. Ich bin davon überzeugt, dass Europa gerade an seinen Binnengrenzen zusammenwächst; nicht in den Brüsseler Amtsstuben, sondern dort, wo das tägliche Leben stattfindet. Deshalb brauchen wir mehr Handlungsspielraum für die grenzüberschreitende Zusammenarbeit – für Feinschmecker aber dennoch ein wichtiges Thema. Ich bin dankbar, dass wir positioniert haben, dass die europäischen Verbünde für territoriale Zusammenarbeit künftig mehr Eigenverantwortung bekommen sollen.

Zentralisierung? Ein klares Nein! Uns ist es wichtig, dass wir in der Kohäsionspolitik auch künftig den Regionen den entsprechenden Raum einräumen. Mehr Zentralismus heißt meist mehr Bürokratie, weniger Tempo und geringere Wirksamkeit.

Ich bin dankbar, dass es gelungen ist, dass wir auch das Wassermanagement besser verankern wollen, um Naturkatastrophen künftig vorzubeugen. Ein Punkt, den ich noch sehr wichtig finde, ist, dass es uns in diesem Bericht auch gelungen ist, dass wir beispielsweise auch das kulturelle Erbe Europas künftig mit europäischen Mitteln fördern wollen. Ich bin davon überzeugt, dass wir beispielsweise Kirchen auch in den nächsten Jahren unterstützen müssen. Sie sind das kulturelle und christliche Fundament Europas.

Sabrina Repp, im Namen der S&D-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident! Vor Kurzem war ich in Zislow, einem kleinen Ort mitten im ländlichen Raum von Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Wunderschön gelegen, geprägt von Menschen, die ihr Zuhause lieben. Der Altersdurchschnitt ist hoch, junge Familien fehlen, und doch spürt man etwas Kostbares – Engagement, Ideen und Zusammenhalt. Der ländliche Raum ist lebendig. Nicht weil alles einfach ist, sondern weil Menschen füreinander einstehen und ihr Zuhause aktiv mitgestalten. Was es braucht, ist keine Mitleidsbekundung, sondern echte Unterstützung, denn dort, wo Menschen ihr Zuhause mit Herz und Hand gestalten, entsteht Gemeinschaft. Genau diesen Zusammenhalt müssen wir fördern.

Wir sprechen über ein Europa, das zusammenhält. Genau das ist das Ziel von Kohäsionspolitik. Doch Zusammenhalt gelingt nur, wenn wir alle Regionen mitdenken. Ländliche Räume sind keine Randnotiz. Sie sind Lebensraum für Millionen von Menschen. Sie stehen für Engagement, Innovation und Gemeinschaft. Wenn wir sie vernachlässigen, gerät Europa aus dem Gleichgewicht – politisch, wirtschaftlich und sozial. Es ist ein Fehler, dass die Kommission mit ihren Plänen rund um die Halbzeitbilanz und den Plänen für den neuen mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen zunehmend den Fokus auf industrielle Zentren setzt und damit ganze Regionen ins Abseits stellt.

Nicht mit uns! Wir stehen für Teilhabe statt Abhängigkeit, für Chancen statt Abwanderung, für das Recht, in der eigenen Herkunftsregion zu leben, mit guter Infrastruktur, fairen Bildungschancen und einer starken öffentlichen Daseinsvorsorge. Wir stehen für ein Europa, das niemanden zurücklässt.

André Rougé, au nom du groupe PfE. – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, permettez-moi de saluer l’excellent rapport de notre collègue Nesci. Alors qu’il couvre les 4/5 de l’Union européenne, le monde rural demeure défavorisé, bénéficiant de trois fois moins de financements que les zones urbaines.

Il assure pourtant des fonctions essentielles: l’aménagement du territoire, la sécurité alimentaire et la transmission aux générations montantes de notre patrimoine historique, culturel et de biodiversité. Le rapport Nesci dresse le bilan chiffré de cette relégation du monde rural en Europe. Un monde où les jeunes se font rares, un monde démédicalisé, numériquement retardé, dépourvu de logements, d’écoles, de commerces et de lieux de vie.

Avec un tel bilan en Europe continentale, imaginez une seconde ce que veut dire être rural dans une région ultrapériphérique de la France d’outre-mer. C’est être périphérisé dans ce qui est déjà l’ultrapériphérie, c’est la double peine. Et nous ne pouvons nous y résoudre.

Je m’associe d’autant plus aux propositions formulées dans ce rapport qu’il porte une réelle attention aux outre-mer. Nos propositions spécifiquement ultramarines sur la couverture de très haut débit des zones rurales, la diversification des cultures pour l’autosuffisance alimentaire et le développement des petites entreprises rurales ont été retenues, et je vous en remercie Monsieur le rapporteur.

Le chemin est encore long, mais les équilibres politiques au sein de cette Assemblée nous permettent aujourd’hui de peser sur les grands choix de l’Union européenne. C’est ce que nous allons continuer à faire inlassablement pour nos peuples et nos nations, en Europe continentale comme dans les outre-mer.

Francesco Torselli, a nome del gruppo ECR. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, quando parliamo di politiche di coesione pensiamo giustamente al rilancio delle aree interne e alla difesa delle diversità europee.

Ma permettetemi una riflessione. Chi andrà a ripopolare queste aree? Chi vi farà crescere e studiare i propri figli? Chi investirà i propri capitali se non vi sarà una connessione digitale? Oggi è centrale nello sviluppo della vita in Europa avere una connessione performante. Finalmente in quest’Aula, grazie al collega Nesci, si parla di rilancio delle aree rurali, attraverso la chiusura del gap digitale, attraverso la garanzia di accesso a Internet veloce, alla rete 5G, di istruzione online, di realizzazione di infrastrutture moderne e performanti.

Ma oggi il Parlamento, grazie a Lei, ha fatto addirittura di più, è andato oltre, ha lanciato una sfida, si è rivolto ai giovani e ha parlato di digitalizzazione. Questa è la sfida delle sfide, e chi si opporrà a questa sfida si opporrà alla più bella rivoluzione culturale che noi potremo fare quest’anno in quest’Aula.

Ciaran Mullooly, on behalf of the Renew Group. – Madam President, Commissioner, I want to commend the rapporteur for the excellent work. As an Irish MEP representing a large rural constituency, this report highlights many of the structural challenges faced by these communities. However, one of the most pressing issues of our time for our rural communities is access to housing, Commissioner.

Madam President, a key challenge in solving this rural housing crisis is addressing the lack of infrastructure. Without proper investment in water, broadband and transport links, even the most basic planning permission becomes unattainable. This has had a direct effect on young people who want to stay in our communities, but cannot because of infrastructure. Supporting this kind of generational continuity and ensuring we have adequate support through cohesion policy is essential, Commissioner, in keeping rural life.

If reports are to be believed, one month from today the European Commission will come forward with the multiannual financial framework. This is a crucial time for our regions, Commissioner. If we do not act now, I fear for the viability in the future. Let’s keep the money for regions, not for defence, Commissioner.

Valentina Palmisano, a nome del gruppo The Left. – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario Fitto, innanzitutto permettetemi di ringraziare il collega, il rapporteur Nesci, per il lavoro fatto, e tutti i relatori ombra con i quali è stato davvero un piacere lavorare.

Oggi discutiamo un provvedimento che tocca da vicino le nostre comunità, i nostri territori. Le aree rurali non sono periferie da assistere, sono una parte essenziale dell’Europa. Eppure, da troppo tempo vengono sistematicamente ignorate. Rafforzarle non è un gesto simbolico. È una questione di giustizia democratica, vuol dire garantire diritti, servizi, opportunità a chi ha scelto di restare e vivere lì. E noi dobbiamo ringraziare queste persone ed aiutarle.

Con i nostri emendamenti abbiamo inserito nel testo temi cruciali, a noi molto cari. La lotta alla crisi idrica e alla desertificazione, che sta mettendo in ginocchio i nostri agricoltori e gli allevatori, minacciando anche la sicurezza alimentare. Abbiamo tutti davanti agli occhi le immagini degli invasi prosciugati, ad esempio in Puglia o in Sicilia. Il diritto a ricevere cure di qualità nel proprio territorio, con il rafforzamento magari del sistema dei medici di base e la creazione della figura dell’infermiere di comunità. Il recupero di immobili in disuso in aree a rischio spopolamento per creare magari spazi di co-housing e di co-working, e magari poter attrarre i lavoratori che, appunto, lavorano da remoto. La tutela delle lingue minoritarie come patrimonio culturale europeo. In Salento, ad esempio, in molte comunità si parla il griko, così come in Calabria, come saprete bene, si parla l’arbëreshë. Si tratta di un’eredità culturale importante che rischiamo di perdere se non la tuteliamo e la valorizziamo. Oppure la creazione di un Fondo europeo per l’imprenditoria rurale giovanile e gli aiuti ai giovani per garantire la loro autonomia abitativa, invece di essere costretti a vivere con i propri genitori.

Ecco, queste sono le priorità per i cittadini europei, non quelle di aumentare investimenti in armi, mentre le nostre aree interne continuano a perdere servizi, persone e prospettive. È una scelta politica. Noi siamo dall’altra parte. Io credo ancora in una politica che sia a servizio dei cittadini e continuerò a battermi per questo.

Irmhild Boßdorf, im Namen der ESN-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Den Einkaufsladen um die Ecke, eine gute Kinderbetreuung, Zwergschulen, großzügiger Wohnraum und Erwerbsmöglichkeiten in erreichbarer Nähe: Das ist es, was Familien in Europa brauchen und wollen. In Deutschland erleben wir bereits seit 2017 eine neue Lust aufs Land. Immer mehr Familien zieht es in Kleinstädte und Dörfer. Doch der ländliche Raum muss entsprechend entwickelt sein, damit er eine Zukunft hat.

270 Milliarden Euro werden in den nächsten vier Jahren in unsere ländlichen Regionen fließen. Diese Gelder werden nicht mehr, wie in der letzten Legislaturperiode, für den Kampf gegen Rechts missbraucht. Diese Gelder werden endlich für gute Lebensbedingungen ausgegeben. Mit diesen Geldern wird es uns gelingen, dass es nicht nur das vielbeschworene right to stay, sondern vor allem die possibility to stay gibt. Damit geben wir jungen Familien die Möglichkeit auf ein gutes Leben. Dann entsteht aus Landlust eine neue Heimat.

Andrey Novakov (PPE). – Madam President, Mr Vice-President, Mr Nesci, I would like to start with grazie mille to you for your work and dedicating so much of your focus to rural areas. I don’t need a written speech to talk about rural areas, because I am proud to come from this kind of society.

In rural areas, your neighbour is more than your family, and this is something that we should cherish and enjoy in Europe. And the only thing that keeps us away from seeing rural areas as a demographic desert is the cohesion policy. The people who live in those areas don’t need any Amsterdam level of achievements or Paris level of tourism. Very simple things will keep them in the places that they love: a good road (that is not taking innocent human lives in car accidents), clean water, good education and health care. And that’s it.

Our history shows that during the crisis, people go exactly to those havens in the rural areas. And the first and most important thing that we can do and deliver here from the European Parliament, at least not to make those people lives more complicated than it is at the moment with our legislation – make our regulations easy to read as a newspaper. When we deliver funding for those regions it should be clear what we require and what we provide. So I think we can rely on those people to keep Europe up and running, as they do so far.

Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D). – Señora presidenta, señor comisario, quien nace hoy en una zona rural de la Unión Europea está condenado a emigrar. Nuestras zonas rurales se despueblan y cualquier ciudadano debería tener el derecho a quedarse donde nació. Las zonas rurales representan el 83 % del territorio de la Unión, pero albergan solo un tercio de la población, y su renta media es solo el 87,5 % de la renta media de las zonas urbanas.

Las zonas rurales tienen grandes desafíos por delante: mejorar su movilidad y conectividad, garantizar menores tasas de desempleo, incrementar los servicios básicos y las oportunidades de desarrollo económico… Si no actuamos, ponemos en peligro la diversidad europea, así como el progreso social y económico.

