NewzIntel.com

Category: Banking

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Christine Lagarde: Earning influence: lessons from the history of international currencies

    Source: European Central Bank

    Speech by Christine Lagarde, President of the ECB, at an event on Europe’s role in a fragmented world organised by Jacques Delors Centre at Hertie School in Berlin, Germany

    Berlin, 26 May 2025

    Over the past 80 years, the global economy thrived on a foundation of openness and multilateralism – underpinned by US leadership. By championing a rules-based international system and anchoring the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, the United States set the stage for trade to flourish and finance to expand.

    This global order proved immensely beneficial to the European Union, whose founding liberal principles aligned seamlessly with it. But today it is fracturing.

    Multilateral cooperation is being replaced by zero-sum thinking and bilateral power plays. Openness is giving way to protectionism. There is even uncertainty about the cornerstone of the system: the dominant role of the US dollar.

    All else equal, this fracturing can pose risks for Europe. Our economy is deeply integrated into the global trading system, with exports accounting for close to one-fifth of our value added and supporting 30 million jobs.

    Any change in the international order that leads to lower world trade or fragmentation into economic blocs will be detrimental to our economy.

    But – with the right policy responses – there could also be opportunities. The changing landscape could open the door for the euro to play a greater international role.

    Today, the euro is the second global currency, accounting for around 20% of foreign exchange reserves, compared with 58% in the case of the US dollar. Increasing the international role of the euro can have positive implications for the euro area.

    It would allow EU governments and businesses to borrow at a lower cost, helping boost our internal demand at a time when external demand is becoming less certain.

    It would insulate us from exchange rate fluctuations, as more trade would be denominated in euro, protecting Europe from more volatile capital flows.

    It would protect Europe from sanctions or other coercive measures.

    In short, it would allow Europe to better control its own destiny – giving us some of what Valéry Giscard d’Estaing called the “exorbitant privilege” 60 years ago.

    So, how likely is this change to happen? History suggests that it is far from guaranteed. The euro will not gain influence by default – it will have to earn it.

    For the euro to increase its global status, history tells us that we need to build on three foundations – each of them critical for success.

    First, Europe must ensure it has a solid and credible geopolitical foundation by maintaining a steadfast commitment to open trade and underpinning it with security capabilities.

    Second, we must reinforce our economic foundation to make Europe a top destination for global capital, enabled by deeper and more liquid capital markets.

    Third, we must bolster our legal foundation by defending the rule of law – and by uniting politically so that we can resist external pressures.

    Before we explore each of these three foundational components, let us observe what recent history can teach us.

    Shifts in the global currency landscape

    Shifts in the global currency landscape are not unprecedented in monetary history. There have been previous episodes where the world’s leading reserve currency issuer has taken steps that have called that leadership into question, without ultimately jeopardising it.

    For example, the US dollar took over from the pound sterling as the world’s leading reserve currency in the mid-1920s, with its share in foreign exchange reserves rising to 64% by 1931. But this leading position did not stop the United States taking measures to unilaterally change the international monetary order.

    For instance, in 1933 President Roosevelt suspended gold convertibility to fight the deflationary forces of the Great Depression. He dismissed European demands for fixed exchange rates with the argument that “the sound internal economic system of a nation is a greater factor in its well-being than the price of its currency”.[1]

    Then again in the 1970s President Nixon ended the Bretton Woods system by unilaterally suspending dollar convertibility to gold and imposing a 10% import tariff.

    Faced with growing imbalances between US current account deficits and the surpluses of western Europe and Japan, Treasury Secretary John Connally declared that “no longer can considerations of friendship, or need, or capacity justify the United States carrying so heavy a share of the common burdens.”[2]

    On both occasions, there was a decline in the standing of the US dollar as a foreign reserve currency. In the 1930s, it fell from over 60% to around 20% of global foreign exchange reserves. In the 1970s, it fell from about 70% to 50% two decades later.

    But on neither occasion was there a robust alternative currency that could take over at short notice. In the 1930s, the pound sterling was already declining, while in the 1970s the Deutsche Mark and the Yen were backed by markets that were too small.

    So, instead, investors flocked to gold. The share of gold in foreign reserves increased by about 20 percentage points in the 1930s to 97% and almost doubled to 60% in the 1970s.[3]

    Today, there is a key difference compared with previous eras. With the euro as the world’s second-largest currency, there is another international currency alongside the dollar. But this has not yet convinced investors.

    Over recent years, the dollar’s share in global foreign exchange reserves has fallen, with its current level of 58% being the lowest since 1994. In parallel, central banks have been accumulating gold at a record pace – almost matching the levels seen during the Bretton Woods era.[4] The share of gold in global foreign reserves[5] has reached around 20%, surpassing that of the euro.[6]

    As previously mentioned, we can identify three essential foundations for international currency usage, without which a currency cannot succeed on the global stage. And in each case, we can see that Europe has many of the key ingredients for success, but we need to bring them together to reinforce the foundations. Action is in order.

    The geopolitical foundation

    The starting point is a credible geopolitical foundation – which rests on both a country’s role in global trade and the strength of its military alliances.

    A currency’s exposure to trade is especially important, as it provides the initial pathway to wider international use. In the mid-1920s, for example, the dollar overtook the pound sterling as the leading form of trade credit before it became the leading reserve currency.[7]

    Once a currency captures a larger share of trade invoicing, its role in international banking and finance, and ultimately as a reserve asset, becomes self-reinforcing. Higher demand for the currency enhances its role as a store of value and further encourages investors to hold it.[8]

    As a major actor in global trade, Europe already has a key ingredient of a strong geopolitical foundation, creating the potential for a virtuous circle of euro internationalisation to unfold.

    The EU has the largest network of trade agreements in the world. Europe is the number one trading partner for 72 countries, which together represent almost 40% of world GDP.[9] And this status is reflected in the share of the euro as an invoicing currency, which stands at around 40%, more than double its share as a reserve currency.

    Europe can press home this advantage by continuing to forge new trade agreements. And we should make clear that we support a win-win approach to trade, ensuring that we are the most attractive partner to make deals with.

    The ECB can also help make the euro more attractive for euro-denominated trade. We are working on a potential digital euro and pursuing initiatives to enhance cross-border payments in euro, which could potentially facilitate international cross-border transactions in the future.

    And by extending swap and repo lines to key partners, we safeguard against euro liquidity shortages abroad disrupting the smooth transmission of our monetary policy – which in turn encourages those partners to transact more in euro.

    But there is a limit to how much a currency can grow simply by virtue of being open to trade. In fact, the euro’s share of global export invoicing is already as large as that of the US dollar, but we are not closing the gap in reserve currency status.

    This is because investors – and especially official investors – also seek geopolitical assurance in another form: they invest in the assets of regions that are reliable security partners and can honour alliances with hard power. So a credible geopolitical foundation must also rest on robust military partnerships.

    This dual strength is essentially what we can learn from the US dollar’s dominance. It is not just a product of economic fundamentals but it is also powerfully reinforced by US security guarantees. These guarantees not only deepen trade ties[10], but have been shown to boost a currency’s share in foreign reserves by up to 30 percentage points.[11]

    We are now seeing a major shift in Europe towards rebuilding our hard power, with important initiatives underway at the national and EU levels. And we should be clear that following through with this effort is a precondition for the euro to become more widely used.

    The economic foundation

    Trade and military power are important for establishing demand for an international currency. But to satisfy this demand, investors need appropriate assets to invest in.

    This is why a strong economic foundation – one that provides opportunities for growth and opportunities to invest in growth – is equally essential.

    There is a virtuous circle between growth, capital markets and international currency usage. Growth generates robust rates of return, which make investors want to hold assets in a particular currency. And capital markets provide investment opportunities and channel funds back into growth.

    At the same time, if capital markets provide a sufficient supply of “safe assets”, investors can hedge their exposures efficiently. When a shock hits and riskier investments lose value, safer assets rise in value. That provides a complete ecosystem for investments in the currency.

    The US dollar’s rise to dominance in the interwar period was certainly driven by this virtuous circle. The development of US capital markets boosted growth – with each 1 percentage point increase in market capitalisation yielding 0.5 percentage points more growth[12] – while simultaneously establishing the foundation for dollar dominance. The depth and liquidity of the US Treasury market in turn provided an efficient hedge for investors.

    Europe has all the elements it needs to produce a similar cycle. But so far, we have not been able to put all the pieces together.

    Despite our large single market, we have fallen behind the US in terms of growth performance and market returns. Since 2000, US labour productivity per hour has grown twice as much as in the euro area, mainly driven by the tech sector, and US markets have delivered returns that are around five times as high as those of European markets.[13]

    Despite our large savings, we have made little progress in integrating our capital markets to channel more of our funds into growth. 60% of household equity investment goes into home country markets even though there may be greater opportunities abroad.

    And despite our strong aggregate fiscal position – our debt-to-GDP ratio is 89%, compared with 124% in the United States – we provide relatively few safe assets. Recent estimates suggest that outstanding sovereign bonds rated at least AA are just below 50% of GDP in the EU and above 100% in the US.[14]

    The conclusion for Europe is clear: if we truly want to see the global status of the euro grow, we must first reform our domestic economy.

    That means moving forwards with the priorities identified in recent reports: completing the Single Market, enabling start-ups, reducing regulation and building the savings and investment union. And it means avoiding a piecemeal approach, where we make progress where it is easy and dither where it is hard, else we will never kick-start the positive cycle.

    Moreover, in this new geopolitical landscape, the case for acting in a European way has never been stronger.

    Each individual country of course needs to make sure that its national policies support growth. But we also need to be mindful of self-defeating fragmentation. For example, we all agree that Europe needs to build up its strategic industries to avoid excessive dependencies – as Mario Draghi and Enrico Letta emphasised in their recent reports. But we will not succeed if we have 27 different policies for these industries.

    Nowadays there are also more policy goals that qualify as European public goods, notably strengthening European defence. But due to the free-rider problem, defence is a good that is likely to be undersupplied. Moreover, joining forces to procure equipment and develop new technologies – leading to economies of scale and more interoperability – will result in greater operational effectiveness than if all 27 Member States go it alone.

    Economic logic tells us that public goods need to be jointly financed. And this joint financing could provide the basis for Europe to gradually increase its supply of safe assets.

    The legal foundation

    Geopolitical strength and faster growth can go a long way towards strengthening the euro’s international role. But maintaining demand for the currency will also depend on our ability to uphold a robust legal and institutional foundation.

    Ultimately, currencies achieve and maintain their reserve status if the institutions and policies backing them consistently safeguard investor confidence in their long-term value.[15]

    For example, historically, the US dollar’s pre-eminence has rested on the strength and stability of US fiscal and monetary institutions. The Federal Reserve System’s credible commitment to controlling inflation, combined with the unparalleled liquidity of the US Treasury market, created a perception of minimal sovereign risk. This made the dollar a safe haven during global economic turbulence and recessions.[16]

    Since 1970, there have been 34 instances of simultaneous sovereign debt and financial crises globally, but the US has remained immune to such “twin crises”.[17]

    However, when doubts emerge about the stability of the legal and institutional framework, the impact on currency use is undeniable.

    These doubts have materialised in the form of highly unusual cross-asset correlations since 2 April this year, with the US dollar and US Treasuries experiencing sell-offs even as equities fell. The same doubts are also cited by investors who are turning to gold: two-fifths say they are doing so as a hedge against rising geopolitical risk.[18]

    Given this context, the EU has a legitimate reason to turn its commitment to predictable policymaking and the rule of law into a comparative advantage.

    This commitment is baked into how the EU works. The positive side of our often slow and complicated decision-making processes is that checks and balances are always respected. We have also enshrined into law the independence of our key institutions, like the ECB, in ways that are hard for politicians to threaten.

    But relying on the fact that our bureaucratic systems are hard to change is not enough. In the current geopolitical environment, we are facing increasing external pressures to take actions that jeopardise the rule of law. And we will only be able to resist these pressures if we are more politically united and able to speak with a single voice.

    As we potentially enter a renewed era of great power rivalry, with countries being asked to take sides, we are likely to find ourselves under pressure to make decisions that are not necessarily in our own interest.

    But if we take this opportunity to unite and, preferably, to reform our institutional structure by enabling more qualified majority voting in areas where a single veto has often held back the collective interests of the 26 other countries, that would enable us to act decisively as a united Europe. We would then be in a much stronger position to defend and uphold our values and, as a result, to defend and uphold global confidence in our currency.

    Conclusion

    Let me conclude.

    In the history of the international monetary system, there are moments when the foundations that once seemed unshakeable begin to shift.

    The Belgian-American economist Robert Triffin described this with great clarity. He observed that nations’ confidence in the international monetary system depends on the reliability of the reserve currency, which, in his words, is “highly dependent on individual countries’ decisions”.

    But moments of change can also be moments of opportunity. The ongoing changes create the opening for a “global euro moment”.

    This is a prime opportunity for Europe to take greater control of its own destiny. But this is not a privilege that will simply be given to us. We have to earn it.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Adriana D Kugler: Assessing maximum employment

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Thank you, Francine, and thank you to the Central Bank of Iceland for the invitation to speak to you today.

    My subject is the Federal Reserve’s mandate of maximum employment. In the Fed’s monetary policymaking, maximum employment and stable prices are linked in the mandate assigned to the Federal Reserve by U.S. law, which we refer to as the dual mandate. Icelanders, I know, are a seafaring people, and those here will understand what I mean when I say that the dual mandate is our “lodestar,” a word our two languages share. It is our goal and our guide in setting monetary policy.

    There is an important distinction between our dual-mandate goals. For reasons that I will explain, while the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) has defined “stable prices” as 2 percent annual inflation, such numerical precision is not possible in defining maximum employment.

    To achieve price stability, the Fed adopted a numerical target for inflation in 2012 that hasn’t changed. It has remained unchanged because the Committee has repeatedly reaffirmed the judgment that it made in 2012 that 2 percent inflation is the rate most consistent with its statutory mandate. In contrast, the Federal Reserve has not spelled out a numerical goal for the unemployment rate or some other measure of employment because maximum employment can move up and down over time and is not directly measurable, and also because the different factors that determine it are either difficult or impossible to measure in real time.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Klaas Knot: A true treasure – why we need diversity and inclusion in the financial industry

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Welcome dear colleagues! Welcome to the conference and welcome to our renovated building.