La despoblación rural y la desigualdad atentan contra los principios de la política de cohesión, que deben inspirar el trabajo de las instituciones comunitarias. La política de cohesión más allá de 2027 debe ser ambiciosa y aumentar la descentralización, fomentando un crecimiento equilibrado, con más recursos en sectores estratégicos, emprendimiento rural, turismo rural, políticas que apoyen la transición energética, y apoyando especialmente a las mujeres y a los jóvenes para frenar el declive demográfico.

Si centralizamos la política de cohesión, estaremos matando definitivamente nuestras zonas rurales. Es nuestra responsabilidad: garanticemos el derecho de todos y todas a quedarse donde han nacido.

Rody Tolassy (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, aujourd’hui, nous examinons un rapport crucial: le renforcement des zones rurales grâce à la politique de cohésion. Ces territoires, qui couvrent 91 % du territoire de l’Union européenne, abritent plus de la moitié de notre population.

En France, 11 millions de nos concitoyens vivent en milieu rural, y compris dans les régions ultrapériphériques, trop souvent oubliées dans cette dynamique européenne. Pourtant, ces territoires sont des trésors, des trésors de savoir-faire, de résilience, de lien social, mais aussi parfois des terres abandonnées, toujours des terres de lutte.

Je veux ici rappeler l’exemple du programme «Avenir montagnes». Il démontre qu’avec une volonté politique affirmée, un accompagnement humain de proximité et des leviers financiers adaptés, nous pouvons transformer la donne. Mobilité durable, ingénierie locale, infrastructures rénovées, tourisme repensé: ce modèle a inspiré une politique de cohésion véritablement solidaire, en particulier à destination des outre-mer.

Dans nos territoires, la ruralité représente des spécificités. Contrairement à d’autres régions, la population y reste nombreuse, la campagne ne se dépeuple pas. Elle a donc besoin non pas de reconquête, mais de plus de connectivité, de services publics et d’investissements ciblés. Alors ne laissons plus nos campagnes, nos montagnes, nos îles, nos ruralités au bord du chemin européen, renforçons les zones rurales, c’est tenir la promesse de l’Union, celle de l’égalité des chances, partout, pour tous.

Waldemar Buda (ECR). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Zrównoważony rozwój całej Europy i wszystkich krajów to jest absolutny priorytet. Gratuluję sprawozdania, ponieważ ono rzeczywiście stawia diagnozę, które są dla nas dość oczywiste, to znaczy wyludnianie, niedoinwestowanie, brak jakościowych usług publicznych – to jest to, co znamy na co dzień. I Szanowni Państwo, w dobie tego rodzaju diagnoz powinno być tutaj pytanie, ile więcej przekażemy na politykę spójności, ile więcej przekażemy na wspólną politykę rolną, żeby jednak te problemy minimalizować. I o to w tej sytuacji dzisiaj tutaj stoimy na tej sali, kiedy za chwilkę decydowały się będą decyzje o ograniczeniu wspólnej polityki rolnej i ograniczeniu polityk regionalnych w nowej perspektywie finansowej. Czyli diagnozujemy dobrze, natomiast za chwilkę chcemy postąpić, co pogłębi te problemy, które diagnozujemy w tym sprawozdaniu.

My w Polsce w latach 2021-2023 ponad 100 mld zł przekazaliśmy, można powiedzieć, taką lokalną polityką spójności, programem strategicznym na rzecz właśnie obszarów małych miast, małych miejscowości. Ten program został zablokowany w poprzednim roku i widzimy już tego skutki. Widzimy te problemy, że małe miejscowości znów stają się nieatrakcyjne, znów nie stanowią pewnego rodzaju alternatywy dla dużych miast. Więc zastanówmy się w tej nowej perspektywie, czy rzeczywiście te plany, o których słyszymy, ograniczania środków na WPR, ograniczenia na politykę spójności doprowadzą do jeszcze głębszych podziałów, jeszcze większych trudności w porównaniu i życiu w małych miejscowościach.

Christine Singer (Renew). – Frau Präsidentin, sehr geehrter Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident! Die Kohäsionspolitik ist ein zentrales Instrument, um regionale Unterschiede auszugleichen – auch bei uns in Bayern –, etwa in strukturschwächeren oder benachteiligten ländlichen Gebieten. Gerade dort braucht es gezielte Impulse, damit die Menschen in ihrer Heimat bleiben und die Zukunft gestalten können. Dazu gehören Investitionen in Infrastruktur, medizinische Versorgung, Digitalisierung und Bildung, und zwar dort, wo sie besonders fehlen.

Als Abgeordnete vom Land ist es mir ein Herzensanliegen, den ländlichen Raum in seiner ganzen Vielfalt sichtbar zu machen, denn Kohäsionspolitik darf nicht an der Stadtgrenze enden. Wo andere nur Wiesen, Wälder und Dörfer sehen, wird Tag für Tag gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt gelebt. Aber was nützen Förderprogramme, wenn Kommunen an komplizierten Antragsverfahren und hohen Eigenmittelanforderungen scheitern? Wir müssen Bürokratie abbauen, Verfahren vereinfachen und die Menschen vor Ort stärker einbinden. So wird Kohäsionspolitik wirklich zum Motor für gleichwertige Lebensverhältnisse in der Stadt und auf dem Land.

Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus (NI). – Doamnă președintă, aș începe acest discurs prin a întreba ceva care mi se pare extrem de fundamental. Oare noi, aici, în acest Parlament, de câte ori vorbim modelăm realmente realitățile? Pentru că am senzația, ca membru al celor două comisii, pentru transport și turism și pentru agricultură și dezvoltare rurală, că de un an de zile aproape de când vorbesc în aceste comisii nu am rezolvat nimic. Și mă simt neputincios și nu-mi place.

Pentru că România, oameni buni, dacă știți cumva, este țara cu cel mai mare deficit din Uniunea Europeană și, ca atare, cei care au condus-o până acum și care o conduc în continuare, deși nu neapărat i-a votat poporul, vor să rezolve acest deficit prin creșteri de TVA, prin creșteri de accize la combustibil, ceea ce va lichida turismul rural.

Totodată, de 17 ani nu am reușit să facem autostrăzi. Oare de ce? Poate reușim acum cu mobilitatea militară. Și lucrurile acestea se perpetuează încontinuu și nu ajungem niciunde. Practic, despre ce politică de coeziune vorbim noi? Cum va acționa această politică de coeziune într-o țară aflată sub deficit, care nu reușește să-și rezolve problemele? Realmente acești bani vor ajunge la oamenii de acasă, de acolo, din mediul rural, unde nici măcar șosele nu sunt sau unde au atâtea și atâtea probleme?

Marta Wcisło (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Komisarzu! Rezolucja w sprawie wzmocnienia obszarów wiejskich – niezwykle ważna: ogranicza biurokrację dla rolników, wspiera małe i średnie przedsiębiorstwa, kładzie nacisk na skrócenie łańcucha dostaw oraz wzmacnia bezpieczeństwo żywnościowe. Dodatkowo rezolucja wspiera model rolnictwa rodzinnego oraz małe i średnie gospodarstwa, które są fundamentem między innymi polskiej wsi.

To są kluczowe zapisy, ale nie jedyne, nad którymi pracowałam jako kontrsprawozdawca. Rezolucja wzywa państwa członkowskie do pełnego wykorzystania wszystkich możliwych środków – zarówno finansowych, pomocowych, jak i administracyjnych – aby wzmocnić obszary wiejskie, zwłaszcza regiony graniczące z Rosją, Białorusią i Ukrainą, które wzięły na siebie największy ciężar wojny za wschodnią granicą Unii Europejskiej.

Proszę wszystkich europosłów, a w szczególności europosłów z Polski, aby ponad podziałami poparli w głosowaniu tę rezolucję, na którą czekają wszyscy rolnicy.

Nora Mebarek (S&D). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, Monsieur le Commissaire, 137 millions d’Européens vivent dans des zones rurales. Une grande part de notre réussite collective dans les transitions verte, numérique et démographique dépend de ces territoires qui couvrent plus de 80 % de notre continent. C’est ce que le rapporteur – et je le félicite – nous a apporté avec ce rapport, cette vision sur les zones rurales.

Dès lors, garantir à chaque citoyen européen la liberté de vivre et de rester là où il le souhaite devient un enjeu stratégique pour l’avenir de l’Union. Ce droit à rester où on le souhaite doit maintenant se traduire concrètement par un meilleur accès à la santé, à l’éducation, aux transports, au logement et à une vie digne. Car là où les services publics disparaissent, là où le décrochage socio-économique s’enracine, le sentiment de déclassement prospère et, avec lui, le désespoir.

C’est pourquoi la politique de cohésion et sa méthode, fondée sur le partenariat avec les autorités locales, doivent rester un pilier fort du prochain cadre budgétaire européen. Cette politique est notre meilleure alliée pour lutter contre les inégalités territoriales et soutenir l’innovation rurale. Préserver le droit de chacun de rester là où il le souhaite et de vivre dignement, c’est protéger l’unité de notre Europe.

France Jamet (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, on pourrait considérer que ce rapport sur le renforcement des zones rurales dans l’Union européenne grâce à la politique de cohésion contient de bonnes mesures. C’est vrai.

Le problème, c’est que la Commission européenne dégrade et détruit tout ce qu’elle touche. Que ce soit sur terre, dans nos campagnes, en mer, vis-à-vis de nos paysans, de nos pêcheurs ou de la ruralité dans son ensemble, ce sont toujours les mêmes erreurs, les mêmes obsessions et le même mépris: interdiction de circuler, de travailler, de pêcher, de produire, de cultiver, de louer, de vendre. Ce qui est impardonnable, c’est qu’elle s’acharne toujours sur les mêmes et qu’elle met systématiquement à l’amende et à contribution les plus précaires.

Sous prétexte de faire le bonheur de ces populations malgré elles, l’idéologie globaliste et éco-fanatique de Bruxelles uniformise tout, détruit nos souverainetés, nos traditions et notre identité. C’est évident, l’Union européenne n’aime pas le peuple. Elle n’aime pas son histoire, elle n’aime pas sa civilisation.

Alors, si la Commission européenne veut revivifier nos campagnes, au lieu d’imposer et de renforcer son modèle qui nous a quand même menés là où nous en sommes, qu’elle respecte nos campagnes, ses habitants, et qu’elle quitte les lieux, qu’elle nous laisse vivre ici, chez nous, en toute liberté.

Antonella Sberna (ECR). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, signor Commissario, coesione, infrastrutture, giovani, semplificazione, diritto a restare: sono queste alcune delle parole che attraversano il cuore di questa relazione e ne sintetizzano lo spirito. Parole che non sono slogan, ma richieste reali che arrivano con forza da chi vive e amministra le realtà locali. Territori che parlano con la voce degli amministratori, delle famiglie, degli imprenditori e dei giovani che vogliono costruirsi un futuro senza essere costretti ad abbandonare le proprie radici. Aree che chiedono un’Europa più vicina, più concreta, più giusta.

Questa relazione ha il merito di portare al Parlamento europeo quelle istanze che abbiamo raccolto in mesi di ascolto e confronto diretto. Per questo desidero ringraziare l’onorevole Nesci per l’eccellente lavoro svolto, con un approccio partecipato e un’attenzione reale ai bisogni delle comunità e alla dignità, come ha detto prima, delle aree rurali e di chi le popola.

Se vogliamo costruire politiche europee efficaci, dobbiamo partire dal dialogo sincero con le aree interne, con i piccoli centri, con quelle zone spesso lasciate ai margini, ma che costruiscono l’anima dell’Europa. E l’attenzione che la Commissione sta dedicando a questo tema è massima e l’apprezziamo molto. È lì, nei borghi, nelle campagne, nei cuori e nei luoghi meno centrali che l’Europa può ritrovare se stessa e il senso della sua missione originaria.