    After several years of construction, De Nederlandsche Bank returned a few months ago to this updated version of our historic home. It is not only energy-efficient and sustainable, but also – quite unusual for a central bank – partially open to the public: on the ground floor, visitors can walk in to have a coffee, work, study, or simply look around.

    Look at our extensive art collection – as you can do later today – or visit the vault where we used to store our gold bars and our money. Now we call it the New Treasury and use it as an exhibition space where visitors can learn more about our role and responsibilities and explore our collection of historic banknotes, with a lot of European pre-euro examples. I hope you take the opportunity to visit the exhibition. 

    Of course I am convinced that the introduction of the euro was a positive change – I am the president of the Dutch Central Bank, after all – but despite everything we gained in this monetary union, we also lost something.

    In our banknotes we lost colour, individuality, diversity. Because the pre-euro banknotes all tell their own story. Of national identity, cultural heritage, time and place. They differ in colour, imagery, size; even in the feel of the paper.

    The Italian lira, with historic painters and sculptors: ornate and expressive.
    The German mark, with scientists and writers: inventive and efficient.
    The Dutch guilder, with colourful birds and sunflowers: bold and modernist.

    To name only a few.

    These banknotes remind us that diversity is not disorder.

    It is depth.
    It is opportunity.
    It is strength.

    The banknotes remind us that it is never one person, one idea that makes us strong.

    Our strength as nations, as the European Community, as financial institutions, is always the product of a flock of ideas, a blend of people, a collection of perspectives. 

    At De Nederlandsche Bank, our vision is ‘connected and diverse’. We believe that to safeguard financial stability and promote sustainable prosperity, we must reflect the society we serve – one that is increasingly complex, international, and indeed, diverse. That is why we aim for a workforce that mirrors the richness of our society.

    Diversity for us is sometimes broad and visible: diversity in gender, age and cultural heritage. But it can also be less visible: diversity in physical and mental ability, sexual orientation, faith, background, education. We don’t pursue diversity for appearances sake. We pursue it because it sharpens our thinking, deepens our dialogue, and improves our decision-making. Complex challenges – like climate risk, digital transformation, and geopolitical uncertainty – demand diverse perspectives. 

    That is not an abstract mission, but a commitment to tangible goals. We are aiming for full gender balance in our workforce and leadership by 2028.

    We are not there yet, we hope to hit our target if we can continue improving by 2% per year. Currently, women make up 43% of DNB’s management, and we are still working on this. We are using the updated definitions from the Dutch Statistical Office to improve cultural representation, with the aim of having 26% of our employees and managers come from a migrant background.

    We have achieved this on the work floor, but not yet in management, where the figure is currently just over 13%; so this is also a work in progress.

    We are making all this happen by translating our ambition for diversity and inclusion into our policies and daily work processes.

    And by keeping track of our progress. We believe – obviously – that data drives progress. What gets measured, gets managed.

    So we have established a Diversity Board to guide and accelerate our progress, and we measure our progress with a Diversity Dashboard. Recently, we published our Out & Proud Statement, in which we explicitly express our support for LGTBIQ+ inclusion and speak out against intolerance. Because there is a world to be gained, and in some cases, regained when it comes to LGTBIQ+ inclusion.

    I am saddened to see that LGTBIQ+ inclusion has declined in recent years in European countries and across the world. Statistics show decreasing support for LGTBIQ+ inclusion – also among younger people.

    We are seeing more frequent physical, verbal and online violence, and politicians are rolling back previously attained rights for LGBTIQ+ couples.This declining support and safety affects LGTBIQ+ people throughout society, including those working at central banks and other financial institutions.

    For our employees to reach their full potential, for them to make the best contribution to our work and mission and – not least – for us to fulfil our potential as an employer, our employees must feel safe, must be able to express themselves. That’s why we have to work together to become – and stay – diverse and inclusive organisations. And that requires the involvement of all of us.

    At DNB, we encourage this by empowering our internal networks, like Young DNB, DNB Pride, DNB International, Blended and Female Capital, but we also try hard to involve every employee outside those networks. Because only by involving everyone can we ensure that every colleague – regardless of who they are – feels seen, heard and valued.

    This is my call to action to you today:

    let’s talk, let’s exchange experiences, let’s exchange ideas to make this happen. For instance by ensuring that – where that is not already happening – we create space for internal networks, for LGBTIQ+ employee resource groups. And, even better, let’s create an international network for these groups, so they can strengthen each other, and by doing so, strengthen our organisations.

    Do you know what this is?

    After the introduction of the euro, we shredded all those beautiful old banknotes. We packed the shreds in small bags, which we handed out as souvenirs to visitors of DNB. One of our doormen used to say, with a big wink and a smile: “It’s a jigsaw puzzle.”

    But of course there is a lesson here: creating a diverse and inclusive workplace is a human-made jigsaw puzzle that we can only put together through human-made solutions.

    We have to look for and connect the diversity of our people. We have to ensure that human uniqueness is not just tolerated, but treasured in our financial institutions.

    Because only then can we truly claim to be resilient. Only then can we speak credibly in the public debate. Only then we can see the full picture: a financial sector that not only serves society – but represents it. 

    And our banknotes?

    There is good news on that front: the European Central Bank is preparing to introduce a new generation of euro banknotes. The ECB is consciously seeking to reflect more of the identities, histories and cultures of the people who use them.

    So once more – I hope – the designs will be colourful, representative and diverse. Because diversity does not weaken unity, it strengthens it. Not only in the European Union, not only in the financial sector, but for all of us.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Sabine Mauderer: Price stability and climate change

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    Check against delivery 

    1 Introduction 

    Ladies and gentlemen. 

    I am delighted to have the opportunity to open this conference today.

    I am sure, we all agree: climate change alters the environment in which central banks operate. 

    According to the NGFS long-term scenarios, unmitigated climate change leads to losses in global GDP of almost 15 % by 2050 – relative to a scenario without climate change. This is a conservative estimate, as it does not yet account for key risks, such as sea level rise and climate tipping points.

    Given the context of this conference, there is no need to give you any further examples about the relevance of climate change. Instead, allow me to briefly recap why and how we as central bankers need to deal with climate change: In doing so, I will focus on some of the most important aspects. 

    2 Physical impacts and climate policies

    Let me turn to the two dimensions of what we call “climate change” for short: the impacts of climate change itself, and the effects of our attempts to mitigate it. 

    Central banks monitor both dimensions because of their relevance for output and prices. This is why I highly appreciate that the impacts of physical risk and transition risk on inflation are at the core of today’s conference. 

    Let’s start with physical risks. 

    In addition to the consequences of gradual shifts in temperature patterns or sea level rise, acute physical risks such as hurricanes, droughts or floods can damage the economy, with impacts lasting beyond the short-term. As the timing, location and magnitude of such shocks are largely unpredictable, central banks are on high alert. 

    In theory, the direction of price developments depends on the balance between supply and demand. Severe weather events could affect either side. Supply-side disruptions tend to cause higher prices whereas a reduction in demand tends to entail lower prices. 

    Without pre-empting the work presented at this conference: As outlined in a recent technical paper by the NGFS1, the emerging empirical work on the linkage between weather shocks and inflation suggests that the upward pressure from the supply side dominates, for instance, for agricultural production.

    One key finding is that food prices tend to rise in the aftermath of a weather shock – associated with negative supply impacts – with some spillovers into overall inflation.2 Moreover, the specific nature of the shock matters, with nonlinear inflationary effects being documented in the case of heatwaves.

    The type of damages can differ as well: while heatwaves tend to impact labour and agricultural productivity, leaving the capital stock unaffected, severe storms tend to impair infrastructure, housing, and the capital stock of an economy.3

    There is also the second dimension – transition risk. Many jurisdictions have committed to decarbonise their economies. This goes hand in hand with substantial structural changes that can also pose risks for price stability. 

    But the picture emerging here is more mixed: the impact of a green transition on inflation depends on its drivers and how it unfolds in the economy. 

    Moreover, short and long-run effects can differ.

    What are these drivers? Let me briefly elaborate. 

    Depending on the policy mix, the pace of technological progress, changes in preferences and the role of international trade relations4 – to mention just a few main aspects – the transition will affect the supply and demand side of the economy in multiple ways. 

    Hence there is no straightforward answer to the question whether inflationary or disinflationary effects will dominate. A higher carbon price, for example, makes carbon intensive products and businesses more expensive. As a result, consumer price inflation may rise in the short-term. 

    Over the medium to long run, however, higher costs of brown products will make it more attractive to shift to greener production processes – and invest in innovative green technologies. 

    Green innovations, efficiency gains and maturing technologies, together with an increasing usage of clean energy, can drive energy costs and prices down over time.5 Therefore, inflationary pressures are likely to remain contained in the medium to long run, especially in the event of an orderly transition with predictable carbon prices.

    Along the way, central banks will have to make sure that inflation expectations remain well-anchored, as maintaining price stability is their core mandate.

    Accelerating the green transition is up to our governments, but price stability and a sound financial system are important facilitators of this process.

    3 Conclusion

    Ladies and gentlemen. 

    Our economies are facing multidimensional, unprecedented structural changes. The green transition is just one aspect. 

    At the current juncture, the approaching threats of climate change are overshadowed by other topics. We are all witnessing the shift in attention to artificial intelligence, tariffs and trade wars, and the rising geopolitical uncertainties.

    The many unknowns associated to these topics make strategic long-term decisions particularly challenging for policymakers, firms and households alike. 

    Yet, climate change is and remains an urgent issue that involves answering complicated questions. The physical principles of climate change have not changed. Climate change will not simply disappear if we try to ignore it.

    But we will get closer to a solution every day – if we tackle these questions courageously and analytically. 

    Events like this conference are important to keep the attention on the problem and to improve our understanding of climate risks.

    In this spirit, I wish you a successful and productive discussion.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Executive Board Concludes 2025 Article IV Consultation with New Zealand

    Source: IMF – News in Russian

    May 26, 2025

    Washington, DC – May 26, 2025: The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Article IV consultation [1] with New Zealand on May 19, 2025.

    Tight monetary policy has helped bring inflation back to target, but at the expense of growth. Real GDP contracted by 0.5 percent y/y in 2024, as investment fell by 4.1 percent y/y, household consumption stagnated. The slowdown has been particularly pronounced in interest-rate-sensitive sectors including retail trade, construction, and manufacturing. The financial sector remains resilient despite rising non-performing loans. A recovery in external demand and improved terms of trade have helped narrow the current account deficit to 6.2 percent of GDP, though it remains above long-term trends. Despite a challenging economic backdrop, the government delivered modest fiscal consolidation in FY2023/24, with the primary deficit narrowing to 2.4 percent of GDP. Tight monetary policy helped bring inflation within the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (RBNZ)’s 1–3 percent target band in 2024Q3, after 13 consecutive quarters, with headline inflation reaching 2.5 percent y/y in 2025Q1. The RBNZ has thus eased the Official Cash Rate (OCR) several times since August 2024, bringing it closer to the neutral rate.

    The return of inflation to target is enabling monetary policy easing and a return to growth. Inflation is forecast to remain within the target band, allowing monetary policy to gradually move to a neutral stance. Real GDP is projected to expand by 1.4 percent y/y in 2025, with monetary policy easing providing a boost to consumption and investment. Growth is expected to accelerate to 2.7 percent y/y in 2026, as the lagged impact of lower interest rates is fully realized. Fiscal policy is expected to continue to balance needed medium-term consolidation with growth considerations. The government’s broad-based structural reform agenda is aimed at boosting medium-term productivity growth, including via reforms to attract foreign investment, enhance competition, reduce regulatory burdens, accelerate housing supply growth, and progress toward closing of the infrastructure gap.

    Risks to the outlook are tilted to the downside. Downside risks stem from a softer-than-expected recovery due to elevated global uncertainty and a weak labor market or the occurrence of a natural disaster. Upside risks include a stronger rebound in growth due to faster-than-expected monetary policy transmission. As a small open economy, New Zealand is vulnerable to trade disruptions, geoeconomic fragmentation, or a global economic slowdown.


    Executive Board Assessment[2]

    Executive Directors agreed with the thrust of the staff appraisal. They welcomed that the economy is showing signs of a nascent recovery and that inflation has returned to the Reserve Bank of New Zealand’s target, after a prolonged period of significant price pressures. Noting the country’s exposure to trade and investment shocks, Directors underscored the importance of maintaining prudent policies to safeguard macroeconomic stability and implementing ambitious structural reforms to address medium‑ and long‑term economic challenges.

    Directors commended the role of monetary policy in helping bring inflation back to target. They agreed that the current monetary policy easing is appropriate and should continue until reaching a neutral level, while remaining data‑dependent and responsive to economic conditions. Directors welcomed the expanded macroprudential toolbox and concurred that macroprudential tools should continue to be used to address financial risks that may emerge as policy rates are reduced.

    Directors agreed that fiscal policy should focus on growth‑friendly, medium‑term consolidation, while supporting the most vulnerable. They called for comprehensive revenue reforms that enhance efficiency and incentivize long‑term investment. Directors also encouraged the authorities to pursue expenditure reforms, including to the pension system, that are grounded in a cost‑benefit analysis.

    Directors agreed that financial stability risks are contained and recommended that household and financial balance sheets continue to be monitored closely. They welcomed progress in key reforms, notably the Depositor Compensation Scheme and the Deposit Takers Act. Directors noted the authorities’ efforts to increase banking competition and emphasized that prudential settings should remain adequately calibrated to guard against financial stability risks. Given housing shortages, they called for improving affordability and expanding housing supply and welcomed the reform efforts around resource management in these areas.

    Directors commended ongoing structural reforms to overcome slow productivity growth and boost long‑term growth. They welcomed the authorities’ plans to boost competition and innovation, reduce barriers to overseas financing, and deepen capital markets. Investing in infrastructure and enhancing resilience to natural disasters will also be needed.

    It is expected that the next Article IV Consultation with New Zealand will be held on the standard 12‑month cycle.



    [1] Under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. A staff team visits the country, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the country’s economic developments and policies. On return to headquarters, the staff prepares a report, which forms the basis for discussion by the Executive Board.

    [2] At the conclusion of the discussion, the Managing Director, as Chair of the Board, summarizes the views of Executive Directors, and this summary is transmitted to the country’s authorities. An explanation of any qualifiers used in summings up can be found here: http://www.IMF.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm .

    Table 1. New Zealand: Main Economic Indicators, 2021-30

    (Annual percent change, unless otherwise indicated)

    2021

    2022

    2023

    2024

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    Est.

    Projections

    NATIONAL ACCOUNTS

    Real GDP (production)

    5.7

    2.9

    1.8

    -0.5

    1.4

    2.7

    2.7

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    Domestic demand

    10.0

    4.5

    -0.8

    -0.8

    1.8

    2.6

    2.4

    2.1

    2.1

    2.0

    Private consumption

    7.9

    4.1

    1.0

    0.2

    1.0

    3.1

    3.0

    2.4

    2.4

    2.3

    Public consumption

    7.9

    5.2

    0.8

    0.0

    0.5

    0.5

    0.5

    0.7

    0.8

    0.8

    Investment

    17.2

    4.1

    -5.4

    -4.1

    2.4

    3.2

    2.7

    2.3

    2.1

    2.1

    Public

    6.2

    3.6

    10.2

    0.5

    0.3

    2.3

    2.5

    2.8

    2.8

    2.8

    Private

    12.6

    4.3

    -3.2

    -6.5

    1.9

    3.5

    2.7

    2.1

    1.7

    1.8

    Private business

    14.5

    7.3

    -2.2

    -5.0

    2.6

    3.5

    2.8

    2.1

    1.6

    1.6

    Dwelling

    8.6

    -2.3

    -5.6

    -10.1

    0.0

    3.6

    2.3

    2.4

    2.1

    2.4

    Inventories (contribution to growth, percent)

    1.4

    0.0

    -1.4

    0.2

    0.2

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    Net exports (contribution to growth, percent)

    -4.8

    -1.6

    2.6

    0.3

    0.3

    -0.1

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    Real gross domestic income

    5.0

    2.3

    1.1

    0.3

    2.9

    3.1

    2.8

    2.4

    2.3

    2.3

    Investment (percent of GDP)

    25.0

    26.3

    24.2

    23.1

    23.4

    23.4

    23.3

    23.2

    23.1

    23.1

    Public

    5.7

    5.9

    6.5

    6.4

    6.3

    6.2

    6.2

    6.2

    6.2

    6.2

    Private

    19.4

    20.4

    17.8

    16.7

    17.1

    17.2

    17.1

    17.0

    16.9

    16.8

    Savings (gross, percent of GDP)

    19.0

    17.1

    17.3

    16.9

    18.3

    18.8

    19.0

    19.2

    19.4

    19.6

    Public

    -3.5

    -4.2

    -3.5

    -4.4

    -5.1

    -3.9

    -2.5

    -1.4

    -0.4

    0.0

    Private

    22.5

    21.3

    20.9

    21.3

    23.4

    22.7

    21.5

    20.6

    19.9

    19.6

    Potential output

    1.5

    1.9

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    Output gap (percent of potential)

    1.8

    2.7

    2.4

    -0.3

    -1.1

    -0.6

    -0.1

    0.0

    0.0

    0.0

    LABOR MARKET

    Employment

    2.2

    1.7

    3.3

    -0.1

    0.7

    1.5

    2.0

    1.7

    1.3

    1.5

    Unemployment (percent of labor force, ann. average)

    3.8

    3.3

    3.7

    4.7

    5.3

    5.2

    4.7

    4.3

    4.5

    4.4

    Wages (nominal percent change)

    3.8

    6.5

    7.0

    4.6

    4.3

    3.9

    3.3

    3.3

    3.0

    3.0

    PRICES

    Terms of trade index (goods and services, % change)

    -1.0

    -3.1

    -3.4

    2.9

    1.9

    1.3

    0.5

    0.4

    0.2

    0.1

    Consumer prices (avg, % change)

    3.9

    7.2

    5.7

    2.9

    2.4

    2.3

    2.2

    2.0

    2.0

    2.0

    GDP deflator (avg, % change)

    3.0

    5.8

    5.1

    3.6

    3.2

    2.8

    2.2

    2.2

    2.2

    2.1

    MACRO-FINANCIAL

    Official cash rate (policy rate, percent, avg)

    0.3

    2.2

    5.2

    4.7

    3.6

    3.3

    3.3

    3.3

    3.3

    3.3

    Credit to the private sector (percent change)

    6.1

    4.3

    0.1

    1.6

    3.2

    5.6

    4.5

    4.0

    3.9

    4.0

    Interest payments (percent of disposable income)

    5.3

    6.3

    8.5

    8.1

    7.3

    7.2

    7.0

    6.9

    6.9

    6.9

    Household savings (percent of disposable income)

    3.6

    3.3

    2.7

    2.5

    2.4

    2.3

    2.9

    3.6

    4.4

    5.1

    Household debt (percent of disposable income)

    174

    173

    168

    166

    160

    160

    159

    158

    157

    157

    GENERAL GOVERNMENT (percent of GDP) 1/

    Revenue

    37.6

    38.8

    37.0

    38.7

    37.6

    37.5

    37.5

    37.7

    37.9

    38.0

    Expenditure

    40.0

    43.3

    40.9

    41.9

    43.1

    42.3

    40.5

    39.7

    38.8

    38.0

    Net lending/borrowing

    -2.5

    -4.4

    -3.9

    -3.2

    -5.5

    -4.8

    -3.1

    -2.0

    -0.9

    0.0

    Operating balance

    -0.3

    -2.2

    -1.7

    -0.7

    -3.0

    -2.5

    -0.8

    0.1

    1.1

    1.9

    Cyclically adjusted primary balance 2/

    -2.8

    -4.2

    -3.7

    -3.4

    -3.6

    -2.9

    -1.4

    -0.2

    1.1

    2.0

    Gross debt

    46.0

    48.6

    45.8

    48.4

    53.2

    56.4

    59.0

    58.8

    57.5

    55.1

    Net debt

    10.6

    17.0

    19.0

    19.8

    23.5

    26.4

    28.0

    28.6

    28.0

    26.4

    Net worth

    94.6

    102.0

    96.3

    94.4

    87.1

    81.3

    77.3

    74.8

    73.5

    73.0

    BALANCE OF PAYMENTS

    Current account (percent of GDP)

    -6.0

    -9.2

    -6.9

    -6.2

    -5.1

    -4.6

    -4.3

    -3.9

    -3.7

    -3.5

    Export volume

    -2.3

    -0.5

    11.0

    4.1

    3.9

    3.9

    4.1

    4.0

    4.2

    4.2

    Import volume

    14.5

    4.7

    -0.4

    2.4

    2.0

    3.5

    3.2

    3.3

    3.4

    3.4

    Net international investment position (percent of GDP)

    -47.9

    -52.5

    -51.3

    -49.4

    -52.1

    -54.0

    -55.8

    -57.3

    -58.6

    -59.6

    Gross official reserves (bn US$)

    16.4

    13.7

    14.8

    23.2

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    MEMORANDUM ITEMS

    Nominal GDP (bn NZ$)

    353

    385

    413

    427

    448

    472

    496

    518

    540

    564

    Percent change

    9.0

    9.2

    7.1

    3.4

    4.9

    5.5

    4.9

    4.4

    4.4

    4.3

    Nominal GDP per capita (US$)

    48,845

    47,819

    48,360

    48,448

    47,158

    49,022

    50,472

    51,643

    53,044

    54,378

    Real gross national disposable income per capita (NZ$)

    54,586

    55,293

    54,662

    53,632

    54,724

    55,635

    56,458

    57,044

    57,611

    58,081

    Percent change

    3.7

    1.3

    -1.1

    -1.9

    2.0

    1.7

    1.5

    1.0

    1.0

    0.8

    Population (million)

    5.1

    5.1

    5.2

    5.3

    5.4

    5.5

    5.5

    5.6

    5.7

    5.8

    US$/NZ$ (average level)

    0.708

    0.636

    0.614

    0.605

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    Nominal effective exchange rate

    109.9

    106.5

    105.0

    104.9

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    Real effective exchange rate

    107.6

    105.5

    105.7

    106.1

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    …

    Sources: Authorities’ data and IMF staff estimates and projections.

    1/ Fiscal year.

    2/ In percent of potential GDP.
    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Pemba Sherpa

    Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

    https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/05/23/pr25159-imf-executive-board-concludes-2025-article-iv-consultation-with-new-zealand

    MIL OSI

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Banking: Tariffs to push healthcare facilities to stock up medical devices, says GlobalData

    Source: GlobalData

    Tariffs to push healthcare facilities to stock up medical devices, says GlobalData

    Posted in Medical Devices

    With the surge in tariffs imposed by and on the US, the medical device industry is likely to be impacted in several areas. Cost, supply chain, and market competitiveness will be altered if companies cannot afford to offset tariff costs. In response to medical device companies, healthcare facilities may stock up on medical devices to prepare for increased pricing if they have the budget, says GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

    According to GlobalData’s US Healthcare Facility Invoicing Database, across 56 tracked medical device markets, the top 20 facilities by March 2025 have spent an average of 6.7% more in April. This increase doesn’t appear to be attributed to specific markets – across most covered markets, some facilities increased their spend in April, while others decreased spend.

    Amy Paterson, Medical Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “Necessary procedures such as aspiration thrombectomy will need to continue being done, whereas elective procedures such as hip reconstruction can be delayed. If prices of devices are driven up by tariffs, hospitals will either face shrinking profits margins or increase the cost to patients, and patients might not be able to afford the increased procedure costs.”

    Paterson continues: “The top facilities have already spent more on hip reconstruction devices, with an 18% jump in the average amount spent by facilities from this March to April, compared to a -3% decline last March to April. Similarly, the top facilities are spending more on knee reconstruction devices. From March to April this year, we have seen a 9% increase in the average spend, compared to a 13% dip from March to April last year.”

    Looking at aspiration thrombectomy, from March to April 2024, there was a decline of 30% in purchasing. Consistently, the March to April period this year also saw a decline of 30%. This suggests that the top facilities have not been stocking up on aspiration thrombectomy devices despite tariffs.

    Paterson concludes: “GlobalData expects a continued steady purchasing of devices for necessary procedures, while purchases of devices for elective procedures like hip and knee reconstruction may slow if facilities have already purchased supply in advance. If tariffs continue, manufacturing sites could move into the US to avoid tariffs for both consumers and manufacturers.”

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

  • MIL-OSI Banking: Digital wallet market in Australia to surpass $130 billion in 2025 amid cashless shift, forecasts GlobalData

    Source: GlobalData

    Digital wallet market in Australia to surpass $130 billion in 2025 amid cashless shift, forecasts GlobalData

    Posted in Banking

    Digital wallet adoption is accelerating rapidly in Australia, with transaction values projected to grow by 20.8% in 2025 to reach AUD201.3 billion ($132.9 billion). This surge is fueled by the shift towards cashless payments, rising smartphone usage, and broader acceptance of NFC and QR-based solutions—highlighting the growing role of digital wallets in Australia’s evolving financial ecosystem, forecasts GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

    An analysis of GlobalData’s Payment Instrument Analytics reveals that the digital wallet payment value in Australia registered a growth of 32.2% from AUD126 billion ($83.2 billion) in 2023 to reach AUD166.6 billion ($110 billion) in 2024.

    Shivani Gupta, Lead Banking and Payments Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “Like many markets in Asia-Pacific, digital wallet adoption is on the rise in Australia, supported by rising consumer preference for mobile payments, and proliferation of digital wallet brands such as Google Pay, Apple Pay, and Samsung Pay.

    “Furthermore, increasing usage of QR code-based payment solutions in addition to NFC payments is also expected to support this growth. Although Australia lags its peers such as China and India in terms of digital wallet payments market size, it is still ahead of some of the other developed countries, including Singapore and Hong Kong in the region.”

    According to the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA), digital wallets are gaining traction, with 39% of debit card and 33% of credit card transactions conducted using digital wallets as of October 2024. In addition, almost 46% of debit cards and 40% of credit and charge cards were enrolled in digital wallets during the same period.

    With the use of digital wallets increasing rapidly in the country, RBA is in the process of amending its Payment Systems Regulation Act 1998 to encompass digital payment services such as Apple Pay and Google Pay and provide the necessary customer protections.

    The availability of international brands such as Apple Pay and Google Pay in Australia has raised consumer awareness of mobile payment technologies and encouraged their uptake.

    According to GlobalData’s 2024 Financial Services Consumer Survey* Apple Pay is the most preferred mobile payment brand followed by Google Pay, PayPal and Samsung Pay.

    To further promote the use of digital wallets in the country and enhance the cost-effectiveness of digital wallet acceptance for merchants, Google Wallet began supporting dual network debit cards in March 2025. The cards allow payments to be processed via either Australia’s domestic debit network “eftpos” or international networks, enabling merchants to save on transaction fees. This feature will empower consumers to select between different networks such as eftpos, Visa, and Mastercard, providing them and merchants with more options and control over their payments.

    In addition to NFC-based mobile brands such as Apple Pay and Google Pay, QR code-based payments are also expected to gain prominence in Australia, the adoption of which is high in its many Asian counterparts such as India and China. To drive this, in May 2022, eftpos  launched a QR code payment system “eQR.” This solution enables consumers to complete transactions by scanning QR codes at participating merchant stores using the eftpos-owned Beem wallet. Even international player like PayPal enables QR code payments in Australia.

    Gupta concludes: “With the widespread adoption of smartphones in everyday life, and the increasing consumer acceptance of mobile payments, GlobalData forecasts continued growth in this space. Subsequently, digital wallet transaction value is expected to register a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.7% between 2025 to 2029 to reach AUD336.1 billion ($221.9 billion) in 2029.”

    *GlobalData’s 2024 Financial Services Consumer Survey was carried out in Q2 2024. Approximately 67,292 respondents aged 18+ were surveyed across 41 countries.

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

  • MIL-OSI Banking: KDCA and SK bioscience forge ahead to shield South Korea against future pandemic influenza threats, says GlobalData

    Source: GlobalData

    KDCA and SK bioscience forge ahead to shield South Korea against future pandemic influenza threats, says GlobalData

    Posted in Pharma

    South Korea has launched the Priority Infectious Disease Pandemic Preparedness Rapid R&D Support Program, led by the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) in collaboration with SK bioscience. This proactive initiative is expected to significantly strengthen and prepare the nation against emerging influenza threats, says GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

    This government-led initiative focuses on developing vaccines against avian influenza that are identified as high-risk candidates for future pandemics. SK bioscience has demonstrated technological capabilities by manufacturing vaccines for global partners and successfully launching its own COVID-19 vaccine.

    SK bioscience’s portfolio includes the WHO-prequalified SkyCellflu Quadrivalent and Skycellflu, both domestically developed cell-cultured influenza vaccines, and SKYCovione, South Korea’s first homegrown COVID-19 vaccine. It is the only domestic company to have commercialized cell-culture-based vaccines for both influenza and COVID-19 with significant strengths in vaccine development.

    Chilamula Srija, Pharma Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “The experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic underscored the risk of dependence on international supply chains for essential medical resources. By investing in domestic R&D, South Korea aims for greater autonomy and to ensure timely access to life-saving vaccines for its citizens in future emergencies.”

    According to GlobalData’s Pharmaceutical Intelligence Center, SK bioscience is expected to initiate a Phase I/II study for an avian influenza vaccine in H2 2026. Ilyang Pharmaceutical Co Ltd is another domestic company in Phase III trials targeting Influenza A Virus, H1N1, and H3N2 subtypes.

    KDCA and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) collaborated in May 2024 to accelerate vaccine development and other biological countermeasures against public health threats. This partnership underscores the commitment to global health security and the rapid response to a broad spectrum of high priority infectious diseases, including Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), Ebola, mpox.

    SK bioscience has previously collaborated with KDCA, notably winning the most bids in the government’s 2023-24 national flu vaccination program. Other companies such as GC Pharma, Ilyang Pharmaceutical, Boryung Corp., and Korea Vaccine also contributed millions of doses to support national immunization efforts.

    Chilamula concludes: “With a robust vaccine pipeline, national collaboration, and advanced manufacturing capabilities, SK bioscience is poised to lead the nation’s next-generation pandemic preparedness strategy. By encouraging domestic companies, South Korea is preparing to face future pandemics and positioning the country as a global leader in pandemic readiness while reducing reliance on foreign pharmaceutical giants.”

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

  • MIL-OSI: KBC Ancora distributes an interim dividend of EUR 3.51 per share on 5 June 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Regulated information, inside information, Leuven, 23 May 2025 (17.40 CEST)

    KBC Ancora distributes an interim dividend of EUR 3.51 per share on 5 June 2025

    The Board of Directors of Almancora Société de gestion, statutory director of KBC Ancora, decided at its meeting on 23 May 2025, to make an interim dividend payable on 5 June 2025, of EUR 3.51 gross per KBC Ancora share. The net coupon amount, after deduction of 30% withholding tax, is EUR 2.457 per share.
    No final dividend will be paid.
    The financial services will be provided by KBC Bank, KBC Brussels and CBC Banque.

    Relevant dividend dates:

    • Ex-date: 3 June 2025
    • Record date: 4 June 2025
    • Payment date: 5 June 2025

    ———————————

    KBC Ancora is a listed company which holds 18.6% of the shares in KBC Group and which together with Cera, MRBB and the Other Permanent Shareholders is responsible for the shareholder stability and further development of the KBC group. As core shareholders of KBC Group, these parties have signed a shareholder agreement to this effect.

    Financial calendar:
    29 August 2025 (17.40 CEST)        Annual press release for the financial year 2024/2025
    30 September 2025 (17.40 CEST)        Annual report financial year 2024/2025 available
    31 October 2025                        General Meeting of Shareholders

    This press release is available in Dutch, French and English on the website www.kbcancora.be.

    KBC Ancora Investor Relations & Presse contact: Jan Bergmans
    tel.: +32 (0)16 27 96 72
    e-mail: jan.bergmans@kbcancora.be or mailbox@kbcancora.be 

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Funding improves access to food in northern B.C.

    Source: Government of Canada regional news

    People in northern B.C. will have more reliable access to healthy food, thanks to an investment from the Province.

    This support for local projects will address unique food-access challenges in rural, remote and First Nations communities. It will also increase the capacity of food-access organizations to meet increased demand for their services due to global inflation. It is made possible by a $2-million investment administered by Food Banks BC (FBBC) and the Public Health Association of BC (PHABC).

    “In many northern rural and remote communities, getting affordable fresh food can be challenging,” said Sheila Malcolmson, Minister of Social Development and Poverty Reduction. “Working together with our partners, we are helping local groups meet the increasing demand for nutritious food.”

    This funding, part of $5 million announced in 2023, is distributed through two streams to support better food access in northern B.C. The Large Scale Innovations for Food System Transformation Pilot stream provides approximately $1.7 million for five partnerships to develop advanced models for food security. The Ideas Lab for Food Systems Transformation stream provides $300,000 across 13 projects, aiming to improve regional food security.

    “This investment underscores the power of collaboration to advance our key project priorities: strengthening food systems, empowering communities and creating lasting change,” said Dan Huang-Taylor, executive director, Food Banks BC. “As demand for food banks reaches unprecedented levels, we are proud to partner with the B.C. government and the Public Health Association of BC to expand access to local, healthy and culturally appropriate food for northern B.C. communities.”

    These projects are creating partnerships of non-profits, businesses, governments and other partners to work together and expand food access. Projects include:

    • using existing transportation networks to improve food delivery;
    • building the first school farm in northern B.C., which will provide fresh fruits and vegetables for school meals;
    • constructing greenhouses in school communities; and
    • partnering with Indigenous groups to support sustainable and culturally relevant food infrastructure.

    “Community partners have worked to build local solutions that strengthen regional food security and support dignified food access,” said Shannon Turner, executive director, PHABC. “This funding supports communities to make vital changes to food systems. Through this project, legacies of co-operation and effective policy are addressing food insecurity with new skills and models designed to reduce hunger and grow local capacity to address inequities and feed those in need.”

    Funding also supported new research to understand the unique barriers and opportunities to improve food access throughout B.C., informed by the experiences of local organizations and people experiencing food insecurity.

    This investment is part of the historic $200 million in funding announced in March 2023 to strengthen the food supply chain throughout B.C., increase the availability of fresh food, encourage more food production in remote areas, strengthen food infrastructure and create more regional community food hubs.

    Quotes:

    Lana Popham, Minister of Agriculture and Food –

    “One of the best ways we can boost our province’s food security is by directly partnering with farming communities and organizations who are on the ground in remote areas. The projects funded by these investments will put more food in the cupboards of people in northern British Columbia and beyond, and they will pay off in our long-term goal of a sustainable, healthy food system, with a thriving agricultural sector grown by and for the people of the region.”

    Dianne Villesèche, quality management system program manager, and Community Food Systems Innovation program manager, Ecotrust Canada –

    “We’re deeply grateful for the Large Scale Innovation for Food Systems Transformation Pilot grant, a giant step forward for the Prince Rupert area. With this opportunity, we’re creating school-based infrastructure that connects students to land, food, and culture, while supporting a more resilient, connected and just food economy rooted in local knowledge and community priorities.”

    Velma Sutherland, band administrator, Sik-E-Dakh (Glen Vowell) First Nations –

    “This facility is more than a place to cut and wrap meat — it’s a commitment to our sovereignty, resilience and cultural integrity. By investing in local food processing through the Large Scale Innovation for Food Systems Transformation Pilot program, we are strengthening our ability to provide affordable, high-quality food while creating jobs and training rooted in our Gitxsan values. This is a step toward revitalizing Gitxsan Food Ways — honouring the knowledge of our ancestors, respecting the animals that sustain us and building a stronger, self-reliant future for our people.”

    Nicholas Fricke, operations manager, BC Bus North (operated by Pacific Western) –

    “We are proud to be a partner with the Northern Food Distribution Network for northern B.C. Being able to have stable access to food is paramount for all. If we can assist with helping those in need gain access to food, especially fresh produce, that is such an amazing thing to be a part of.”

    Learn More:

    For a full list of grant recipients, visit: https://news.gov.bc.ca/files/FoodGrantsNew.pdf

    To learn more about the $5 million in funding to support food access in northern B.C., visit: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2023SDPR0061-001580

    To learn more about FBBC, visit: https://www.foodbanksbc.com/

    For more information about PHABC, visit: https://phabc.org/

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cook, A View on Financial Stability