Branislav Ondruš (NI). – Vážená pani predsedajúca, kolegyne a kolegovia, ak má mať existencia Európskej únie zmysel, nesmieme siahnuť na finančnú podporu regiónom, ktoré čelia nedostatku pracovných príležitostí, chýbajúcim investíciám do modernizácie a rozvoja, hrozbám pre životné prostredie, sociálnej nerovnosti a odlivu obyvateľov. Fondy pre naše regióny sa nesmú stať obeťou európskej militarizácie a pretekov v zbrojení ani osobných záujmov prospechárov. Spravodlivý a udržateľný rozvoj regiónov neprinesie masívna výroba zbraní a munície, ale podpora poľnohospodárov, živnostníkov v lesnom hospodárstve, remeselníkov a malých a stredných podnikov v službách či cestovnom ruchu. Financie najmä sociálnym podnikom a družstvám, nie nadnárodným zbrojársky korporáciám, pretože pre udržateľný rozvoj potrebujeme udržať vytvorené hodnoty v regiónoch. Nech firmy investujú peniaze tam, kde ich zarobili. Preto použitie eurofondov navrhujem podmieniť konkrétnymi sociálnymi a ekologickými kritériami, aby z nich mala prospech celá spoločnosť a nie špekulanti, korupčníci a korporácie. Ďakujem.

Gabriella Gerzsenyi (PPE). – Tisztelt Elnök Asszony! Májusban a Tisza közössége egymillió lépést tett meg Budapesttől Nagyváradig. Az út során megtapasztaltuk, milyen nagy a szakadék Magyarország vidéki régiói között. Nő az elvándorlás, az elnéptelenedés, a fiatal, képzett munkaerő hiánya pedig óriási versenyképességi hátrányt okoz. Eközben hiányoznak az uniós ezermilliárdok, amelyekből normális közlekedési kapcsolatokat lehetne létesíteni.

A kohéziós politika egyik legfőbb célja a vidékfejlesztés, hogy valóban senkit se hagyjunk hátra. Elégedett vagyok, hogy a jelentés felhívja a figyelmet a demográfiai kihívások és a regionális egyenlőtlenségek leküzdésére, a sérülékeny társadalmi csoportokra, különösen a nőkre, a fogyatékossággal élőkre.

Külön öröm magyar szempontból – köszönöm a jelentéstevő munkáját–, hogy kihangsúlyozza több közvetlen uniós forrást szükséges biztosítani helyi és regionális önkormányzatok számára.

Sajnos a magyar kormány magára hagyja a vidéket. A Tisza viszont kormányra kerülése után haza fogja hozni az embereknek járó uniós forrásokat, és vidéken is valódi fejlesztéseket fog megvalósítani.

André Rodrigues (S&D). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Comissário, o relatório que hoje discutimos propõe respostas há muito reclamadas para os desafios estruturais das zonas rurais. Mais investimento em serviços públicos, infraestruturas, digitalização, apoio ao emprego e às comunidades locais. Sublinha também a urgência de travar o despovoamento, reforçar o papel das mulheres e dos jovens, apoiar as PME e garantir que as zonas rurais não ficam para trás na transição energética.

Mas não tenhamos ilusões; sem uma política de desenvolvimento rural mais ambiciosa, articulada e simples, nenhuma destas respostas será concretizada.

Há quem queira acabar com o segundo pilar da PAC; aqui dizemos, claramente, não. Ele deve antes ser reforçado e mais bem articulado com uma política de coesão verdadeiramente descentralizada e ancorada nos territórios e nas suas comunidades.

É preciso ação e ambição, e estas têm de estar refletidas no próximo Quadro Financeiro Plurianual. Cabe agora à Comissão, aos Estados‑Membros e a este Parlamento assumir a responsabilidade que têm perante o mundo rural e não votá-lo ao abandono.

(O orador aceita responder a uma pergunta «cartão azul»)

João Oliveira (The Left), Pergunta segundo o procedimento «cartão azul». – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Deputado André Rodrigues, o senhor deputado fez referência a vários aspetos importantes deste relatório, mas queria questioná-lo sobre outros aspetos que vão no sentido negativo.

Em primeiro lugar, queria perguntar-lhe como é que se apoia o desenvolvimento das zonas rurais pondo este foco no militarismo – que também neste relatório acaba por aparecer com a referência à importância da mobilidade militar; veja-se bem: a mobilidade militar como um aspeto relevante do ponto de vista da coesão e da resposta às necessidades das zonas rurais!

E, por outro lado, queria saber também como é que se conjugam todos estes objetivos com políticas setoriais nos transportes e na energia, que depois vão em sentido exatamente contrário, como acontece, por exemplo, com as redes transeuropeias de transportes, que deixam completamente de lado a mobilidade das populações nas zonas rurais.

Como é que isto tudo se pode compatibilizar, Senhor Deputado?

Valérie Deloge (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, Monsieur le Commissaire, chers collègues, l’Union européenne est vraiment une girouette qui change d’avis tout le temps. D’un côté, il est question d’intégrer la PAC, principal fonds en faveur des campagnes, dans le budget global de l’Union européenne, ce qui le fera diminuer. De l’autre, nous discutons aujourd’hui de l’utilisation des fonds de cohésion, déjà très sollicités, en faveur des zones rurales. Avec des signaux aussi contradictoires, comment avoir confiance?

Depuis des années, les politiques européennes se concentrent sur les métropoles et les zones urbaines, laissant nos campagnes se vider et nos exploitations disparaître. Ce n’est finalement qu’au moment où les citadins redécouvrent les campagnes, au détour du télétravail, qu’on s’intéresse à nouveau à ces zones.

Vous prétendez aujourd’hui vouloir nous aider. Comment pouvons-nous soutenir les agriculteurs et les services de proximité, car ce sont eux qui font vivre ces zones? Cessez de nous imposer votre idéologie verte qui nous prive de nos moyens de transport. Redevenez lucides et apprenez à nous respecter.

Aurelijus Veryga (ECR). – Gerbiama pirmininke, komisare. Eurostato duomenimis, iki 2050 m. Lietuvoje kaimo gyventojų skaičius sumažės beveik penkiasdešimt procentų. Todėl šiandien, kaip niekada, aktualu kalbėti apie teisę pasilikti regionuose. Matant demografines problemas, svarbu suvokti švietimo sistemos regionuose išsaugojimo svarbą. Juolab, kad jau daug investuota į regionų švietimo įstaigų atnaujinimą, mokytojų rengimą. Kita svarbi sritis – tai sveikatos paslaugų užtikrinimas, nes senstant visuomenei tai tampa vis didesniu iššūkiu. Suprantama, kad pirminė sveikatos priežiūra turi būti kaip galima arčiau gyventojų. Tačiau ir kitos paslaugos, tokios kaip onkologinės patikros programos, turėtų būti kaip galima labiau pasiekiamos. Būtina didinti mobilių patikros priemonių prieinamumą, vystyti telemediciną, nes šiuo metu regionų gyventojams dėl paslaugų netolygumų vėliau nustatoma ligos diagnozė, sunkiau pasiekti specializuotą pagalbą. Regionai dažniau susiduria su medikų trūkumu, todėl labai svarbu, kad regionams būtų skiriama pakankamai dėmesio Europos sveikatos programoje, Europos vėžio įveikimo plane ir kitose priemonėse.

Krzysztof Hetman (PPE). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Na początku chciałbym podkreślić, że polityka spójności już od wielu, wielu, wielu lat wspiera obszary wiejskie na terenie Unii Europejskiej. Ale cieszę się, że dzisiaj możemy rozmawiać o tym, w jaki sposób polityka spójności może w sposób bardziej skuteczny, szybszy i na większym poziomie wspierać rozwiązywanie tych problemów, które dotyczą obszarów wiejskich, takich jak wykluczenie komunikacyjne, poprawa infrastruktury drogowej, edukacyjnej, zdrowotnej, kulturalnej, wsparcie dla rozwoju przedsiębiorczości, a przede wszystkim ten problem, z którym borykamy się już od wielu lat, w wielu miejscach Unii Europejskiej na obszarach wiejskich, mianowicie z wyludnieniem.

Jeśli chcemy, aby polityka spójności rzeczywiście rozwiązała te problemy, musimy podjąć jedną zasadniczą decyzję, mianowicie zaufać ludziom, tym, którzy tam dzisiaj mieszkają, i tym, którzy podejmują decyzje i wiedzą najlepiej, jakie są oczekiwania i potrzeby społeczne. To oni na dole, tam w swoich samorządach lokalnych, w swoich małych ojczyznach wiedzą najlepiej, na co powinni wydać te pieniądze. Dajmy im taką możliwość. Pierwszy raz w historii Unii Europejskiej. Panie Przewodniczący, cieszę się, że Pan rozumie te problemy. Dajmy im możliwość zdecydowania, na co chcą wydać te pieniądze. Które problemy w pierwszej kolejności chcą rozwiązać. Oni się odwdzięczą, odwdzięczą się pięknymi projektami, odwdzięczą się wspaniałymi zadaniami, które zostaną zrealizowane za środki europejskie, którymi my wszyscy, także Pan Komisarz, Pan Przewodniczący, będzie mógł się chwalić. Zaufajmy ludziom. Dajmy im szansę w końcu podjąć samodzielną decyzję, w jaki sposób chcą wydać te pieniądze, na które sami pracują i wypracowują, a które wpływają do wspólnego budżetu Unii Europejskiej.

Gerald Hauser (PfE). – Frau Präsidentin, geschätzter Herr Exekutiv-Vizepräsident! Jeder wird den ländlichen Raum stärken wollen. Nur, ein Teilaspekt: Was machen wir im ländlichen Raum ohne Landwirte? Die Kohäsionspolitik hat in dieser Sache komplett versagt. Ich bin aus Österreich, aus Tirol. Nur ein Beispiel dazu: Im Jahr 2000 haben die Bauern für einen Liter Milch in etwa 0,34 Euro bekommen. Jetzt bekommen sie zwischen 0,40 und 0,55 Euro, etwas mehr, aber in Relation zu 2000 inflationsbereinigt wesentlich weniger. Die Erlöse gehen massiv zurück. Auf der anderen Seite steigen die Kosten, die Energiekosten, verursacht durch die Politik der Europäischen Union. Die Arbeitskräfte werden teurer, die Futtermittel werden teurer. Das heißt, die Erträge gehen massiv zurück. Was passiert? Dass so wie in Österreich täglich acht Landwirte zusperren. Zur Statistik: Im Jahr 2000 hatten wir in Österreich 18 000 landwirtschaftliche Betriebe, im Jahr 2000 nur mehr 14 000 – minus 22 Prozent. Täglich sperren acht Betriebe zu. Und Ihre Politik, geschätzter Herr Kommissar, wird daran nichts ändern.

Wir müssen endlich aufhören, gegen die Menschen im ländlichen Raum, auch gegen die Landwirte, zu arbeiten. Mercosur muss verhindert werden. Der Green Deal ist das nächste, was den Bauern extreme Probleme macht, und die aufgeblähte Verwaltung ist mittlerweile unerträglich. Das ganze Geld, das Sie über die Kohäsionspolitik in die Regionen geben wollen, kommt in die falschen Hände und kommt nicht dort an, wo es ankommen muss. Leider werden die ländlichen Gebiete und auch die Landwirte weiterhin verlieren.

(Der Redner ist damit einverstanden, auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“ zu antworten.)

Sabrina Repp (S&D), Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Ihre Darstellung und der Fokus auf die Landwirte verkennt das Zusammennehmen. Es ist kein Ausspielen von Landwirtinnen und Landwirten und dem ländlichen Raum. Das ist der Fehler, der in den letzten Jahren passiert ist. Wir müssen beide zusammennehmen, um tatsächliche Zukunftsperspektiven für den ländlichen Raum zu schaffen. Wie wollen Sie es gewährleisten, wenn nur das eine fokussiert wird und Sie gar vorwerfen, dass die Kohäsionsmittel in die falschen Hände geraten? Im ländlichen Raum gibt es zahlreiche Menschen, die sich jeden Tag mit Engagement für Projekte einsetzen, für Bürgerhäuser, für Begegnung. Sie sagen, das sind die falschen Hände? Da geht irgendetwas nicht zusammen. Sie spielen verschiedene Menschen im ländlichen Raum gegeneinander aus. Eigentlich muss der ländliche Raum an einem Strang ziehen und den Zusammenhalt stärken. Das ist wichtig. Wie wollen Sie das erreichen, wenn Sie die Menschen im ländlichen Raum so gegeneinander ausspielen?

Gerald Hauser (PfE), Antwort auf eine Frage nach dem Verfahren der „blauen Karte“. – Ja, das ist das übliche linke Totschlagargument, das daherkommt mit dem Gegeneinander-Ausspielen. Wenn Sie mir zugehört hätten, hätten Sie bemerkt, dass ich mich in den eineinhalb Minuten, die ich Zeit hatte, intensiv für die Landwirte, für die Bäuerinnen und Bauern einsetze. Der ländliche Raum braucht die Bauern, weil sie die Erhalter unserer Kulturlandschaft, unserer Tradition sind, und wenn uns die Bauern immer mehr verloren gehen, dann verödet der ländliche Raum. Das ist die Basis, auf der wir aufbauen müssen. Das heißt, wir müssen zuerst einmal schauen, dass natürlich auch die Landwirte am Leben erhalten werden und Rahmenbedingungen haben, mit denen sie wirtschaften können. Derzeit ist es ihnen nicht möglich, deswegen sperren in Österreich täglich acht Landwirte zu. Das ist eine Entwicklung, die desaströs ist und die wir aufhalten wollen.

Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhor Vice-Presidente, a União Europeia é muito mais do que as suas capitais, e é por não percebermos isto que estamos a perder muitos defensores do projeto europeu.

As áreas rurais representam mais de 80 % do território da União Europeia e são a casa de cerca de 25 % dos europeus e de 33 % dos portugueses. Isto indica que a falta de condições leva muitos dos nossos jovens a migrar para as grandes cidades, muitas vezes ficando nas suas periferias sem cumprirem com os seus sonhos.

O despovoamento, o envelhecimento da população, a escassez de oportunidades económicas e sociais e os rendimentos significativamente inferiores aos das zonas urbanas comprometem a coesão da União.

Precisamos, portanto, de uma política de coesão mais robusta, flexível, multinível e simplificada, centrada na promoção da igualdade territorial e no combate às assimetrias regionais.

Para cumprir o direito a ficar, é fundamental termos as infraestruturas e a conectividade necessárias, as acessibilidades adequadas –– no caso das regiões ultraperiféricas, através de um POSEI Transportes –– e um acesso, com dignidade, à educação e a cuidados de saúde.

É também por isto que a política de coesão é um instrumento essencial para responder aos desafios específicos destas regiões. E agradeço os seus esforços, Senhor Vice-Presidente, para a salvar.

Não há coesão sem uma Europa integralmente desenvolvida e territorialmente justa. E termino: as zonas rurais têm de ser reconhecidas como de facto são, ou seja, territórios estratégicos para a segurança alimentar, a produção agrícola, a transição energétic e a sustentabilidade ambiental e intervenientes centrais no futuro na União Europeia.

Mélanie Disdier (PfE). – Madame la Présidente, chers collègues, pendant des décennies, la Commission européenne n’a fait que jouer le jeu du libéralisme à outrance et de la mondialisation effrénée. Cette politique désastreuse a d’abord eu comme effet de créer une fracture importante entre les zones urbaines riches, connectées au monde, et les zones rurales, parfois enclavées et beaucoup plus fragiles économiquement. Pourtant, les zones rurales, cœur battant de notre identité, couvrent 83 % du territoire européen et un quart de sa population.

La politique de cohésion de l’Union européenne doit cesser d’être une coquille vide et devenir le fer de lance d’un sursaut rural et d’un retour de la puissance agricole et industrielle. Nos campagnes ne sont pas seulement des terres agricoles, elles garantissent notre souveraineté alimentaire et sont les gardiennes de notre patrimoine millénaire que Bruxelles méprise et cherche à effacer.

Nous exigeons des investissements massifs dans l’agriculture, le transport, l’industrie et la transformation numérique pour redonner vie à nos territoires. De la même manière qu’une grande entreprise ne peut pas vivre sans un tissu de PME adéquates, aucune grande métropole ne pourra se passer des zones rurales pour exister.

Cette résolution est donc une main tendue à la Commission pour rattraper les errements du passé. Restaurons le modèle économique de nos campagnes. Vous voulez une Europe durable? Restaurons les circuits courts. Vous voulez réindustrialiser? Rouvrons des usines dans nos villes moyennes qui en dépendent. Soutenons les initiatives nationales qui vont en ce sens, sans les étouffer dans des réglementations inutiles et contre-productives, comme vous savez si bien le faire. Nos campagnes méritent respect, moyens et autonomie. Notre avenir en sera assuré.

Zgłoszenia z sali

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Doamnă președintă, domnule comisar, stimați colegi, consolidarea zonelor rurale este un obiectiv extrem de important. Domnule comisar, trebuie să gândim Fondul de coeziune împreună cu Politica Agricolă Comună, dar nu să luăm bani de la Politica Agricolă Comună și să punem la coeziune, că nu am făcut nimic.

Avem acolo posibilități și oportunități: să dezvoltăm turismul, turismul rural, să dezvoltăm și să consolidăm și să păstrăm tradițiile, meșteșugurile, putem, de asemenea, să dezvoltăm comerțul. Dar pentru aceste lucruri, oamenii de acolo și mai ales generația tânără nu se întorc în rural pentru că n-au condiții, n-au infrastructură.

De aceea spun că trebuie să gândim proiectele consolidat: infrastructură, să aibă medic, să existe școală, să poată să aibă conexiune la internet. Sunt zone întregi rurale în care nu există posibilitatea de conectivitate.

Sper, domnule comisar, că veți susține ca aceste zone rurale să aibă bugete țintite, pentru că dacă dăm buget la grămadă și mai este o problemă, s-a discutat aici, trebuie să simplificăm procedura de accesare a fondurilor de către administrațiile din comunitățile mici sau de către micii întreprinzători.

PREDSEDÁ: MARTIN HOJSÍK
Podpredseda

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, a política de coesão é fundamental para garantirmos zonas rurais vivas e com serviços básicos. Por isso, não concordamos que o governo europeu reoriente incorretamente os fundos para fins militares.

Na Galiza, o meu país, ainda se aguarda uma decisão sobre o que financiar com 60 % dos fundos. 62 % dos municípios galegos estão designados como zonas desfavorecidas. O êxodo rural avança de forma imparável na Galiza. Em apenas um ano, 32 aldeias ficaram desertas.

Temos escassez de serviços básicos nas zonas rurais e muita emigração. As pessoas ficam se houver trabalho e serviços.

Senhor Comissário, precisamos de um apoio específico para municípios afetados pelo despovoamento, vilas e áreas funcionais. São necessárias áreas funcionais e uma política de emprego dotada de serviços que atraiam as pessoas e que não as expulsem.

Precisamos de iniciativas para jovens agricultores para que também possam menos Altri e mais projetos, com direito a ficar.

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário Fitto, o dia em que fazemos o debate sobre este relatório, a propósito da importância da política de coesão para as zonas rurais, é precisamente o dia em que a Comissão dos Orçamentos acaba de votar alterações aos regulamentos dos fundos europeus da política de coesão, nomeadamente o FEDER e o Fundo de Coesão, que passam a ter como objetivos específicos o militarismo.

A mobilidade militar na União passou a ser um dos objetivos de utilização dos fundos de coesão.

E nós perguntamos: como é que a mobilidade militar pode contribuir para o desenvolvimento das zonas rurais? O militarismo não serve a política de coesão, nem serve as zonas rurais e as suas necessidades específicas, tal como não serve objetivos de políticas setoriais que contrariam esta discussão que estamos hoje aqui a ter.

Quando a União Europeia financia o desenvolvimento da Rede Transeuropeia de Transportes, como está a fazer neste momento em Portugal, na ligação Sines-Caia, mas desconsidera a necessidade do investimento no aproveitamento da ligação ferroviária para as populações dessas regiões, não está a contribuir para a coesão, nem para o desenvolvimento das zonas rurais. Estes são objetivos das políticas setoriais que têm de ser considerados também.

Λευτέρης Νικολάου-Αλαβάνος (NI). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι βιοπαλαιστές αγροτοκτηνοτρόφοι στην Ελλάδα τσακίζονται από τις τεράστιες αυξήσεις του κόστους παραγωγής, για εφόδια, ρεύμα και πετρέλαιο, από τις μηδαμινές αποζημιώσεις για τις μεγάλες καταστροφές, από μύλους και μεσάζοντες που αγοράζουν τα προϊόντα τους σε πολύ χαμηλές τιμές.

Είναι αποτελέσματα της μεγάλης ενιαίας αγοράς, της ευρωενωσιακής ΚΓΠ που τους έφερε στο χείλος του γκρεμού. Αυτά ευθύνονται για το σκάνδαλο με τις αγροτικές επιδοτήσεις του ΟΠΕΚΕΠΕ, με ευθύνες της σημερινής κυβέρνησης της Νέας Δημοκρατίας και των προηγούμενων. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση συναινούσε στην κλοπή σε βάρος των αγροτών, χορηγώντας ενισχύσεις αποσυνδεδεμένες από το κτηνοτροφικό κεφάλαιο, με το μοίρασμα επιδοτήσεων σε μη αγρότες-δικαιούχους για εικονικά βοσκοτόπια.

Πρέπει να γίνουν άμεσα οι πληρωμές που εκκρεμούν και να ανοίξει το σύστημα ώστε να εξυπηρετηθούν οι αγρότες. Οι βιοπαλαιστές αγρότες να απορρίψουν την ευρωενωσιακή γραμμή που τους ξεκληρίζει και τα κόμματα που πίνουν νερό στο όνομά της και τους συκοφαντούν. Να συμπορευτούν με το ΚΚΕ παλεύοντας για την ικανοποίηση των αιτημάτων τους, για τις δικές τους ανάγκες.

Vytenis Povilas Andriukaitis (S&D). – Gerbiamas posėdžio pirmininke, dėkoju pranešėjui. Tikrai puikus raportas ir, gerbiamas komisare, išklausėt labai daug gerų pasiūlymų. Neabejotina, kad sanglaudos politikos srityje reikalingos horizontalios programos, kurios apimtų švietimo, sveikatos, skaitmeninės infrastruktūros kompleksiškumą, ir nustatytos sąlygos (conditionality), kad niekas, net ir šalis narė, negalėtų pakeisti, nes didieji miestai, didieji regionai ir parlamentuose, kur daug stipresnės yra kitos jėgos, nuskriaudžia kaimo teritorijas. Kitas dalykas, pritraukti jaunimą galima tiktai investuojant stipriai į pažangias ūkininkavimo formas – patrauklias, „advanced farming“. Tos pažangios formos – su robotizacija, su dirbtiniu intelektu, naudojant įvairias naujas technologijas ir naujas veisles – ir augalų, ir taip toliau. Tas patrauktų jaunimą, nes jaunimas yra patrauklus mokslui ir gerai infrastruktūrai.

Γεάδης Γεάδη (ECR). – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, τόσο ως ECR όσο και ως Εθνικό Λαϊκό Μέτωπο δίνουμε προτεραιότητα στην ενίσχυση των αγροτικών και ορεινών περιοχών. Για εμάς, η διασφάλιση ενός βιώσιμου μέλλοντος για τις αγροτικές περιοχές —που κινδυνεύουν λόγω της γήρανσης του πληθυσμού, της αστυφιλίας, της εγκατάλειψης των νέων, της έλλειψης υπηρεσιών και των περιορισμένων ευκαιριών απασχόλησης και κοινωνικής ένταξης— αποτελεί κορωνίδα της πολιτικής μας.

Αναντίλεκτα, οι αγροτικές περιοχές αποτελούν το λίκνο της παραγωγής γεωργικών και διατροφικών προϊόντων, ενώ παράλληλα διαφυλάσσουν μια αναντικατάστατη πολιτιστική και τοπική κληρονομιά. Για να εξασφαλιστεί η μακροπρόθεσμη βιωσιμότητά τους, οι αγροτικές περιοχές πρέπει να αποκτήσουν ισότιμη πρόσβαση στην υγειονομική περίθαλψη, τη συνδεσιμότητα, την προσιτή στέγαση, το νερό, την εκπαίδευση, τις κατάλληλες υποδομές και άλλες βασικές υπηρεσίες.