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you, Alessandra, for organizing us today, and thanks to you, Veronica Guerrieri, and Marina Azzimonti for initiating this effort seven years ago. I am honored to be with so many friends in macroeconomics at the 2025 Women in Macro Conference. I still read, recommend, and cite your work and am grateful to New York University and the University of Chicago for supporting this conference and this research.1
    How has the arc of mainstream macroeconomic research become more closely integrated with issues related to financial stability? This question is what I would like to discuss today. I applaud the advances in incorporating financial stability into macroeconomic models, which have significantly enhanced our understanding of financial market functioning and its effect on the economy. It is a topic that holds special importance to me as a macroeconomist who has worked at the intersection of macroeconomics and finance since my dissertation and as the chair of the Federal Reserve Board’s Committee on Financial Stability. I would like to then offer my assessment of the stability of the U.S. financial system.
    Financial stability supports the objectives assigned to the Federal Reserve, including full employment and stable prices, a safe and sound banking system, and an efficient payments system. A financial system is considered stable when banks, other lenders, and financial markets are able to provide households, communities, and businesses with the financing they need to invest, grow, and participate in a well-functioning economy—and can do so even when hit by adverse events, or “shocks.”2 Financial instability, by contrast, arises when vulnerabilities—such as asset bubbles, excessive leverage, liquidity mismatches, or interconnected exposures—can build up to such an extent that they can amplify different shocks and threaten the core functions of the system and the functioning of the broader economy.
    Macroeconomic Research and Financial StabilityThe idea that supply creates its own demand, or Say’s law, was the prevailing economic orthodoxy of the 1800s. As a result, the core content of macroeconomics as a separate discipline did not exist. Prolonged periods of involuntary unemployment were considered to be impossible. Money and credit were thought to act as a “veil” with no real effects, so money was seen as neutral and banks and other financial intermediaries as essentially passive, despite what we now know.
    The Great Depression fundamentally put an end to this comforting orthodoxy and prompted decades of work to better understand the causes of, and policy responses to, economic fluctuations. For the first time, financial factors took center stage in economic theory. Directly responding to the failures of economic theory exposed by the Depression, John Maynard Keynes introduced the concept of a “liquidity trap,” in which fear pushes the demand for money so high that the usual corrective measures become ineffective.3 Friedrich Hayek and the Austrian school of economics emphasized the role of unsustainable credit booms, noting that booms in “malinvestment” would lead to fundamental mismatches that would need to be addressed.4 Despite the early focus on panics, credit booms, and extreme dynamics, macroeconomic research evolved in a way that de-emphasized the role of the financial system, likely reflecting technical limitations and, more broadly, the need to develop policy frameworks for the post–World War II economy where the Great Depression seemed less relevant. Modeling financial crises requires addressing complex nonlinear dynamics, feedback loops, and discontinuities, like defaults and bank runs. All of these were analytically intractable and computationally unmanageable with the tools available at the time.
    As a result, the macroeconomic framework that originated from the ideas of Keynes generally assumed stable and frictionless financial markets. The IS-LM, or Investment-Saving Liquidity Preference-Money Supply framework, which describes how the goods market and the money market interact to determine aggregate output and interest rates in the economy, emerged as the central analytical tool for understanding short-run output and interest rate dynamics.5
    However, the neoclassical synthesis was not without its critics. Joan Robinson argued that capital accumulation and investment behavior were inherently volatile and criticized the prevailing framework for overlooking important sources of instability.6 Milton Friedman’s work challenged the Keynesian paradigm by highlighting the importance of monetary policy and the destabilizing effects of monetary mismanagement.7 Even as the rational expectations revolution in macro ushered in explicit modeling of micro foundations and dynamic optimization, financial intermediaries, credit frictions, and the potential for systemic crises remained largely absent. Neoclassical growth models prioritized capital accumulation and technological progress as drivers of long-run growth, and real business cycle models emphasized productivity shocks as drivers of fluctuations in employment and growth.8
    Two papers familiar to many of you here and published in 1983 were instrumental in bringing financial stability considerations back into macroeconomic research. Douglas Diamond and Philip Dybvig showed how banks’ role in providing liquidity makes them vulnerable to runs, while Ben Bernanke demonstrated how bank failures deepened the Great Depression.9 These contributions, which were recognized with a Nobel Prize in 2022, have helped pave the way for researchers wishing to explore both directions of the relationship between financial fragility and macroeconomic outcomes. In parallel, Hyman Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis advanced a dynamic view of systemic risk, emphasizing how periods of sustained economic and financial stability tend to encourage excessive leverage and risk-taking—culminating in what we now call a “Minsky moment.” This phenomenon is when a rapid unwinding of financial positions triggers broader economic distress.10
    Ultimately, it took the Global Financial Crisis to bring home just how deeply the financial system and macroeconomic dynamics are intertwined, as evidenced by the explosion of research on financial stability and financial frictions. Models incorporating financial intermediaries, leverage cycles, and endogenous risk became more central to macroeconomic analysis, while empirical work confirmed the critical role of credit booms in preceding financial crises.11
    Over the past few years, macroeconomic research, to which some of you have contributed, continued to incorporate important financial stability aspects, ranging from endogenous leverage and bank runs to models studying the effects of monetary policy in the presence of heterogenous banks.12 Much of this research is also being done at the Fed, and it has informed our current work in the area. I thought it would be helpful to describe some of that work to you.
    Monitoring Financial StabilityCentral banks around the world routinely monitor the financial system for risks, because financial crises can lead to severe recessions. A cornerstone of the Fed’s work in this area is our framework for monitoring and assessing vulnerabilities. The most recent version of our semiannual Financial Stability Report (FSR) was released last month.13 Our framework distinguishes between two fundamental elements: shocks and vulnerabilities.14 Shocks are adverse events that by their nature are difficult to predict and, unfortunately, are all too frequent. Recent examples include the pandemic, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, and many geopolitical events that still warrant headlines. Vulnerabilities, which are aspects of the financial system that would amplify stress, tend to build up over time and can be identified and assessed. We monitor vulnerabilities in four key categories: asset valuation pressures, household and business borrowing, financial-sector leverage, and liquidity and maturity transformation, or funding risks. Policies to build resilience in the financial system are appropriately targeted at reducing vulnerabilities, because they do not require foreknowledge of any particular shocks.
    The financial cycle is recognized as being lower in frequency than the business cycle, with vulnerabilities building over years and typically only to be crystallizing in a short-lived stress event—the classic dynamic of going up by the stairs but down by the elevator.15 Further, as I mentioned earlier, vulnerabilities often build during prolonged expansions as, for example, investor optimism leads to greater tolerance of risk, excess borrowing, and increased leverage. The realization of stress and associated contraction can put these forces into reverse, resulting in decreased vulnerabilities. But the economic and human costs of such an adjustment can be significant.
    Financial Stability AssessmentOur most recent FSR reflects data and information generally available as of April 11, a point when financial market volatility and risk-off sentiment were elevated, with, for example, the S&P 500 having fallen more than 10 percent from its prior peak. Nonetheless, the report echoes many of the themes that we had been highlighting for the previous couple of years. I will discuss our most recent report in the context of some of those themes and illustrate a few lessons from the April volatility.
    Let me start with one theme that is quite encouraging. Generally, businesses and household finances are in solid shape. Most households are able to service their debt, and overall household debt relative to GDP has declined over the past five years. While we are seeing some stress among low-to-moderate-income borrowers and those with subprime credit scores, the risks posed by overall household borrowing remain moderate. Stable balance sheets and solid income have supported the ability of most nonfinancial businesses to service their debt. At the same time, smaller and riskier businesses—which tend to have lower debt service capacity, measured by the interest coverage ratio—are sensitive to income shocks.
    Most households are able to service their debt, and overall household debt relative to GDP has declined over the past five years. While vulnerabilities posed by overall household borrowing remain moderate, we are seeing some signs of stress among borrowers with subprime credit scores, which include many low- and moderate-income households. For instance, auto and credit card delinquency rates for borrowers with subprime credit scores increased substantially in 2022 and 2023 and are at or near their highest levels since the financial crisis. More generally, a sufficiently large income shock could strain the debt-servicing capacity of a broader group of households and push up delinquency and default rates, resulting in more substantial losses for lenders.
    Asset prices have fluctuated significantly over the past several years. Although we do look at asset prices, we tend to focus more on “valuations pressures,” which essentially measure how much prices differ from a variety of benchmarks. For instance, we care whether prices, relative to measures of risk, appear to be out of step with historical experience. In such circumstances, the potential price declines—should risk appetite revert to historical averages—would be larger than normal. Additionally, when the compensation for risk is low, borrowing or leverage could also increase and put further upward pressure on valuations. Coming into the April volatility, valuation pressures were elevated, consistent with the strong economy.
    Allow me to discuss our view of valuation pressures in property markets and come back shortly to the imprint of the April volatility on stock and bond prices. The significant rise in house prices during and after the pandemic has slowed substantially over the past couple of years, but price-to-rent ratios and model-based valuation measures are around the record levels last seen in 2005. Two key differences are that lax underwriting standards do not appear to have driven the increase in house prices and owners’ equity appears to be more solid, using both price- and model-based measures.
    We also noted that commercial real estate (CRE) valuations had been elevated going into 2022 but declined significantly through the period of higher interest rates and deteriorating CRE fundamentals. Prices and fundamentals appear to have moderated, and valuations are closer to historical norms. Given the significant volume of CRE that is maturing and will need to be refinanced, I am continuing to watch this market closely.
    Let me now turn to financial system leverage and funding risks. Capital in the banking system continues to be at historically high levels. However, as you no doubt remember, the intersection of interest rate and liquidity risks played a prominent role in the March 2023 banking-sector stress. High reliance on funding from uninsured deposits was a key vulnerability among some of the most affected banks, including those that failed. When higher interest rates resulted in substantial unrealized losses, we observed rapid outflows of uninsured deposits from a handful of banks. In the April FSR, we describe how over the past couple of years, the share of uninsured deposits relative to total bank funding has decreased for most banks, especially for those that previously relied heavily on uninsured deposits. This outcome is a welcome signal. However, sizable exposure to fixed-rate assets remains, suggesting ongoing exposure to interest rate risk.
    Since 2019, our FSRs have noted another development in markets—a decline in market liquidity. “Market liquidity” refers to the cost of quickly buying or selling a desired quantity of a security and being able to do so without having a significant effect on the market price. During periods of asset-price volatility, it is not surprising that liquidity often declines, so we consider whether market liquidity measures are low given the level of volatility. As discussed in previous FSRs, some evidence indicates that a number of measures of liquidity have shifted down over time, particularly in Treasury markets, where volatility has also been relatively high.16 We have done a lot of work, as have others, to analyze the causes and what lower liquidity in normal times may imply for market functioning during periods of severe stress. One area we are exploring is broker-dealers’ intermediation capacity, which has been affected by a number of factors, including elevated Treasury issuance and increased client demand for secured financing—which is typically collateralized by Treasury securities.
    With that backdrop, let me now turn to last month’s events. The details of the tariff announcements in early April were unexpected. Corporate earnings calls and our own broad-based market outreach suggest three areas of concern among businesses and market participants: One, significantly heightened uncertainty, two, an increased risk of a slowdown in economic activity, and three, prospects for higher inflation. With subsequent announcements some of this uncertainty has ebbed. Nonetheless, the episode offers some insights relevant for financial stability.
    Asset prices fell sharply, particularly in equities, but also in corporate bond and other securities markets. By the second week of April, major stock indices had declined almost 20 percent from their mid-February peaks, with over half of the declines coming in a seven-day period in early April. The Chicago Board Options Exchange’s Volatility Index, the VIX, was extremely elevated through this period, closing at levels not seen since the onset of the pandemic. Some of the decline in equity prices likely reflected a change in the economic outlook, but investor risk appetite likely fell as well, although this is harder to assess because data on changes in earnings expectations arrive with a lag. As we have flagged in previous FSRs, large asset-price declines, whatever the cause, can trigger margin spirals and other feedback loops that are self-reinforcing, if there is excessive leverage or liquidity mismatches in the system.
    Highly leveraged investors, including some large hedge funds, have rapidly unwound positions during past bouts of market volatility. While such dynamics likely contributed to some of the price declines in early April, the overall volumes appear limited. As Roberto Perli, the manager of the Federal Open Market Committee’s System Open Market Account, noted in a recent speech, while there is evidence of some unwinding of the swap spread trade, it was orderly. He said there is no evidence of an unwinding of the cash-futures basis trade, a large and highly leveraged trade that exploits small differences in the prices of Treasury securities and Treasury futures contracts. This stability likely owes in part to the resilience of funding markets through this episode.17
    Large asset-price declines also prompt outflows from open-end mutual funds. Some funds specialize in relatively illiquid assets, such as high-yield corporate bonds or leveraged loans. This is another potential vulnerability we have tracked over time, because a large redemption wave can overwhelm these funds’ cash reserves, leading to fire-sale dynamics in the underlying markets. And redemptions from some funds were quite large in April, particularly given that, in contrast with previous episodes, the general level of interest rates did not fall. Nonetheless, funds were able to handle these redemptions without contributing to stress in corporate debt markets.
    Treasury markets also continued to function in an orderly fashion throughout the episode. To be sure, market depth and other liquidity measures decreased from already low levels, but the decline was in line with what would be anticipated, given the elevated volatility in markets. This outcome is in contrast to what we saw in March 2020, when trading became much more difficult than would have been expected, given the level of volatility because of the broad market dysfunction that characterized the onset of the pandemic.
    The episode provided a real-life example of the large asset-price declines and sudden bursts of volatility that can result from shocks when asset valuations are stretched, as well as the importance of stable and resilient funding markets in absorbing shocks. The experience will surely help us hone our ongoing assessment of financial system vulnerabilities and areas of resilience.
    ConclusionI would like to conclude my remarks with a few examples of research areas that I think would be interesting and helpful to me and, perhaps, to other policymakers.
    First, I understand the difficulty of developing macroeconomic models in which financial risk is endogenously determined by leverage and liquidity mismatch rather than a reliance on exogenous risk shocks. But I hope that the prospect of making highly impactful policy-relevant contributions will induce researchers to dig in on this topic.
    Second, episodes of strain in U.S. Treasury markets over the past several years illustrate the importance of nonbank financial intermediaries, a term that encompasses hedge funds, mutual funds, life insurers, finance companies, and money market funds. This is particularly true in the U.S., where credit is provided by a combination of banks and nonbanks that are often connected through counterparty relationships or common exposure. It would be helpful to have deeper insights into the potential macroeconomic consequences of the shifting interaction between banks and nonbanks.
    Third, relatedly, efforts to incorporate private credit and private equity into macroeconomic models could spur important lines of research. Layered leverage in intermediation chains involving private equity, private credit funds, banks, and businesses can transmit and amplify real-economy shocks to different parts of the financial sector. In addition, private equity and private credit are macro-relevant sectors that can transmit shocks to the real economy.
    I understand that it is easy to throw out a research wish list and walk away, leaving the substantial modeling and operational challenges to others. But I do think it is worth developing new tools and approaches for better characterizing our evolving macro-financial reality. I hope some of you and your graduate students will take up the challenge.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to join you today.

    1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text
    2. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2024), Financial Stability Report (Washington: Board of Governors, April). Return to text
    3. See John Maynard Keynes (1936), The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money (London: Macmillan). Return to text
    4. See Friedrich A. Hayek (1931), Prices and Production (London: George Routledge & Sons). Return to text
    5. See J. R. Hicks (1937), “Mr. Keynes and the ‘Classics’; A Suggested Interpretation,” Econometrica, vol. 5 (April), pp. 147–59; and Franco Modigliani (1944), “Liquidity Preference and the Theory of Interest and Money,” Econometrica, vol. 12 (January), pp. 45–88. Return to text
    6. See Joan Robinson (1956), The Accumulation of Capital (London: Macmillan). Return to text
    7. See Milton Friedman and Anna Jacobson Schwartz (1963), A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press). Return to text
    8. See Robert M. Solow (1956), “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 70 (February), pp. 65–94; and Finn E. Kydland and Edward C. Prescott (1982), “Time to Build and Aggregate Fluctuations,” Econometrica, vol. 50 (November), pp. 1345–70. Return to text
    9. See Douglas W. Diamond and Philip H. Dybvig (1983), “Bank Runs, Deposit Insurance, and Liquidity,” Journal of Political Economy, vol. 91 (June), pp. 401–19; Ben S. Bernanke (1983), “Nonmonetary Effects of the Financial Crisis in the Propagation of the Great Depression,” American Economic Review, vol. 73 (June), pp. 257–76; and Ben S. Bernanke, Mark Gertler, and Simon Gilchrist (1983), “The Financial Accelerator in a Quantitative Business Cycle Framework,” in John B. Taylor and Michael Woodford, eds., vol. 1: Handbook of Macroeconomics (Amsterdam: Elsevier), pp. 1341–93. Return to text
    10. See Hyman P. Minsky (1982), Can “It” Happen Again? Essays on Instability and Finance (Armonk, N.Y.: M.E. Sharpe).  Return to text
    11. See, for example, Mark Gertler and Nobuhiro Kiyotaki (2010), “Financial Intermediation and Credit Policy in Business Cycle Analysis” in Benjamin M. Friedman and Michael Woodford, eds., vol. 3: Handbook of Monetary Economics (Amsterdam: Elsevier), pp. 547–99; Markus K. Brunnermeier and Yuliy Sannikov (2014), “A Macroeconomic Model with a Financial Sector,” American Economic Review, vol. 104 (February), pp. 379–421; Mark Gertler and Simon Gilchrist (2018), “What Happened: Financial Factors in the Great Recession,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, vol. 32 (Summer), pp. 3–30; Òscar Jordà, Moritz Schularick, and Alan M. Taylor (2013), “When Credit Bites Back,” Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, vol. 45 (December), pp. 3–28; Carmen M. Reinhart and Kenneth S. Rogoff (2009), This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press). Return to text
    12. See, for example, Mark Gertler, Nobuhiro Kiyotaki, and Andrea Prestipino (2020), “A Macroeconomic Model with Financial Panics,” Review of Economic Studies, vol. 87 (January), pp. 240–88; and Marco Bellifemine, Rustam Jamilov, and Tommaso Monacelli (2022), “Monetary Policy with Heterogeneous Banks,” CEPR Discussion Paper No. 17129 (Washington: Center for Economic and Policy Research, March 22). Return to text
    13. See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2025), Financial Stability Report (PDF) (Washington: Board of Governors, April). Return to text
    14. Details of the approach are outlined in the framework developed by Tobias Adrian, Daniel Covitz, and Nellie Liang (2013), “Financial Stability Monitoring (PDF),” staff report no. 601 (New York: Federal Reserve Bank of New York, February; revised June 2014). Return to text
    15. See Claudio Borio (2014), “The Financial Cycle and Macroeconomics: What Have We Learnt?” Journal of Banking & Finance, vol. 45 (August), pp. 182–98. Return to text
    16. See, for example, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2023), Financial Stability Report (PDF) (Washington: Board of Governors, May); and Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2024), Financial Stability Report (PDF) (Washington: Board of Governors, November). Return to text
    17. See Roberto Perli (2025), “Recent Developments in Treasury Market Liquidity and Funding Conditions,” speech delivered at the 8th Short-Term Funding Markets Conference, sponsored by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, May 9. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: As Trump Administration Plans to Drop Criminal Charges Against Boeing, Warren and Blumenthal Call for Accountability of Boeing Executives