Η Επιτροπή και τα κράτη μέλη έχουν καθήκον να παρέχουν επαρκή χρηματοδότηση, να κατανοήσουν ότι οφείλουν να στηρίξουν τις οικογένειες ώστε να διασφαλιστεί η ενεργός συμμετοχή τους στην αγροτική ανάπτυξη και τις οικονομικές δραστηριότητες.

Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Domnule președinte, vorbeați de faptul că cetățenii trebuie să aibă șansa de a rămâne în locurile în care s-au născut. Românii nu au avut această șansă.

10 milioane de români, jumătate din populația României, este nomadă în acest moment, în sensul în care a fost dată afară din țară de măsurile Uniunii Europene: pentru că ați închis mineritul, pădurile au fost luate de austrieci, iar la țară nu au mai rămas decât oamenii bătrâni. Românii vă dezvoltă dumneavoastră economiile, pentru că nouă ne-ați închis orice posibilitate de a ne dezvolta.

Știți că s-au desființat școli la țară? Știți că nu mai sunt dispensare? Știți că acuma, tot venind de la Uniunea Europeană, li se interzice să se mai încălzească cu lemne? Știți că deși avem o treime din rețeaua hidrografică a Europei, românilor le este interzis să mai scoată apă din fântână să-și ude plantele? Știți că dumneavoastră impuneți să avem boli la animale, astfel încât să nu mai avem agricultură și zootehnie?

(Koniec vystúpení na základe prihlásenia sa o slovo zdvihnutím ruky)

Raffaele Fitto, Executive Vice-President of the Commission. – Mr President, thank you for your contribution, of which I have taken good note. I appreciate your insights on the challenges the rural areas face and the significant role that cohesion policy plays in shaping the future of the EU’s rural areas.

You rightly point out the development of infrastructure, particularly in the fields of transport, energy and digital connectivity, alongside essential services for improving the quality of life in rural areas. The reduction of economic, social and territorial disparities will continue to remain at the core of cohesion policy, providing critical support to rural areas.

Your report and interventions today reaffirm this importance and will further guide our discussions and our work for the future of rural areas.

I would like to give only two messages.

First, many problems that you mentioned are the priority of the mid-term review, like water, housing, energy and competitiveness. And I remember to all of you that mid-term review is a voluntary basis. So defence is a possibility. And in particular for eastern border regions that have to face not only the challenge regarding defence but also the new economic challenges.

Second message, we can work together using also the new governance of the European Commission. As you know, under my executive vice-presidency we have a coordination of three commissioners: agriculture, tourism and transport, fisheries and blue economy. And I agreed with the three commissioners that we must work with a common vision to prepare the strategy for internal rural areas, starting by this important and very positive report.

Denis Nesci, relatore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la sintesi del dibattito ha fatto emergere il lavoro che abbiamo fatto in questi mesi con i relatori ombra, con tutto lo staff, con gli advisor, cioè quello di cercare di sintetizzare e di fotografare la situazione attuale delle aree rurali per cercare di andare a risolvere ciò che non va e ciò che è stato dimenticato.

Io penso che questo dibattito abbia fatto emergere tutto ciò che abbiamo evidenziato: dalle infrastrutture, dalla digitalizzazione, dalla connettività, dai servizi sanitari essenziali, dalla formazione. Quindi, in questa relazione abbiamo centrato l’obiettivo che ci eravamo dati, senza tralasciare soprattutto la bussola che ci ha guidato lungo questo percorso, cioè poter garantire il diritto di restare, che era l’obiettivo principale, cioè la possibilità di dare ai giovani l’opportunità di decidere dove poter sviluppare, dove poter vivere e dove poter creare il proprio futuro.

Quindi io sono soddisfatto di questo lavoro e ancora ringrazio anche il lavoro fatto dalla Commissione, dal Commissario, dalle parole del Vicepresidente esecutivo, soprattutto perché ci ha trasmesso un messaggio di fiducia in merito all’utilizzo della politica di coesione.

Quindi concludo con l’invito, che ci è stato dato anche nell’ultimo intervento fatto dal Vicepresidente, che è quello di lavorare insieme. Allora cerchiamo tutti insieme di lavorare affinché si possa guardare nel concreto quelle che sono le problematiche da risolvere e lasciamo possibilmente da parte gli aspetti ideologici che non aiutano i cittadini europei.

Predsedajúci . – Rozprava je uzavretá.

22. One-minute speeches on matters of political importance

Maria Walsh (PPE). – Mr President, recent riots on the island of Ireland, which began in the town of Ballymena in County Antrim, have morphed from concern about a tragic sexual assault allegation into xenophobic violence against migrant families. As Amnesty Northern Ireland Director Patrick Corrigan said, we are just one petrol bomb away from racially motivated murder.

Families have been forced from their homes as groups hurled bricks, petrol bombs and fireworks, leaving innocent children vulnerable and traumatised. This is not a protest for justice; it’s racism cloaked in outrage.

Sadly, inflammatory political rhetoric has added fuel to the fire. Some politicians have deliberately fanned the flames of hatred and, by linking migration to crime, they’ve pitted neighbour against neighbour.

We must stand with victims and prosecute hate-fuelled crimes swiftly. And we must invest in our community dialogue and integration. Ireland and Europe must show that diversity is a strength, not a threat.

Victor Negrescu (S&D). – Domnule președinte, dragi colegi, în ultimele săptămâni, România s-a confruntat din nou cu inundații grave: oameni evacuați, locuințe distruse, drumuri rupte, vieți afectate. Printre zonele lovite se află și Salina Praid, un monument natural și un important obiectiv economic. Acolo, inundațiile au provocat pagube uriașe. O salină unică în Europa, folosită în scopuri medicale, riscă să se prăbușească.

Am cerut Comisiei Europene ajutor de urgență, iar apelul meu a fost ascultat. În câteva zile, experții europeni au ajuns în România. Acesta este rezultatul unui demers concret, pe care l-am început chiar aici, în Parlamentul European, dar trebuie mai mult.

În negocierile pentru bugetul Uniunii am reușit să obțin fonduri suplimentare pentru protecția civilă și catastrofele naturale. Solicit acum ca aceste sume obținute să fie folosite și pentru reconstrucție. Solidaritatea europeană trebuie să însemne și mai multă acțiune, ajutor concret și sprijin pentru oameni. Salina Praid și comunitățile afectate merită acest lucru.

Rody Tolassy (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, chers collègues, il y a quelques jours, à Nice, se tenait la conférence des Nations unies sur l’océan. Mme von der Leyen a présenté le pacte européen pour l’océan. Fort bien.

Mais pendant que l’on pactise ici, nos enfants, aux Antilles, continuent de respirer les émanations toxiques des sargasses. Depuis quatorze ans, l’Europe regarde ces algues échouer sur nos côtes, sans réaction. Pourtant, la science est claire: ce fléau n’est pas qu’une conséquence du changement climatique, il est aussi le résultat de déséquilibres structurels.

Pendant ce temps, nous vivons chaque saison dans l’urgence, dans le silence et dans l’oubli. Alors non, ce pacte ne pourra pas être un texte d’avenir s’il ne regarde pas vers ses avant-postes océaniques, les régions ultrapériphériques. Il est temps que l’Europe parle aussi antillais. Quand elle dit «océan», il est temps qu’elle finance un véritable plan de valorisation des sargasses pour que cette prolifération cesse d’être un désagrément subi et devienne une ressource maîtrisée, gérée directement en mer. Sinon, ce pacte ne sera qu’un parchemin vide, emporté par les mêmes courants qui, déjà, ont charrié le poison jusqu’à nos rivages.

Cynthia Ní Mhurchú (Renew). – A Chathaoirligh, cuireann aerfoirt réigiúnda na hEorpa go mór le nascacht, le hiomaíochas agus le fás eacnamaíoch cothrom i réigiúin na hEorpa.

Is údar imní dom, faraor, nach bhfuil ár ndóthain infheistíochta á dhéanamh orthu, mar shampla in iardheisceart na hÉireann, atá lonnaithe i mo thoghcheantar féin, ina bhfuil Aerfort Phort Láirge, Waterford Airport, fágtha leath-dhímhaoin. Is deis iontach ann go n‑úsáidfear Aerfort Phort Láirge chun taighde agus nuálaíocht a chur chun cinn i gcomhar le hOllscoil Teicneolaíochta an Oirdheiscirt.

Tá an Eoraip go mór chun cúil ar na Stáit Aontaithe maidir le breosla inbhuanaithe a fhorbairt d’eitleáin. Agus níl an scéal ach ina thús i dtaobh teicneolaíochta na ndrón a chabhróidh linn, in oibríochtaí tarrthála, mar shampla. Maidir le turasóireacht, le tacaíocht dírithe trí chiste úr Eorpach, d’fhéadfaí borradh, a bhfuil géarghá leis, a chur faoi nuálaíocht timpeall na hEorpa trínár n‑aerfoirt réigiúnda ar nós Waterford Airport.

Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, o galego é uma língua histórica, com raízes profundas, a língua do meu país, a Galiza.

O galego é o património imaterial do povo galego. A sua máxima expressão.

A Europa deve reconhecer os direitos linguísticos do nosso povo, assim o defendo como eurodeputada galega. Por isso, precisamos que o galego seja uma língua oficial na Europa para a representatividade, a visibilidade e o respeito do nosso povo. Porque o galego tem direito, estatuto legal e reconhecido.

As línguas representam os povos. Não é democrático criar línguas de primeira e línguas de segunda. Para o Governo galego, a nossa língua é uma língua de terceira. Que complexo de inferioridade! Desvaloriza a nossa língua e até faz lobby, aqui, na Europa, para impedir que o estatuto oficial seja reconhecido a nível europeu.

Que pena existirem governantes que desprestigiam as possibilidades da língua do seu país, a utilidade e o prestígio que isso daria ao galego, as possibilidades de trabalho, o mundo aberto através da nossa irmandade linguística.

Eu amo Alfonso Castelao, e, como ele dizia, «se ainda somos galegos é por obra e graça do idioma».

Rudi Kennes (The Left). – Voorzitter, collega’s, ik weet niet hoe jullie je voelen, maar ik schaam mij in ieder geval heel diep. We zijn blijkbaar alle slachtoffers al vergeten, evenals alle offers die onze ouders en grootouders hebben gebracht om na de chaos, de haat en de meer dan 80 miljoen doden tijdens de twee wereldoorlogen een Europa van vrede en gerechtigheid op te bouwen.

Ik dacht dat we klaar waren met kolonialisme, met blanke suprematie, met martelingen, met verspilling van miljarden aan wapens. En toch zijn we vandaag hier en kijken we gewoon op onze gsm’s naar kinderen en patiënten die levend worden verbrand, gehandicapte burgers die worden verscheurd door door het leger getrainde honden, baby’s die in couveuses worden achtergelaten om te sterven, artsen die worden gemarteld, ziekenhuizen en scholen die worden gebombardeerd, journalisten die worden vermoord en gevangenen en die worden verkracht, keizersneden die moeten worden toegediend zonder verdoving.

Collega’s, ik doe een beroep op jullie gevoel voor ethiek. We kunnen en mogen niet toestaan dat onze leiders ons medeplichtig maken aan dat alles. We mogen de wereld niet opnieuw overlaten aan psychopaten. Onze vertegenwoordigers moeten zich inzetten voor een wereld van vrede en welvaart, en niet van dood en vernietiging.