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    May 23, 2025
    “Any deal between DOJ and Boeing that would allow the company and its executives to avoid accountability would be a serious mistake”
    Text of Letter (PDF)
    Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, wrote to Attorney General Pam Bondi, calling on the Department of Justice to hold Boeing and any responsible executives accountable for their role in the 2018 Lion Air and the 2019 Ethiopian Airlines crashes, which killed a total of 346 passengers. Boeing had previously agreed to plead guilty to criminal fraud in connection to the plane crashes, but recent reporting suggests the company is backtracking on its agreement in an attempt to receive more lenient treatment under the Trump administration. Now, DOJ appears to be preparing to drop the pending criminal charge against Boeing, signing a non-prosecution agreement..
    “We urge you not to sign a non-prosecution agreement with Boeing, and to instead hold the company, and its executives, to account for the consequences of their actions,” wrote the senators. 
    In both the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes, the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS) flight control software installed on the aircraft, was found to have unexpectedly and forcefully pushed the aircraft’s nose down preceding the crashes. Boeing has admitted to criminally conspiring to defraud the federal government about MCAS in the course of the 737 MAX’s certification.
    Even as Boeing executives have promised to improve safety at Boeing, serious safety problems have persisted at the company. Last year, a door plug blew out of Alaska Airlines Flight 1282, a Boeing 737 MAX. A preliminary report indicates that the aircraft was delivered from Boeing’s factory without the key bolts that hold the door plug in place. Following the incident, an audit by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) of Boeing’s 737 MAX production line found “systemic” safety issues including failures in 33 of the 89 safety tests it conducted.
    “The series of safety incidents and warnings from whistleblowers and regulators all point to one troubling conclusion—that manufacturing errors and defects in Boeing aircraft are not one-offs. They appear to be a product of its broken safety culture across multiple manufacturing sites—an atmosphere that prioritizes speed of production and short-term profit over quality and safety,” wrote the senators. 
    Even as these safety issues persist, Boeing executives have continued to squeeze profits out of the company to pay for their exorbitant salaries. Since the two Boeing 737 MAX crashes that resulted in the deaths of 346 people, Boeing executives have received over $377 million in pay and bonuses. Just days before DOJ told the court that it is considering a non-prosecution agreement, Boeing’s CEO appeared in Qatar with President Trump to announce that Qatar Airways had placed an order for 160 Boeing jets.
    “Senior Boeing executives have consistently failed to take responsibility or face meaningful repercussions for wrongdoing, and the agreement that is reportedly under discussion would increase the odds that they are ever forced to do so…Any deal between DOJ and Boeing that would allow the company and its executives to avoid accountability would be a serious mistake,” said the senators. 
    The lawmakers demanded that the DOJ not sign the non-prosecution agreement and instead ensure that both the company and its executives are held accountable if they are found to have violated federal laws or regulations. 
    Senator Warren has led calls to hold Boeing accountable for its safety failures, and has pushed for greater corporate and executive accountability: 
    In October 2024, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal wrote to Attorney General Merrick Garland and Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, urging the Department of Justice to investigate Boeing executives following years of promoting short-term profit over passenger safety.
    In October 2023, Senator Warren sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco, calling on the DOJ to immediately reverse its newly unveiled “safe harbor” policy that would provide a get-out-of-jail-free card for mergers involving corporate white-collar criminals.
    In August 2022, Senators Warren and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.) sent a letter to Attorney General Garland and Deputy Attorney General Monaco urging DOJ to use its authority to ban corporations that commit misconduct from government contracting.
    In May 2019, Senator Warren and Representative Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) released a new report: Rigged Justice 2.0: Government of the Billionaires, by the Billionaires, and for the Billionaires. The report is the second in a series on the failure of the federal government to hold corporate and white-collar criminals accountable and highlights how enforcement hit a 20-year low under the Trump administration.
    In April 2019, Senator Elizabeth Warren wrote to then-Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao and Acting Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration Dan Ewell urging them to enact strong ethics policies to ensure that the Special Committee tasked with reviewing the FAA’s Aircraft certification process is free from all conflicts of interest and undue insider influence.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: May Federal Grand Jury 2024-B Indictments Announced

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    United States Attorney Clint Johnson today announced the results of the May Federal Grand Jury 2024-B Indictments.

    The following individuals have been charged with violations of United States law in indictments returned by the Grand Jury. The return of an indictment is a method of informing a defendant of alleged violations of federal law, which must be proven in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt to overcome a defendant’s presumption of innocence.

    Alejandro Aldave. Possession of Cocaine with Intent to Distribute (Counts 1 and 2); Maintaining a Drug-Involved Premises (Count 3); Possession of a Firearm in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime (Count 4). Aldave, 36, of Tulsa, is charged with knowingly possessing more than 500 grams of cocaine with intent to distribute. He is additionally charged with maintaining a residence to distribute cocaine and possessing a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking. The Drug Enforcement Administration Tulsa Resident Office, the Oklahoma Highway Patrol, and the Tulsa Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Adam D. McConney is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-173

    Daniel Allen Ash; Amber Dawn Murphy. Second Degree Murder in Indian Country (Count 1); Child Neglect in Indian Country (Counts 2 through 5); Aggravated Sexual Abuse of a Minor Under 12 Years of Age in Indian Country; (Count 6); Second Degree Murder in Indian Country (Count 7); Child Neglect in Indian Country (Counts 8 through 11) Possession of Child Pornography in Indian Country (Count 12) (superseding). Both from Commerce, Ash, 32, and Murphy, 30, a member of the Cherokee Nation, are charged with unlawfully killing a minor child in Sep. 2024 and willfully neglecting the health, safety, and welfare of four minor children. Ash is further charged with engaging in a sexual act with a minor child under 12 years old. Additionally, he is charged with possessing visual images depicting the sexual abuse of at least one prepubescent minor. The FBI and Quapaw Nation Marshal Service are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Alicia Hockenbury is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-088

    David Moses Castro-Rivera. Unlawful Reentry of a Removed Alien. Castro-Rivera, 22, a Honduran national, is charged with unlawfully reentering the United States after having been previously removed in June 2021. ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Dallas Field Office is the investigative agency. Assistant U.S. Attorney William Dill is prosecuting the case. 
    25-CR-183

    Javier Cortez Banda. Unlawful Reentry of a Removed Alien. Banda, 36, a Mexican national, is charged with unlawfully reentering the United States after having been previously removed in Sep. 2020. ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Dallas Field Office is the investigative agency. Assistant U.S. Attorney David Whipple is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-184

    James Devon Davis. Felon in Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition; Possession of a Firearm and Ammunition After Conviction for a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence. Davis, 29, of Tulsa, is charged with possessing a firearm and ammunition, knowing he was previously convicted of a felony and a domestic violence misdemeanor. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and the Tulsa Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Emily Dewhurst is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-177

    Bradley Ray Dick. Child Abuse in Indian Country. Dick, 47, of Claremore and a member of the Cherokee Nation, is charged with willfully and maliciously injuring a child under the age of 18. The FBI and the Claremore Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Tara Heign is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-176

    Stephen Dale Homer. Production of Child Pornography; International Production of Child Pornography; Possession of Child Pornography. Homer, 57, of McAlester and a member of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, is charged with using a minor child to engage in sexually explicit conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of child sexual abuse material. He also coerced a minor child to engage in sexually explicit conduct outside of the United States for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of the sexually explicit conduct. This visual depiction was then transported to the United States. Additionally, Homer is charged with possessing visual images and videos depicting the sexual abuse of children under 12 years old. The FBI Tulsa, FBI Charlotte, the Federal Air Marshal Service, the Tulsa Police Department, and the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Ashley Robert is prosecuting the case with assistance from the Western District of North Carolina USAO. 25-CR-171

    Robert Marcus Johnston. Assault of an Intimate/Dating Partner by Strangling and Attempting to Strangle in Indian Country. Johnston, 19, of Tulsa and a member of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, is charged with assaulting a minor victim by strangulation. The FBI and Sapulpa Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Melissa Weems is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-169

    Kaci Anne-Rene Lima. Bank Fraud (Counts 1 through 3); Aggravated Identity Theft (Counts 4 through 6). Lima, 36, of Tulsa, is charged with fraudulently obtaining funds from the victim’s bank account without permission. Further, Lima used the victim’s identity while committing a felony. The U.S. Postal Inspection Service and the Catoosa Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Thomas Buscemi is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-179

    Jorge Antonio Lopez Vasquez. Unlawful Reentry of a Removed Alien. Lopez Vasquez, 39, a Mexican national, is charged with unlawfully reentering the United States after having been previously removed in July 2018. ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Dallas Field Office is the investigative agency. Assistant U.S. Attorney Emily Dewhurst is prosecuting the case. 
    25-CR-180

    Olajuwon Hasan Myers. Possession of Methamphetamine with Intent to Distribute. Myers, 39, of Phoenix, Arizona, is charged with knowingly possessing more than 500 grams of methamphetamine with intent to distribute. The Drug Enforcement Administration Tulsa Resident Office and the Tulsa Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney Mandy Mackenzie is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-178

    Ricardo Plateado-Martinez; Rosa Maria Olmos; Rafael Gonzalez; Joel Rosales Pina. Drug Conspiracy; Conspiracy to Commit International Money Laundering; Maintaining a Drug-Involved Premises; Conspiracy to Import a Controlled Substance (third superseding). Plateado-Martinez, 34, of Broken Arrow; Olmos, 35, of Broken Arrow; Gonzales, 31, of Beaumont; and Pina, 40, a Mexican National are charged with conspiring to distribute over 500 grams of methamphetamine. Plateado-Martinez, Olmos, Gonzalez, and Pina are charged with conspiring to move money internationally with the intent to promote methamphetamine distribution and the conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine. Pina is further charged with maintaining a residence to distribute drugs. Gonzalez, and Pina are charged with conspiring to import more than 500 grams of methamphetamine from Mexico. The Drug Enforcement Administration, FBI, ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Dallas Field Office, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Tulsa Police Department, Tulsa County Sheriff’s Office, Broken Arrow Police Department, and Oklahoma City Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorney David A. Nasar is prosecuting the case. 
    24-CR-131

    Jordan Frazier Payne. Second Degree Murder in Indian Country; Child Neglect in Indian Country. Payne, 31, of Grove, is charged with unlawfully killing the minor victim by blunt force trauma to the head. Further, Payne is charged with willfully failing to provide medical care for the minor victim. The FBI, the Cherokee Nation Marshal Service, the Grove Police Department, and the Jay Police Department are the investigative agencies. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Valeria Luster and Emily Dewhurst are prosecuting the case. 25-CR-168

    Adan Orozco-Godines. Unlawful Reentry of a Removed Alien. Orozco-Godines, 38, 
    a Guatemalan national, is charged with unlawfully reentering the United States after having been previously removed in Dec. 2016. ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations Dallas Field Office is the investigative agency. Assistant U.S. Attorney Christian Harris is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-182

    Lekeith Deshawn Russell. Use of a Communication Facility in Committing, Causing, and Facilitating the Commission of a Drug Trafficking Felony (Counts 1 and 2); Attempted Possession of Methamphetamine with Intent to Distribute (Count 3). Russell, 38, of Tulsa, is charged with attempting to possess methamphetamine through the mail. He is further charged with attempting to possess methamphetamine with the intent to distribute. The U.S. Postal Inspection Service is the investigative agency. Assistant U.S. Attorney Tyson McCoy is prosecuting the case. 25-CR-172

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Global: What action can Israel’s allies take over its expansion of military operations in Gaza?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Catherine Gegout, Associate Professor in International Relations, University of Nottingham

    The British, French and Canadian leaders issued a joint statement on May 19 in which they condemned Israel’s “egregious actions” in Gaza, warning that concrete action could follow if it does not stop its military offensive. They said an 11-week blockade on humanitarian aid reaching the territory had led to an “intolerable” level of human suffering.

    Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu – who the International Criminal Court (ICC) alleges is responsible for war crimes in Gaza – responded angrily. He accused the leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris of offering Hamas a “huge prize” for its October 7 attack on Israel.

    This drew a rebuttal from the British foreign secretary, David Lammy, who declared that “opposing the expansion of a war that’s killed thousands of children is not rewarding Hamas”. So, what action can Israel’s western allies take over its offensive in Gaza?

    The most realistic option is probably the recognition of Palestinian statehood. The Netanyahu government has expressed fierce opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state, saying recently it would be a “win for terrorism”.

    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.

    But this recognition would send a strong message of support for a two-state solution, which most of the world has long seen as the only way to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And the UK, along with Canada, has said it is joining a French initiative to recognise Palestine as a state at a June conference in New York, organised to advance a two-state solution.

    By doing so, the UK, France and Canada would join 160 states that already recognise Palestine. These include 11 states in the EU: Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Ireland, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.

    Stop selling arms

    Another option is for western states to stop selling arms to Israel. France has done this already. And the British government partially suspended arms exports to Israel in September 2024 over concerns they could be used unlawfully in Gaza.

    However, in the three months that followed, the government reportedly approved US$169 million (£126 million) worth of military equipment to Israel. This is more than the total amount it approved between 2020 and 2023.

    The UK maintains that its “exports of military goods to Israel are low”, and the same is true for Canada. The UK and Canada together provide less than 1% of the annual value of Israel’s military imports. But a full suspension would be a major political statement, demonstrating diminishing international support for Israel’s military offensive in Gaza.

    For a total ban to have any effect on the Israeli military’s operations, it needs to be complemented by similar action from more significant arms providers. Germany, for instance, accounted for 30% of Israel’s arms imports between 2019 and 2023.

    The UK and Canada are also part of the global F-35 jet fighter programme, with the UK alone supplying 15% of the value of each jet. F-35 jets play a key role in Israel’s military operations in Gaza. But stopping British-made parts for F-35s from being supplied to Israel is unlikely.

    It would involve pulling out of the entire programme, which the government says is crucial for international security. However, given the High Court is hearing a case that alleges the sale of components for F-35s indirectly to Israel breaks domestic and international law, its stance could change.

    Western countries could also suspend their trade with Israel. The EU accounts for almost 30% of Israeli exports, with a similar amount of Israeli imports coming from the EU. The UK is the 11th-largest importer of Israeli goods.

    This option would have a significant impact on Israel’s economy, and is being considered by both the UK and EU. On May 20, Lammy announced the suspension of negotiations over a new free trade deal between the UK and Israel. And the EU has said it will review its trade association deal with Israel, after 17 of the bloc’s 27 foreign ministers backed the move.

    A complete suspension of the EU’s trade agreement with Israel would require unanimity, so it is unlikely. But a partial suspension is possible, as this would only require at least 55% of member states to vote in favour.

    Sanction Israeli settlers

    One more option is the expansion – and coordination – of efforts to sanction Israeli nationals who promote violence against Palestinians. In 2024, France, Canada and the EU imposed financial sanctions and travel bans against extremist Israeli settlers who had been found guilty of using violence against Palestinian civilians in the West Bank.

    The UK has now taken a similar approach, introducing sanctions on several individuals and entities involved in the Israeli settler movement. This includes prominent Israeli settler Daniella Weiss, who featured in Louis Theroux’s recent documentary, The Settlers. Weiss has dismissed the sanctions, saying they will not affect her or the broader settler movement.

    Britain’s government is also reportedly considering sanctions against Israel’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, and national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. Lammy referred to Smotrich’s recent comments that the Israeli military offensive will be “destroying everything that’s left” of Gaza as “monstrous”.

    Sanctions could, in theory, be complemented by bans on the import of goods from Israeli settlements. Israel’s finance ministry says that 2.5% of the country’s agricultural exports and 1.5% of industrial exports to the EU originate in settlements.

    This type of ban would be difficult for France to introduce due to EU law, but it might not be impossible. Ireland is also trying to ban the trade of goods from such settlements.

    Above all, Israel’s allies should step up their efforts to respect international law. In November 2024, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Netanyahu over alleged war crimes relating to the Gaza war.

    The UK and Canada have said they would arrest Netanyahu if he travels to either country – and they could apply pressure on France to join them. France has not said whether it would arrest Netanyahu if he sets foot on French territory.

    The humanitarian situation in Gaza is likely to worsen over the coming weeks and months. If Israel’s western allies want to use their influence to force the Israeli government to end the conflict, now is the time.

    Catherine Gegout 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. What action can Israel’s allies take over its expansion of military operations in Gaza? – https://theconversation.com/what-action-can-israels-allies-take-over-its-expansion-of-military-operations-in-gaza-257154

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Speech: Minister Tim Hodgson at the Calgary Chamber of Commerce

    Source: Government of Canada News

    “Canada Strong: Building the Future of Energy”

    Date of delivery: May 23, 2025

    Introduction

    Hello,

    Thanks for having me here today.

    And above all, thank you for the work you do as a Chamber.

    Your priorities — securing diversified trade, attracting, retaining and investing in talent, and making it easier to do business — are going to keep Calgary strong now and into the future.

    I also see my colleague, MP Corey Hogan, Ministers Jean and Schulz, and Mayor Gondek, as well as several other former or current MPs, MLAs and Mayors in the audience — I want to thank them for being here, and for the work they do to represent and strengthen this province and this city.

    I’ve found that Calgarians are pretty quick to ask me where I’m from.

    My father was in the Canadian Armed Forces … and later on I was in the Forces myself … so when people ask me that, I’ve always said, “where would you like me to be from? Because I can be from there.” 

    Of course … now when I say it … people think I’m just trying to be a politician.

    But it’s true.

    And, I think, a pretty Canadian thing to say.

    So many of us come from somewhere else. Somewhere else in the country. Somewhere else in the world.

    What we have in common is fierce loyalty to where we live. To our cities. To our provinces. But above all, to our country.

    And that is what I want to speak about today.

    About our country. About what unites us as Canadians.

    About this province and city … and the role they will play in making Canada a conventional and clean energy superpower.

    But you likely don’t know much about me.

    Like Johnny Cash sang — I’ve been everywhere, man.

    But my roots are in the Prairies. My grandmother was born in Moosejaw, when it was the Northwest Territories — before Saskatchewan was created. My mum was born in Calgary, and most of her family still live here.

    Following my dad’s example, I joined the Canadian Armed Forces out of high school when I was 17. That stint taught me a lot about service. And if you know anyone who has served, you know that it shapes your life forever.

    Then, I went to work for Goldman Sachs, commuting from New York to Calgary.

    At Goldman, one of my first major deals is also one of the deals I am still the proudest of today: The Alliance Pipeline.

    In the 1990s, there was too much gas in Alberta. Prices were low, and nobody was making money.

    We helped get that project off the ground, delivering rich natural gas and liquids from the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin to the Chicago market hub — and putting the basin back in balance.

    That pipeline closed the natural gas price differential, supported jobs, and brought Alberta better royalties and the federal government more revenue. A better price for Canadian energy helped every Canadian — just like more recently, with the building of the TMX expansion.

    My experience in the energy and resource sector did not stop there. I served on the boards of MEG Energy and Hydro One. I’ve helped finance OSB mills in High Level and Grande Prairie. I worked on IPOs, including Cameco’s listing on the NYSE and Capital Power’s IPO here in Alberta. And I helped finance potash projects and even a pulp mill in Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan.

    During the global financial crisis, I had the privilege of serving our now-Prime Minister, Mark Carney, as his special advisor at the Bank of Canada. Those were turbulent days, and they taught me that leadership is about action when it matters most.

    But ultimately — that belief in the power of leadership — combined with the deep sense of public service and patriotism I learned in the Forces … led me here today. 

    I’m a pragmatist, a businessman. When I see something that needs changing, I work hard to change it.

    That’s why I joined this government: because I believe in public service that delivers results. And most of all, because I love this country.

    Where We Are Now

    Today, we find ourselves at a pivotal moment. Global economies and markets are volatile. President Trump’s tariffs are disrupting trade, threatening Canadian jobs and industries, and rewriting the rules of the game.

    We did not ask for this trade war. But we are going to win it.

    When President Trump says, “We don’t need Canada’s lumber, energy, autos, or minerals,” it’s not exactly subtle. We know what that really means: the Americans really need all those things.

    The President likes to talk about it like a card game. So, if we’re going to sit across the table from him or anyone else, we need to hold Canada’s best cards. That means being able to sell our products to the world. It means expanding our markets, modernizing our infrastructure, and creating the conditions to compete and win.

    That’s why I’m working with my new Cabinet colleagues and every provincial and territorial government to retool our economy to strengthen Canada’s hand — not just in Washington, but everywhere.

    Ultimately, though, this is not a game.

    Jobs and livelihoods are at risk — from miners in Saskatchewan to forestry workers in B.C., from rigs in Alberta and Newfoundland to Ontario’s auto plants.

    The old economic relationship with the United States is over. We need to accept that. We need to prepare to compete as Canadians, on our terms.

    Prime Minister Carney has laid out a clear strategy: We will be masters in our own home. We will not bow to economic aggression. We will defend our workers, our industries, and our values. And we will build a new foundation — one that delivers the strongest, most resilient economy in the G7.

    We are living through what the Prime Minister calls a “hinge moment” in our national story. This is not a time for half-measures or slow steps. It is a time for bold action, clear decisions, and a renewed spirit of building.

    That means reframing the national conversation.

    No more asking, “Why build?” The real question is, “How do we get it done?”

    That means breaking apart barriers and ripping down red tape. It also means doing things responsibly the first time: meeting our Duty to Consult so Indigenous Peoples are true partners, and protecting our environment so we don’t have to clean up mistakes later.

    I want to be very clear. In the new economy we are building, Canada will no longer be defined by delay.

    We will be defined by delivery.

    Canada as an Energy and Natural Resources Superpower

    So what does delivery look like? It begins with a vision: to build Canada into a conventional and clean energy and natural resources superpower.

    We have the resources. We have the people. We have the ideas. And we now have a government determined to lead and help unlock the potential of Canadian workers and businesses.

    We are taking major steps to back that vision with action.

    First, we will identify and fast-track Projects of National Interest. These are the projects that matter — to our economy, our environment, and our sovereignty. No more five-year reviews — decisions will come in two years for all projects.

    To make that happen, we’re standing up a Major Federal Projects Office. It will be a single window for permits, bringing together what used to be scattered across departments. It’s about making “One Project, One Review” real. Less red tape, more certainty, better outcomes.

    And we’re doing this not just for speed, but for purpose.

    Because Canadian energy is not just about domestic prosperity. It’s a tool for global stability and transformation.

    It’s high time to trade more with people who share our values — not just our border. Your new government will work fast with the provinces and territories, industry and Indigenous partners to diversify our trade and open and expand new markets for energy and natural resources.

    Every barrel of responsibly produced Canadian oil and every kilowatt of clean Canadian power can displace less clean, riskier energy elsewhere in the world. Our exports can help our allies break dependence on authoritarian regimes and help the world reduce our emissions.

    And by working with the energy sector to make investments that fight climate change, we can get more barrels to market while cutting carbon emissions.

    And by the way, the building doesn’t stop with energy: we need housing too, as you in Calgary know well. And that housing needs lumber. Good thing Canadian lumber and engineered wood products are among the best in the world for building.

    This is basic economics: comparative advantage. We’re better at energy, forestry and mining than most of the world. We do it cleaner, safer, and with stronger labour standards and Indigenous rights. Let’s be proud of that. And let’s use the revenues to strengthen our economy, fund public services, and build the next generation of Canadian prosperity.

    I’m not here to waste time — mine, yours, or Canada’s. Like Prime Minister Carney, I have a strong vision for each sector within Canada’s energy and natural resources fabric. So, let’s talk about what that looks like.

    Oil & Gas

    Let’s start with oil and gas.

    Canada will remain a reliable global supplier — not just today, but for decades to come. The real challenge is not whether we produce, but whether we can get the best products to market before someone else does.

    We need infrastructure that gets our energy to tidewater and to trusted allies — diversifying beyond the U.S.

    We will invest in carbon capture, methane reduction, and other technologies to ensure Canadian oil and gas is not only produced responsibly, but is the most competitive in the world.

    All of us — governments and industry — need to get the Pathways Project done.

    This government will not be a government of talk, but a government of action. We need the same from the province of Alberta and the Pathways Alliance.

    Your federal government has committed to certainty, to support, and to making Canada an energy superpower, but we need a partner who is also willing to make good on their promises to Canadians. We need to demonstrate to our customers outside the U.S., and to our fellow Canadians, that we are a responsible industry — and this government believes Pathways is critical to that reality.

    Through it all, we need to ask questions about two things at the same time: economics and security. They run in parallel, but they are not the same. One project can be an answer to both, but first let’s make sure we are asking the right questions.

    I am old enough to remember the oil embargo in 1973, when the SS Manhattan, bound for Quebec, was diverted to the United States, leaving Eastern Canadians vulnerable. We can’t let that happen again. Eastern Canada needs better supply security. We need to reduce our exposure to foreign energy, in a world where we may not be able to rely on trade agreements with our southern neighbours.

    Energy is power. Energy is Canada’s power. It gives us an opportunity to build the strongest economy in the G7, guide the world in the right direction, and be strong when we show up at a negotiation table.

    Hydrogen, Nuclear, and Biofuels

    We can’t end the energy conversation having only talked about oil and gas. We must also invest in promising, scalable energy sources like hydrogen, geothermal, advanced biofuels, renewables and nuclear. These are not speculative bets — they are scalable, exportable solutions with rising global demand that will diversify and strengthen our economy.

    Electricity

    Further, as former Board Chair of Hydro One, I also know one or two things about the power of Canadian electricity.

    I believe our future depends on integrated electricity grids. Our new government will quickly work with provinces and territories on east–west transmission and better integrate our systems. This is part of what the Prime Minister means when he says one economy, not thirteen.

    A pan-Canadian grid means more reliable, affordable, sustainable power for Canadians. It means powering industries from AI to manufacturing. And it means exporting energy between provinces who want Canadian solutions.

    Critical Minerals

    When it comes to mining, we know that Canada also has what the world needs here: lithium, copper, nickel, cobalt, manganese and— of course — one of the world’s largest supplies of high-quality uranium.

    But we need to do more than dig. We need to process and refine here at home, and export to the world, not just the U.S.

    Our First and Last Mile Fund will connect remote projects to infrastructure, ensuring our critical minerals get to market with the associated value-added processing.

    This is about creating a secure, vertically integrated supply chain that makes Canada the global supplier of choice.

    Forestry

    Finally, the forestry sector — the lifeblood of some 300 communities across Canada, including here in Alberta.

    Canadian forest companies continue to face unjustified duties when exporting lumber to the U.S. These duties continue to place needless pressure on the Canada–U.S. trading partnership, impacting everyone from workers to home builders to consumers. While we continue to work towards a long-term resolution, we will use more Canadian wood at home to address Canada’s housing and other building needs.

    Alberta and the West

    Now … let’s talk about Alberta, specifically.

    One of my first calls as Minister was to Minister Brian Jean. This relationship matters, and I am committed to a clean slate.

    I may live in Toronto right now, but I was born on the Prairies. I want you to understand that I will be a voice for Alberta and Western Canada at the Cabinet table.

    President Trump has done a lot. But one thing he’s done unintentionally is remind us that we need to act as one Canada. And not just one Canada, but one economy, and one market.

    That includes actively working with provincial and territorial governments to harmonize and link carbon markets across the country.

    Improving our system of carbon markets will make sure that, as Canadian industry reduces emissions, we are still competitive, able to withstand America’s trade war, and positioned to take advantage of new opportunities. I’m working closely with Minister Dabrusin and others to make this a reality.

    The nation-building projects we must deliver cannot be delivered by governments on their own. These projects will be built by the private sector, with the support of Indigenous communities and other stakeholders. Governments can be a catalyst and an enabler — and the federal government is ready to do our part. I know — with your support — we can get this done.

    These projects are crucial because not only are global markets changing but so, too, is our global environment. We need to build to meet both these challenges, and that will not be easy or free. That will involve thinking outside the box, outside of electoral cycles, and digging in on solutions that allow us to hand down a competitive, sustainable economy to our children and grandchildren.

    I also want to say to every energy worker in this province and this country: Thank you. You are an integral part of Team Canada. You make Canada Strong.

    I went to a vocational high school in Winnipeg, and many of my classmates didn’t go to university. One of my best friends spent 25 years on the rigs. His job on those rigs in Alberta bought him a home. It financed a good life. That’s how it should be.

    During the election, I went door to door in my riding. It’s a suburban Toronto riding that would look a lot like the suburban ridings in Calgary or Edmonton. I learned that you can knock on any door, anywhere in Canada, and hear the same thing from new Canadians: We came here to build a better life.

    They know, like we do in this room, that because of the opportunity Canada offers — through jobs in sectors like energy — it is the best country in the world.

    And that’s what we need to protect. A Canada where hard work still pays off. Where good jobs — with or without a degree — are available for future generations.

    This government isn’t just about people in suits in Toronto or Ottawa. It’s about people in hard hats, on the drilling pads, in the forests, and at the mills. From Peace River to Lethbridge, from engineers to rig workers — that work powers our country, and it earns our respect.

    Time to Build

    A strong Canada needs a strong Alberta.

    To be strong, we will build things in this country again. We will make Canada a true conventional and clean energy superpower. That is our promise.