Alexander Jungbluth (ESN). – Herr Präsident! In Deutschland werden die Grundrechte mit Füßen getreten. Dort ist es inzwischen normal, dass man bespitzelt wird, wenn man nicht regierungskonform ist, oder die Polizei einem die Tür eintritt, wenn man einen grünen Minister kritisiert. Nun haben die Mächtigen in Deutschland etwas Neues aus dem Giftschrank geholt – Berufsverbote. Ist es gerechtfertigt, einem talentierten Schriftsteller den Zugang zu seinem Beruf zu verwehren, nur weil seine Meinung kontrovers ist? In Deutschland schon. So wird aktuell einem Juristen die Laufbahn als Richter oder Anwalt verweigert, weil er einen Roman geschrieben hat, der den Behörden nicht passt.

Damit nicht genug: Uli Grötsch von der SPD fordert, dass AfD‑Mitglieder aus dem Polizeidienst geworfen werden. Die SPD, die auf einem historischen Tiefstand ist und zu einer Splitterpartei verkommt, handelt nach dem Motto: Wenn wir schon so schlecht sind, dass uns niemand mehr wählen will, dann zerstören wir doch einfach die Existenzen der Opposition. Lehrer, die nicht gewillt sind, ihre Schüler maximal zu indoktrinieren, haben auch schon Druck bekommen. Deutschland wird jeden Tag ein wenig unfreier. Wir werden für die Freiheit des deutschen Volkes kämpfen, und die Altparteien werden verlieren.

Diana Iovanovici Şoşoacă (NI). – Domnule președinte, vorbim de libertatea de exprimare și de democrație. Nu, nu există. Și în România este la fel ca și în Germania și chiar mai rău. Odată ce ești împotriva puterii, ești catalogat drept antisemit.

Vă spun asta pentru că absolut toată opoziția este făcută antisemită și se adoptă legislație împotriva opoziției, acuzându-i de antisemitism, interzicând istoria României. Bună, rea, este interzisă de un anumit domn reprezentant al khazarilor din România. Este interzisă, iar dacă vorbești despre istoria României, ești băgat în pușcărie 10 ani.

Dacă tipărești o carte sau cumperi o carte despre istoria României din Cel de-Al Doilea și după Al Doilea Război Mondial, faci pușcărie 10 ani. Dacă îți permiți să vorbești de mareșalul Antonescu și Corneliu Zelea Codreanu și Mișcarea legionară, care nu a fost niciodată condamnată de Tribunalul de la Nuremberg, faci pușcărie 10 ani.

Și asta pentru că așa vrea domnul Vexler, care e reprezentantul khazarilor din România. Și vă întreb unde este libertatea de exprimare? Cum să suprimi ziare, jurnale și televiziuni, pentru că unora nu le convine adevărul. Shimon Peres a menționat…

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitoarei)

Hélder Sousa Silva (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhor Comissário, caros colegas, assinalámos no passado dia 12 de Junho, quatro décadas de adesão de Portugal à então Comunidade Económica Europeia, marco fundamental na consolidação da nossa democracia e também na modernização do país.

A integração europeia representou para Portugal uma oportunidade de desenvolvimento económico, o reforço do Estado de direito e a projeção internacional.

Ao longo destes 40 anos, beneficiámos de investimentos estruturantes, ampliámos horizontes para as nossas empresas e para os cidadãos e afirmámos os valores que partilhámos com os restantes Estados‑Membros. Valores da paz, valores da liberdade, valores da solidariedade e valores da coesão.

Portugal é hoje um membro plenamente comprometido com o projeto europeu. E é com responsabilidade que devemos continuar a contribuir para uma União mais forte, mais coesa e mais próxima dos cidadãos.

Celebrar 40 anos é, acima de tudo, renovar o nosso compromisso com o futuro da Europa.

Maria Grapini (S&D). – Domnule președinte, domnule comisar, ați moștenit de la vechea comisie un program de reindustrializare a Uniunii Europene. Am mai pus întrebarea: se ține cont că vrem să avem o industrie sau doar vorbim?

Am niște date statistice de anul trecut. Țări ca țara mea, România, dar și Italia, și Spania, și Franța au industria, de exemplu, pentru plăci ceramice aproape distrusă, pentru că se importă din India, din Egipt, din Turcia, cu prețuri la jumătate. Oamenii, firmele (în țara mea mai este o singură firmă), au investit sute de milioane de euro și riscă să închidă fabricile.

Această e concurență neloială cu prețuri la jumătate. Pentru că da, India nu plătește nici certificate verzi, nu plătește nici taxe pe CO2 la consumul de gaz, știm bine că salariile acolo sunt altele, protecția socială nu există.

Ce facem pentru a face o protecție? Și vă spun, în calitate de vicepreședintă a Comisiei pentru piața internă, vrem să mai avem industrie, vrem să avem locuri de muncă, vrem să crească veniturile oamenilor? Trebuie măsuri concrete și aștept aceste răspunsuri.

Marie Dauchy (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, comment peut-on tolérer, dans cet hémicycle, l’imposture de Rima Hassan, une élue qui, à chaque prise de parole, détourne le drame israélo-palestinien à des fins idéologiques et communautaristes? Pas un mot pour la France, pas un mot pour l’Europe, seulement une obsession: importer un conflit qui n’est pas le nôtre sur notre sol.

Sa colère est à géométrie variable. Elle se met en scène en victime après moins de 24 heures de garde à vue, alors que des enfants ont été massacrés le 7 octobre. Quant à sa prétendue grève de la faim de 8 heures, c’est une provocation indécente face à la tragédie vécue à Gaza. Mais le plus inquiétant, c’est le silence, voire la complaisance de trop d’élus dans cet hémicycle.

L’Union européenne ne doit pas être le porte-voix de ceux qui attisent la haine. Elle doit redevenir une voix de paix, de fermeté et de clarté. Retrouvons le cap, retrouvons la voix de la France.

Ciaran Mullooly (Renew). – Mr President, we’re in a housing crisis, so we’re told. In Ireland and in Europe we need simple, straightforward reforms.

Currently, the credit union sector in Ireland have EUR 22 billion in assets, just EUR 7 billion in loans given out. They want to lend out more for housing and other things. But under current central Bank of Ireland rules, credit unions must hold 10 % of the value of any investment in Irish government bonds as a capital reserve. This is despite the fact that under EU banking regulations, government bonds are considered zero‑risk assets and require no such capital buffer.

If our Irish regulations were to be aligned with EU norms and this reserve requirement were to be removed, credit unions could redirect billions into domestic investment. They would immediately free up EUR 1 billion for lending to families, small businesses, farmers and for building affordable homes.

Imagine what it would do. People like Tom Allen in Mullingar, a credit union, could put young couples on the first rung of the ladder for houses for the first time, so we need to get our credit unions the tools they need to invest in their future and strengthen our communities.

I appeal for reform here, reform this 10 % reserve rule and start that investment.

Nicolae Ștefănuță (Verts/ALE). – Domnule președinte, uciderea Teodorei Marcu a șocat țara noastră și de atunci 26 de femei au fost ucise pentru simplul fapt că sunt, că au fost femei. Singura lor vină a fost dorința bărbaților de a le trata după bunul plac, ca pe proprietăți, să le bată sălbatic și chiar să le omoare, dacă așa își doresc.

Milioane de femei suferă în tăcere și pot astfel deveni următoarele victime. De aceea trebuie să vorbim despre femicid. De ce? Pentru că este considerată o circumstanță agravantă care adaugă pedepsei penale. Trebuie să vorbim despre femicid ca să arătăm că este cea mai mare crimă a violenței de gen. Trebuie să mai vorbim despre consimțământ, despre viol, despre ce înseamnă abuz psihic, abuz psihologic, abuz fizic împotriva femeilor.

Și încă ceva: nu trebuie să facă acest lucru femeile mereu, ci toți bărbații Europei trebuie să fie alături de ele.

João Oliveira (The Left). – Senhor Presidente, Senhoras e Senhores Deputados, a habitação é uma prioridade na resposta aos problemas dos povos e é preciso que a União Europeia tome as medidas necessárias para que haja soluções a nível nacional para aumentar a oferta pública de habitação, proteger os inquilinos, combater a especulação imobiliária, garantir a mobilização do investimento necessário para que as casas que estão devolutas –– os imóveis que são propriedade do Estado –– possam ser afetados ao objetivo da habitação, que tanta falta faz aos povos do espaço da União Europeia.

Em Portugal, essas necessidades também se fazem sentir de forma absolutamente urgente e imediata. No entanto, aquilo que vemos da parte da União Europeia são opções no sentido contrário, que, de resto, incentivam os Estados e os governos a fazerem as opções exatamente contrárias.

A proposta de orçamento para 2026 da União Europeia não assume a prioridade da habitação, mas permite o desvio de recursos orçamentais para o militarismo e a guerra. A revisão intercalar das políticas de coesão não deu prioridade à habitação, mas permitiu a utilização dos fundos de coesão para o objetivo do militarismo e da guerra. Por isso, não espanta que o Governo português queira agora gastar em 2025 o triplo dos gastos militares, o triplo das verbas que estavam inicialmente previstas para a habitação no PRR. Essas são as opções erradas.

Jan-Peter Warnke (NI). – Herr Präsident! Ich habe einen eher grundsätzlichen Punkt zu machen. Wir leben im Jahre 2025 und führen Debatten, als wären wir im Kalten Krieg. Ich war mein Leben lang Arzt und habe nie verstanden, warum Politik nicht friedlich denken kann. Mehr Panzer machen Europa nicht sicherer. Die Zahl schwerer Waffen entscheidet heute nicht mehr über Krieg und Frieden, sondern der politische Wille, Konflikte diplomatisch zu lösen. Lassen Sie uns hier im Parlament gemeinsam für eine europäische Friedensordnung, die auf Kooperation und nicht auf Konfrontation setzt, einstehen.

Nebenbei bemerkt: Für rund 600 Milliarden Euro – das ist der Umfang der weltweiten Rüstungsausgaben – hätten wir vermutlich längst einen Durchbruch bei der Behandlung von Krebs erzielt. Statt Kriege zu führen, können wir Leben retten. Europa muss ein Vorbild sein, nicht im Wettrüsten, sondern im Friedenshandeln. Wir sind ein Friedensprojekt. Was Gesundheit für den Einzelnen ist, ist Frieden für die Gesellschaft. Ohne beides ist alles nichts.

Nina Carberry (PPE). – Mr President, addressing the skills gap in Europe has rightly been identified as a core priority of this Commission, and so we should not be surprised to learn that a new report in Ireland has found that there is urgent need to take action in the advanced manufacturing sector. The sector has now faced threats that will impact innovation, competitiveness and economic growth on both sides of the border.

The 2025 Future Skills Report, compiled on behalf of Louth and Meath Education and Training Board, showed that the engagement in the sector remains low among younger people, and especially women.

If we are to compete on a global scale, we must break the barriers contributing to the skills gap in Europe. The EU now needs to follow up on its Union of Skills initiative with concrete actions, creating lasting opportunities for young, skilled workers. This is not a task that one region, one sector or one government can tackle alone. It’s a shared challenge.

Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, vicepresidente Fitto, a finales del pasado mes de mayo se desplazó a la isla de El Hierro una delegación de la Comisión de Libertades Civiles, Justicia y Asuntos de Interior. Se trata del punto de mayor afluencia de la ruta más mortífera de migración hacia la Unión Europea. Mi tributo a la sociedad herreña, y a la canaria en general, por su mirada humanitaria ante el hecho migratorio, sin ninguna concesión a la xenofobia ni al rechazo.

Canarias espera mucho de la implementación del Pacto sobre Migración y Asilo y, particularmente, de su pilar de solidaridad y del coordinador de solidaridad europeo, que debe facilitar la redistribución de las personas arribadas a fronteras exteriores, regiones exteriores, como es el caso de Canarias en el conjunto de la Unión.

Eso no impide subrayar que España, siendo un país intensamente descentralizado, encuentre un problema para articular esa solidaridad en su interior, como consecuencia de que en el consejo de política migratoria existe una amplia mayoría de comunidades gobernadas por el Partido Popular que se niegan a recibir a los menores no acompañados que se hacinan en Canarias y, por tanto, este es el momento de subrayar que el PP no puede ser, sin más, parte del problema y nunca de la solución.

Thierry Mariani (PfE). – Monsieur le Président, en février, notre Parlement a adopté une résolution sur la crise à l’est de la République démocratique du Congo, pointant très clairement la responsabilité du Rwanda dans ce drame qui dure depuis 30 ans. Quatre ans après et quelques sanctions symboliques après, la République démocratique du Congo a complètement disparu des préoccupations de l’Union européenne. Mais, quatre ans après, M. Kagame et ses milices continuent d’occuper une partie de la RDC, de la piller et d’y massacrer. Pourquoi? Parce que Kigali se moque ouvertement de nous et de notre lâcheté, à moins qu’ils profitent de notre complaisance.

Oui, l’UE se moque de l’Union. Oui, l’UE se moque des Congolais, car, pour l’Ukraine, on est capable d’en être à la 18ᵉ vague de sanctions – pour le Congo, une seule vague de sanctions, qui en réalité n’a donné aucun résultat. En RDC, les cadavres et les preuves s’accumulent, mais Bruxelles regarde ailleurs. Toute cette ridicule comédie doit cesser, car plus de 100 millions de Congolais nous regardent et attendent que l’Union européenne sanctionne réellement M. Kagame et son entourage qui sont les seuls responsables de ce massacre.

Cristian Terheş (ECR). – Domnule președinte, stimați colegi, pentru a reduce prețul electricității, e imperativ să se renunțe la sistemul actual ce stabilește prețul energiei pe baza prețului marginal, care impune ca cel mai scump tip de energie să dicteze prețul întregii piețe.

Acest model a devenit ineficient și injust, mai ales într-o perioadă în care ponderea energiei regenerabile mai ieftine este în creștere. Dacă 10 % din energie e produsă pe cărbune, care e mai scumpă, e absurd ca restul de 90 % de energie consumată, produsă din surse regenerabile care au cost de producție mai mic, să fie vândută la același preț ca și energia produsă pe cărbune.

Avem nevoie de un sistem de tarifare a energiei care să acopere costurile reale de producție și să facă profit firmelor, dar în niciun caz genul de cost, cum se întâmplă în prezent, care produce profituri imense firmelor, dar face produsele și serviciile ineficiente. Renunțarea la prețul marginal pentru stabilirea prețului la energie este imperativă pentru reducerea prețului energiei în Europa, ceea ce va conduce la reducerea sărăciei și protejarea familiilor.

Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus (NI). – Domnule președinte, dragi colegi, după cum știți, România și-a ales în sfârșit președintele. După o serie de încălcări ale Constituției care au presupus atât lichidarea unor candidați, cât și anularea efectivă a alegerilor, în sfârșit avem un președinte care de circa o lună de zile nu e în stare să găsească un prim-ministru.

Întrucât jumătate din poporul român are senzația că dumneavoastră, Bruxelles-ul și Strasbourgul, ați pus președintele în România, vă rog respectuos să ne puneți și un prim-ministru. Puneți-ne un prim-ministru ca să știe și România încotro merge, care va fi viața ei economică și socială.

Nu, lăsăm la o parte suveranismul, că înțeleg că suveranismul nu mai este important și că oricum vă displace acel suveranism care este creator de stat modern și care este păstrător de tradiții și obiceiuri. Acel suveranism care se opune până la urmă implicării instituțiilor de guvernanță globală care să vină peste noi și să ne impună ce să mâncăm, cum să mâncăm, ce să facem, cât să stăm în casă, cât să cheltuim, ce bani să cheltuim și până la urmă să ne impună tot stilul de viață.

Pe când globalismul pare a fi mai la modă, acel globalism care nu reprezintă nimic altceva decât o societate în declin, o societate care uniformizează…

(Președintele a retras cuvântul vorbitorului)

Tiago Moreira de Sá (PfE). – Senhor Presidente, na doutrina da Ordo Amoris, Santo Agostinho ensinava que o amor deve ser ordenado: do mais próximo para o mais afastado. Primeiro a Deus, depois à família, à comunidade e só depois aos mais distantes.

Hoje, com o reagrupamento familiar no centro da política migratória, é essencial afirmar a nossa posição frontalmente contra políticas que promovem a imigração descontrolada.

Portugal já tem 1,6 milhões de imigrantes. Sem limites, ultrapassaremos os 2 milhões. Esta pressão apaga a nossa identidade, compromete a nossa segurança, desafia a coesão nacional e coloca em risco Schengen, que celebra agora 40 anos.

Temos de ter coração, mas também cabeça. A generosidade não tem de ser ingénua. A nossa primeira obrigação é com a nossa comunidade e com quem nos elegeu. O rio fora do leito torna-se dilúvio. O remédio, sem medida, faz adoecer. Até o bem, quando desgovernado, pode destruir.

Para que não destruamos a coesão dos nossos países e a Europa de Schengen, combateremos o reagrupamento familiar de migrantes.

President. – Thank you very much. That concludes the 1-minute speeches. Thank you, Executive Vice-President, for listening until the end.

23. Agenda of the next sitting

Predsedajúci . – Nasledujúce rokovanie sa uskutoční zajtra v utorok 17. júna so začiatkom o deviatej hodine ráno. Program schôdze bol zverejnený, je k dispozícii na webovom sídle Európskeho parlamentu.

24. Approval of the minutes of the sitting

Predsedajúci . – Zápisnica z tohto rokovania bude predložená parlamentu na schválenie zajtra na začiatku popoludňajšieho rokovania.

25. Closure of the sitting

(Rokovanie sa skončilo o 21:58 h.)

MIL OSI Europe News –

June 18, 2025

MIL-OSI: Quick Custom Intelligence (QCI) Launches QCI Customer Power Pack at Fort Worth Stockyards, Introducing Real-Time Analytics to the Retail and Hospitality Experience

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

SAN DIEGO, June 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Quick Custom Intelligence (QCI), a global leader in generative driven enterprise platforms, is proud to announce the successful deployment of its QCI Customer Power Pack at the historic Fort Worth Stockyards, in partnership with Stockyards Heritage Development Co. This marks a major milestone as QCI brings its powerful analytics and engagement tools into the retail and hospitality space.

The QCI Customer mobile experience platform has delivered measurable results, equips retail resort operators with real-time behavioral insights, dynamic guest interaction tools, and comprehensive data activation capabilities. Designed to enhance the entire guest experience, the platform empowers strategic decision-making while streamlining operations.

Built on QCI’s industry-leading analytics engine, the app offers deep visibility into visitor demographics, behavior patterns, and interests. Interactive features allow operators to enhance engagement and deliver personalized offerings—all while collecting actionable data that fuels continuous improvement.

Ethan Cartwright, Vice President of Marketing for the Stockyards, expressed his enthusiasm for the new technology, stating: “I enjoy seeing who our visitors are, how they engage with the property, and what they’re interested in. The deep reporting aspects of the APP give us a new level of visibility that we’ve never had before—and it’s already helping us make smarter marketing and operational decisions. We are excited about the opportunities that QCI Customer including QCI Power Pack and the QCI Suite present. The quantity of real-time data available is impressive and allows us to share key metrics quickly and confidently with our marketing partners.”

This project marks QCI’s expansion into the retail and destination hospitality sectors, where the need for rich, data-driven insights continues to grow. The QCI Customer APP offers a seamless mobile experience that bridges entertainment, shopping, dining, and event discovery—all while capturing critical behavioral data in real time.

Andrew Cardno, CTO of QCI, shared his thoughts on the successful deployment:
“We’re excited to bring our proven intelligence platform to the Stockyards. This successful implementation not only validates our retail strategy but also demonstrates how real-time analytics can transform how venues interact with their guests.”

The QCI Customer APP represents a new frontier in guest engagement for destination venues like the Stockyards. With powerful analytics capabilities and a user-friendly interface, it provides both visitors and operators with an enhanced, intelligent experience.

QCI’s Enterprise platform is now deployed in over a dozen countries, backed by a solid track record in both retail execution and advanced analytics. With the launch of this new application, QCI has also activated its deep real-time analytical platform, delivering live insights that support operational agility and data-driven decision-making.

ABOUT Stockyards Heritage Development Co.
Stockyards Heritage Development Co. is a partnership between nationally recognized developer Majestic Realty Co. and Fort Worth’s Hickman Investments. Created with the intention of thoughtfully reimagining the historic Fort Worth Stockyards, the company is dedicated to preserving the National Historic District legacy while elevating it with experiences for locals and visitors from afar. Accomplished through a public/private partnership with the City of Fort Worth and Tarrant County, the project’s first phase, Mule Alley, broke ground in the fall of 2018 to include the renovation of the destination’s historic, 108-year-old horse and mule barns into a street of curated shops, restaurants, retail, office spaces, and Hotel Drover, an Autograph Collection hotel, which since opening in March 2021, has been consistently rated one of Texas’ top hotels by Travel + Leisure, Condé Nast Traveler, and U.S. News & World Report, among others. Phase II, which was unanimously approved by the City of Fort Worth in June 2024, will encompass an additional $630 Million investment to the district and will include 300,000 square feet of new commercial space, new full-service hotels with 500 rooms, a 295-unit multi-family property, and two or more below-ground parking garages to support Cowtown Coliseum, the Fort Worth Herd, and other area improvements. www.fortworthstockyards.com

ABOUT QCI
Quick Custom Intelligence (QCI) has pioneered the revolutionary QCI Enterprise Platform, an artificial intelligence platform that seamlessly integrates player development, marketing, and gaming operations with powerful, real-time tools designed specifically for the gaming and hospitality industries. Our advanced, highly configurable software is deployed in over 250 casino resorts across North America, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Latin America, and Europe. The QCI AGI Platform, which manages more than $35 billion in annual gross gaming revenue, stands as a best-in-class solution, whether on-premises, hybrid, or cloud-based, enabling fully coordinated activities across all aspects of gaming or hospitality operations. QCI’s data-driven, AI-powered software propels swift, informed decision-making vital in the ever-changing casino industry, assisting casinos in optimizing resources and profits, crafting effective marketing campaigns, and enhancing customer loyalty. QCI was co-founded by Dr. Ralph Thomas and Mr. Andrew Cardno and is based in San Diego, with additional offices in Las Vegas, St. Louis, Dallas, and Tulsa. Main phone number: (858) 299.5715. Visit us at www.quickcustomintelligence.com.

ABOUT Andrew Cardno
Andrew Cardno is a distinguished figure in the realm of artificial intelligence and data plumbing. With over two decades spearheading private Ph.D. and master’s level research teams, his expertise has made significant waves in data tooling. Andrew’s innate ability to innovate has led him to devise numerous pioneering visualization methods. Of these, the most notable is the deep zoom image format, a groundbreaking innovation that has since become a cornerstone in the majority of today’s mapping tools. His leadership acumen has earned him two coveted Smithsonian Laureates, and teams under his mentorship have clinched 40 industry awards, including three pivotal gaming industry transformation awards. Together with Dr. Ralph Thomas, the duo co-founded Quick Custom Intelligence, amplifying their collaborative innovative capacities. A testament to his inventive prowess, Andrew boasts over 150 patent applications. Across various industries—be it telecommunications with Telstra Australia, retail with giants like Walmart and Best Buy, or the medical sector with esteemed institutions like City Of Hope and UCSD—Andrew’s impact is deeply felt. He has enriched the literature with insights, co-authoring eight influential books with Dr. Thomas and contributing to over 100 industry publications. An advocate for community and diversity, Andrew’s work has touched over 100 Native American Tribal Resorts, underscoring his expansive and inclusive professional endeavors.

Contact:
Laurel Kay, Quick Custom Intelligence
Phone: 858-349-8354

The MIL Network –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Analysis: The UK failed grooming gang victims by not seeing ‘children as children’

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Michelle McManus, Professor of Safeguarding and Violence Prevention, Co-Director of the Institute for Children’s Futures, Manchester Metropolitan University

Mariana Serdynska/Shutterstock

The announcement of a national inquiry into group-based child sexual exploitation raises urgent questions: How did we end up here again? Haven’t there been enough reports? Why weren’t children protected the first time? And will these reforms actually change anything?

As someone who has worked for years in safeguarding policy and research into grooming, county lines drug trafficking and child criminal exploitation, I believe this moment could be different. For the first time in years, there is political momentum, public scrutiny and survivor-led demand for change all converging. But we have to honest about how we got here.

The inquiry, which will have full statutory powers, follows crossbench peer Louise Casey’s rapid national audit into grooming gangs. Her report lays bare what the Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, described as a “collective failure” over 15 years. This phrase reflects not just high-profile cases in Rotherham, Rochdale or Telford, but a nationwide pattern of authorities disbelieving victims, delaying action and denying the scale of the problem.

Since 2014, inquiry after inquiry has revealed how children, often girls, care-experienced young people, or those from marginalised backgrounds were not listened to, with some dismissed by social services as making “life choices”. Despite the Jay report, the 2022 Telford inquiry, and the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, victims were often not seen as victims at all.

Seeing ‘children as children’

One of the most striking lines in Lady Casey’s audit came just before her 12 recommendations: “We need to see children as children.” This cuts to the heart of how so many victims were failed. When professionals view teenagers as complicit, consenting, or “making choices”, they stop seeing the child in need of protection.

Casey revealed that even today, many victims are still falling through the cracks because their exploitation doesn’t fit assumptions. The report revealed that cases involving 13- to 15-year-olds were too often dropped or downgraded from rape, with professionals referencing that the child was “in love” or had “consented”.

These interpretations ignore the law — which sets the age of consent at 16 — and more importantly, they ignore the power imbalance and coercion at the heart of grooming. Casey has called for the law to be unambiguous: any penetrative sex with a child under 16 must be classified as rape.

This failure to see children as victims is deeply embedded. In 2023, 706 group-based child sexual exploitation offences were recorded. A number dwarfed by the estimated 500,000 annual cases of child sexual abuse in England and Wales.

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

One reason for this gap, as Casey’s audit acknowledges, is that “the results tend to obscure rather than clarify the picture of group-based child sexual exploitation”. Much abuse is made invisible by confusing and inconsistently applied definitions, where grooming is recorded under unrelated offence types such as gang or drug crime, rather than identified as exploitation.

In my own research and parliamentary evidence, I’ve repeatedly warned that when a child is caught carrying drugs or cash, they are too often seen as a criminal first — not as someone coerced, groomed or harmed.

These assumptions directly shape the outcome of a case. In earlier grooming gang cases identified in the various inquiries, girls were seen as “promiscuous” or as having “chosen” to associate with older men. These narratives made it easier for agencies to downplay reports, delay interventions or ignore disclosures altogether.

Casey rightly highlights how exploiters have taken advantage of the blurred legal and professional treatment of 13- to 15-year-olds in sexual exploitation cases. But it is concerning that proposed legislation (the crime and policing bill) appears to replicate the same flaws in how it treats child criminal exploitation. The bill introduces different assumptions about a young person’s “awareness” or involvement, even where grooming or coercion is present.

This risks embedding a double standard: one where a 14-year-old can’t consent to sex, but can be seen as knowingly trafficking drugs. Without urgent scrutiny, we risk repeating the same failures but under the banner of criminal exploitation. It is still child exploitation.

What’s different about these reforms?

The government has accepted all 12 of Casey’s recommendations, including making ethnicity data collection mandatory and fast-tracking rape charges for adults abusing under-16s.

It has also promised mandated data-sharing to finally resolve the communication failures that have dogged policing, social care and health services for decades.

The Casey audit underscores how urgent these reforms are. It found that two-thirds of recorded perpetrators had no ethnicity data captured, making it impossible to draw clear national conclusions. In areas like Greater Manchester and South Yorkshire, there was evidence of over-representation among men of Asian ethnicity.

But the data-sharing failures go far beyond demographics. In many serious case reviews, including ones I’ve worked on, key information held by one agency (such as frequent missing episodes recorded by police) were never pieced together across agencies. Mandated data-sharing could have allowed professionals to spot patterns of grooming earlier and intervene before exploitation escalated.

We’ve seen versions of these promises before. The independent inquiry into child sexual abuse made over 80 recommendations. The Jay report outlined repeated missed chances to intervene. In 2022, the Centre of expertise on child sexual abuse called for urgent reforms to how police and social workers identify and respond to child sexual exploitation. Many of those changes were either delayed, diluted or quietly dropped.

Some changes, such as the statutory inquiry’s power to compel evidence, are welcome. But legal duty doesn’t automatically translate into professional confidence or competence. The systems and infrastructure needed to enable professionals to share data consistently and safely still do not exist.

I’ve observed how even the most robust policy and guidance fails in practice because professionals are underresourced, overwhelmed, lack experience, or are unprepared to challenge risk-averse decision making.

For example, mandated data-sharing has been a goal since the 1980s. It was a central recommendation in the 1987 Cleveland inquiry and the 2000 Victoria Climbié inquiry, both of which dealt with child abuse. It has remained a consistent theme in reviews from the child safeguarding practice review panel and in my own national evaluations.

Yvette Cooper delivers a speech on the ‘collective failure’ in the handling of grooming gangs cases.
House of Commons/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND

Case reviews across four decades have cited the same failures: organisations not talking to each other, files siloed, risks misunderstood. In the cases explored in the Casey audit, better data-sharing could have helped agencies identify patterns of concern much earlier, including young people going missing from home or school, presenting at sexual health clinics, or being repeatedly reported in distress by family members, teachers and health practitioners.

Instead, these signs remained isolated. Without a full picture, no single agency recognised what was happening. Children were left unprotected while perpetrators continued to offend.

Unless we address why so many professionals have historically avoided taking action, whether due to fear of being seen as racist, fear of reputational harm, or simply not believing children, reforms may look good on paper but fall short in reality.

The Casey audit shows we haven’t just failed to act, we’ve failed to learn. “Collective failure” is a powerful phrase, but without collective responsibility, we risk repeating the cycle.

Michelle McManus has received funding from Home Office, Department for Education and National Independent Safeguarding Board Wales. She is also currently seconded as part of a Chancellor’s Fellowship at Manchester Met, with the VKPP, which is part of the National Centre for VAWG and Public Protection.

– ref. The UK failed grooming gang victims by not seeing ‘children as children’ – https://theconversation.com/the-uk-failed-grooming-gang-victims-by-not-seeing-children-as-children-259098

MIL OSI Analysis –

June 18, 2025
MIL-OSI Economics: Advancing healthcare AI innovation at HLTH Europe 2025

Source: Microsoft

Headline: Advancing healthcare AI innovation at HLTH Europe 2025

The global healthcare landscape is complex and challenging. Workforce shortages,¹ clinician burnout, and lack of access to essential health services² are placing increasing pressure on healthcare systems in Europe, and around the world. However, advancements in AI present a tremendous opportunity to help. In Europe, for example, hospital Trusts have made good progress migrating data to the cloud and adopting AI to enhance efficiency.³

To keep the momentum around innovation, AI leaders, innovators, startups, researchers, scientists, and policymakers are coming together at HLTH Europe 2025 to stand up their latest AI use cases. Microsoft will showcase our commitment to advancing AI for better health by focusing on accelerating life-saving breakthroughs, transforming the healthcare experience, and enabling global health equity. These areas are central to our mission to help shape a future for every person on the planet to live healthier.

Explore Microsoft Dragon Copilot capabilities

Accelerating life-saving breakthroughs

Advancements in AI are also playing a pivotal role in accelerating life-saving breakthroughs and transforming healthcare into a more precise and efficient domain. Microsoft and the Mayo Clinic are leveraging multimodal data imaging models for chest X-rays lines and tubes to drive innovations in disease detection, and treatment while advancing the state of precision medicine. Jonathan Carlson, Vice President Managing Director at Microsoft Health Futures, and Dr. Matthew Carlson, Vice President Chair of Radiology at Mayo Clinic, will spotlight the collaboration and the ways in which unified data, intelligence, and generative AI are adding value to clinician workflows and patient care.

Transforming the healthcare experience

At the heart of every clinical consultation is a human moment. But in an era of increasing clinical demands, empathy is at risk of becoming a casualty of efficiency. Our recent global survey, featuring insights from over 13,500 patients across 10 European countries and Australia, revealed a growing disconnect in the clinician-patient interaction but more importantly, an opportunity to rebuild that connection with the help of AI.

Earlier this year, we announced Microsoft Dragon Copilot, a new groundbreaking AI solution that transforms the way clinicians work. At HLTH Europe 2025 we are bringing Dragon Copilot to life with Dr. Markus Vogel, Chief Medical Information Officer, Microsoft DACH, Dr. Simon Wallace, Chief Medical Information Officer, Microsoft United Kingdom, and Dr. Joost Juiskens, Chief Medical Information Officer, Microsoft Netherlands, who will demonstrate how Dragon Copilot combines proven technologies with advanced generative AI and healthcare-focused safeguards to revolutionize clinical workflows and enhance patient care across Europe.

Dragon Copilot represents a significant step forward in scalable, AI-powered clinical productivity and will be generally available to European markets later this year. Ambient AI, when responsibly implemented, is transforming clinical documentation, lightening administrative burdens, and making healthcare more human-centered. Healthcare leaders should feel empowered to harness AI to restore what matters most—meaningful and empathetic connections between patients and clinicians.

Enabling global health equity, responsibly

Demonstrating a steadfast commitment to bringing AI technologies to life, we are dedicated to enabling global health equity through responsible innovation. By prioritizing health literacy, fostering trust, and aligning with Microsoft’s responsible AI practices, Microsoft is tackling real-world challenges in healthcare. We are focused on inclusive and equitable solutions that help ensure advancements in AI are accessible and impactful for every community. Through ongoing efforts to promote understanding and confidence in AI-powered healthcare, we are shaping a future where transformative technology benefits patients, clinicians, and populations worldwide.

The future of healthcare starts now

At Microsoft, we’re not just imagining meaningful change—we’re making it happen. Through strategic collaborations, responsible innovation, and deep commitment to the human side of healthcare, we are realizing the mission of AI for better health for every patient, provider, and population on the planet.

Learn more about Microsoft Healthcare solutions

Microsoft Dragon Copilot

An extensible AI workspace that scales across specialties, care settings, and devices

¹ World Health Organization, Health workforce.

² World Health Organization, Billions left behind on the path to universal health coverage, September 18, 2023.

³ NHS England, AWS NHS migration case studies.

Kees Hertogh

Vice President, Healthcare and Life Sciences Marketing

Kees Hertogh leads the Global Health & Life Science Product Marketing team at Microsoft. He is responsible for Microsoft’s global marketing priorities across the health and life science verticals and Microsoft Cloud for Healthcare portfolio and go-to-market strategies.

See more articles from this author

MIL OSI Economics –

June 18, 2025

Category: Australia

Source: Fire and Emergency New Zealand

Optus admits inappropriate practices, using debt collectors

Summary of the proposed Undertaking

Examples of alleged conduct

Background

Example: remediation payment allocations

Example: dormant reserve

Example: fair and reasonable allocations disregarded

Example 1: lifetime pension in an SMSF

Example 2: market-linked pension in an SMSF

Current situation (as of 3 p.m., June 17)

Orders and alerts

Fire bans

Air quality

Roads and highways

Health

Education

Justice and Court Services

Related information

Creating tension in a soundtrack

The psychology behind our response

The public sector holds a range of debt

Are there limits to government debt?

Interest costs are surging

Recent policy decisions not helping

A compromised Federal Reserve is the next risk

What the textbooks and other countries tell us

Australia’s limited track record

The big questions nobody can answer yet

Reinvigorating Australia’s climate policy

Getting to net-zero exports

A positive agenda for change

Tracking teens’ mental health

Which teens were hardest hit?

How does this data compare to other studies?

What can we do about the gender divide in mental health?

We must design solutions with young people

Building standards-based markets

Mobilizing capital and investing in partnerships

Promoting innovation

Quick facts

Related information

Multimedia

Related news

Seeing ‘children as children’

What’s different about these reforms?

Accelerating life-saving breakthroughs

Transforming the healthcare experience

Enabling global health equity, responsibly

The future of healthcare starts now

Learn more about Microsoft Healthcare solutions

Microsoft Dragon Copilot