    So let’s work together — government, industry, Indigenous partners, labour — to make it happen.

    The Canadian energy industry is the best in the world. Let’s treat it that way. Let’s keep it that way.

    Thanks for having me today.

    And I’ll be back.

    Because this is just the beginning. Your federal government’s door is open. My door is open.

    Bring your ideas. Bring your ambition.

    And together — let’s build.

    Thank you.

    MIL OSI Canada News –

  • MIL-OSI: Malaga Financial Corporation Announces 84th Consecutive Quarterly Cash Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PALOS VERDES ESTATES, Calif., May 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Malaga Financial Corporation (OTCPink:MLGF) announced today the declaration of a cash dividend in the amount of 25 cents per share to shareholders of record on June 23, 2025. The dividend will be paid out on or about July 1, 2025. Randy C. Bowers, Chairman, President and CEO, remarked, “We are pleased to reward our loyal shareholders with this 25-cent quarterly dividend which represents a 4.84% annualized yield based on our most recent closing price of $20.65. We are grateful for the efforts of our colleagues which has positioned us to declare this 84th consecutive quarterly cash dividend.”

    Malaga Bank, a subsidiary of Malaga Financial Corporation, is a full-service community bank headquartered on the Palos Verdes Peninsula with six offices located in the South Bay area of Los Angeles. For over fifteen years Malaga Bank has been consistently recommended by one of the nation’s leading independent bank rating and research firms, Bauer Financial Inc. Malaga Bank was awarded Bauer’s premier Top 5-Star rating for the 70thconsecutive quarter as of March 2025. Since 1985, Malaga Bank has been delivering competitive consecutive banking services to residents and businesses of the South Bay, including real estate loan products custom-tailored to consumers and investors. As the largest community bank in the South Bay, Malaga is proud of its continuing tradition of relationship-based banking and legendary customer service. The Bank’s web site is located at www.malagabank.com.

    Contact: Randy Bowers
    Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
    Malaga Financial Corporation
    (310) 375-9000
    rbowers@malagabank.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Banking: Historic Win For Samsung As Its Named Which? Home Entertainment Brand Of The Year 2025 For The First Time Ever

    Source: Samsung

     

     
    CHERTSEY, UK – May 23, 2025 – Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. is thrilled to announce its recognition as the Which? Home Entertainment Brand of the Year 2025. This historic and prestigious accolade underscores Samsung’s leadership in innovation, design, and accessibility within the home entertainment sector.
     
    Anabel Hoult, Chief Executive of Which? praised Samsung’s achievement, stating: “Congratulations to Samsung on being named Which? Home Entertainment Brand of the Year. A step above the competition when it comes to pushing technology, design, and accessibility, it is a worthy winner. The Which? Awards judging standards are incredibly high, so to be named as a winner is a huge achievement – something only achieved by the best of the best.”
     
    As a globally respected authority in consumer testing and awards, Samsung’s commitment to excellence has been consistently reflected in Which?’s review scores, having won a huge 14 best Buys awards in 2024 within the TV and audio category. This recognition by the UK’s leading consumer champion highlights Samsung’s dedication to delivering high-quality products that enhance everyday experiences for users.
     
    Dan Harvie, Vice President of TV/AV at Samsung UK, expressed his pride in the achievement: “We are extremely proud to win this award from such a prestigious organisation as Which? and it’s testament to the technology and innovation that defines Samsung as a brand.
     
    “At the heart of everything we do is a commitment to meeting the evolving needs of our consumers. Delivering entertainment experiences that enhance their lives in meaningful ways, every day.”
     

     
    This award further solidifies Samsung’s position as a global leader in home entertainment, driven by its relentless pursuit of innovation and customer-centric solutions. Samsung remains dedicated to pushing the boundaries of technology to create products that inspire and delight consumers worldwide.
     
    For more information about Samsung’s award-winning home entertainment products, please visit Samsung’s official website.

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn, Colleagues Introduce Bill to Safeguard Genetic Data Privacy After 23andMe Bankruptcy

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators John Cornyn (R-TX), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) today introduced the Don’t Sell My DNA Act, which would safeguard customers’ sensitive genetic information when an entity that maintains their data files for bankruptcy:
    “Advances in DNA testing have allowed Americans to have unprecedented access to important insights about their genetics, but these companies must have a plan to protect this data in the event of bankruptcy,” said Sen. Cornyn. “By updating the bankruptcy code, this legislation would safeguard Americans’ sensitive genetic information to ensure it cannot be weaponized against them or made public without their knowledge and consent.”
    “For too long companies have profited off of Americans’ data while consumers have been left in the dark, which is especially concerning in light of reports that 23andMe plans to sell customer genetic data assets to a large pharmaceutical company,” said Sen. Klobuchar. “This bill will put new protections in place to safeguard Americans’ privacy while giving consumers greater control over how their sensitive health data is shared.”
    “Consumers should feel confident that any personal information shared with a public company isn’t up for grabs when that company files for bankruptcy,” said Sen. Grassley. “This bill would fill gaps in current law to help safeguard consumers’ genetic information and ensure Americans’ DNA isn’t treated like any other financial asset.”
    Background:
    Recently, data privacy concerns have been raised when companies who maintain data on users’ DNA and genetic profiling file for bankruptcy. Under current law, the Bankruptcy Code provides protections for personally identifiable information in bankruptcy court proceedings to prevent the possibility of identity theft, harm, or other unlawful injury from occurring. The current definition of personally identifiable information includes an individual’s name, address, email, phone number, social security number, credit card number, and other information that could be used for identification purposes. However, the definition is outdated and does not include reference to genetic information, meaning this information is vulnerable. This legislation would solve this problem by updating the definition of “personally identifiable information” in the bankruptcy code to include genetic information.
    The Don’t Sell My DNA Act strengthens consumer privacy protections by:
    Modernizing the definition of “personally identifiable information” in the Bankruptcy Code to include genetic information;
    Having consumers affirmatively consent to the use, sale, or lease of their genetic information after the bankruptcy case commences;
    Requiring companies to provide prior written notice of the use, sale or lease of their genetic information during bankruptcy;
    And requiring the trustee or debtor in possession to delete any genetic information not subject to a sale or lease.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Lake Shore Bancorp, Inc. Announces Commencement of Stock Offering

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DUNKIRK, N.Y., May 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Lake Shore Bancorp, Inc. (“Lake Shore Federal Bancorp”) (NASDAQ: LSBK), the holding company for Lake Shore Savings Bank (the “Bank”), announced today that Lake Shore Bancorp, Inc. (“Lake Shore Bancorp”), a newly formed Maryland corporation and the proposed successor holding company of the Bank, is commencing its offering of common stock in connection with the proposed conversion of Lake Shore, MHC from a mutual holding company to a stock holding company. As part of the conversion, the Bank will convert its charter to a New York commercial bank and will be renamed Lake Shore Bank.

    Lake Shore Bancorp is offering for sale up to 5,750,000 shares of its common stock (subject to increase to up to 6,612,500 shares) at a purchase price of $10.00 per share. The shares will be offered for sale to eligible depositors of the Bank and to its employee stock ownership plan. Any shares of common stock not subscribed for in the subscription offering may be offered for sale in a community offering, with a first preference given to natural persons (including trusts of natural persons) residing in the New York counties of Chautauqua, Erie and Cattaraugus and a second preference given to public stockholders of Lake Shore Federal Bancorp as of the close of business on May 5, 2025 and then to the general public.

    All questions concerning the conversion and stock offering or requests for stock offering materials should be directed to the Stock Information Center at (800) 552-2535 (toll-free). The Stock Information Center will be open Monday through Friday between 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Eastern Time, beginning on May 27, 2025 and through June 24, 2025, the scheduled expiration date of the subscription offering. The Stock Information Center will be closed on bank holidays.

    Lake Shore Bancorp must sell at least 4,250,000 shares of its common stock in the stock offering in order to complete the conversion and stock offering. Completion of the conversion and stock offering is also subject to the receipt of final regulatory approvals, the approvals of the stockholders of Lake Shore Federal Bancorp and the members of Lake Shore, MHC, and other customary closing conditions.

    Raymond James & Associates, Inc., is acting as marketing agent to Lake Shore Bancorp in connection with the stock offering.

    About Lake Shore
      
    Lake Shore Federal Bancorp is the mid-tier holding company of Lake Shore Savings Bank, a federally chartered, community-oriented financial institution headquartered in Dunkirk, New York. The Bank has ten full-service branch locations in Western New York, including four in Chautauqua County and six in Erie County. The Bank offers a broad range of retail and commercial lending and deposit services. Lake Shore Federal Bancorp’s common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Market as “LSBK”. Additional information about Lake Shore Federal Bancorp is available at www.lakeshoresavings.com.

    Safe-Harbor

    This release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, that are based on current expectations, estimates and projections about Lake Shore Federal Bancorp’s, Lake Shore Bancorp’s (collectively, the “Company”) and the Bank’s industry, and management’s beliefs and assumptions. Words such as anticipates, expects, intends, plans, believes, estimates and variations of such words and expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Such statements reflect management’s current views of future events and operations. These forward-looking statements are based on information currently available to the Company as of the date of this release. It is important to note that these forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve and are subject to significant risks, contingencies, and uncertainties, many of which are difficult to predict and are generally beyond our control including, but not limited to, that the proposed transaction may not be timely completed, if at all, that required final regulatory, stockholder and member approvals are not timely received, if at all, or that other customary closing conditions are not satisfied in a timely manner, if at all, data loss or other security breaches, including a breach of our operational or security systems, policies or procedures, including cyber-attacks on us or on our third party vendors or service providers, economic conditions, the effect of changes in monetary and fiscal policy, inflation, tariffs, unanticipated changes in our liquidity position, climate change, geopolitical conflicts, public health issues, increased unemployment, deterioration in the credit quality of the loan portfolio and/or the value of the collateral securing repayment of loans, reduction in the value of investment securities, the cost and ability to attract and retain key employees, regulatory or legal developments, tax policy changes, dividend policy changes and our ability to implement and execute our business plan and strategy and expand our operations. These factors should be considered in evaluating forward looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements, as our financial performance could differ materially due to various risks or uncertainties. We do not undertake to publicly update or revise our forward-looking statements if future changes make it clear that any projected results expressed or implied therein will not be realized.

    Important Additional Information and Where to Find It

    Lake Shore Bancorp has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) a registration statement on Form S-1 that includes a proxy statement of Lake Shore Federal Bancorp and a prospectus of Lake Shore Bancorp, as well as other relevant documents concerning the proposed transaction. STOCKHOLDERS OF LAKE SHORE FEDERAL BANCORP ARE URGED TO READ THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT, THE PROXY STATEMENT, AND THE PROSPECTUS CAREFULLY AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC, AS WELL AS ANY AMENDMENTS OR SUPPLEMENTS TO THOSE DOCUMENTS, BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. When filed, these documents and other documents relating to the proposed transaction can be obtained free of charge from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Alternatively, these documents, when available, can be obtained free-of-charge from the Company upon written request to Lake Shore Bancorp, Inc., 31 East Fourth Street, Dunkirk, New York 14048, Attention: Taylor M. Gilden, or by calling (716) 366-4070 ext. 1065.

    Participants in the Solicitation

    The Company and its directors and its executive officers may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies with respect to the proposed transaction. Information regarding the Company’s directors and executive officers is available in Lake Shore Federal Bancorp’s definitive proxy statement for its 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, filed with the SEC on April 11, 2025. Other information regarding the participants in the proxy solicitation will be contained in the proxy statement, the prospectus, and other relevant materials filed with the SEC, as described above.

    This press release is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of an offer to buy common stock. The offer is made only by the prospectus when accompanied by a stock order form. The shares of common stock to be offered for sale by Lake Shore Bancorp are not savings accounts or savings deposits and are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or by any other government agency.

    Source: Lake Shore Bancorp, Inc.
    Category: Financial

    Investor Relations/Media Contact
    Kim C. Liddell
    President, CEO, and Director
    Lake Shore Bancorp, Inc.
    31 East Fourth Street
    Dunkirk, New York 14048
    (716) 366-4070 ext. 1012

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: QCR Holdings, Inc. Announces Annual Meeting Results and a Cash Dividend of $0.06 Per Share

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MOLINE, Ill., May 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — QCR Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: QCRH) (the “Company”) today announced the election of three Class II directors at the Company’s annual meeting of its stockholders. The directors, Brent R. Cobb, Mark C. Kilmer, and Amy L. Reasner were re-elected to three-year terms. The directorships of Larry J. Helling and Donna J. Sorensen, J.D. ended at the 2025 Annual Meeting resulting in a reduction in the number of Board of Directors members from 13 to 11.

    Todd A. Gipple assumed the role of President and Chief Executive Officer due to Mr. Helling’s retirement and Nick W. Anderson assumed the role of Chief Financial Officer due to Mr. Gipple’s move to Chief Executive Officer, as previously announced. Brittany N. Whitfield will serve as Chief Accounting Officer of the Company.

    Additionally, on May 21, 2025, the Company’s Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.06 per share payable on July 3, 2025, to holders of common stock of the Company of record on June 18, 2025.

    About Us
    QCR Holdings, Inc., headquartered in Moline, Illinois, is a relationship-driven, multi-bank holding company serving the Quad Cities, Cedar Rapids, Cedar Valley, Des Moines/Ankeny and Springfield communities through its wholly owned subsidiary banks. The banks provide full-service commercial and consumer banking and trust and wealth management services. Quad City Bank & Trust Company, based in Bettendorf, Iowa, commenced operations in 1994, Cedar Rapids Bank & Trust Company, based in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, commenced operations in 2001, Community State Bank, based in Ankeny, Iowa, was acquired by the Company in 2016, and Guaranty Bank, based in Springfield, Missouri, was acquired by the Company in 2018. Additionally, the Company serves the Waterloo/Cedar Falls, Iowa community through Community Bank & Trust, a division of Cedar Rapids Bank & Trust Company. The Company has 36 locations in Iowa, Missouri, and Illinois. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had $9.2 billion in assets, $6.8 billion in loans and $7.3 billion in deposits. For additional information, please visit the Company’s website at www.qcrh.com.

    Contact:
    Nick W. Anderson
    Chief Financial Officer
    (309) 743-7707
    nanderson@qcrh.com

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Marshals Collaborate to Put Violent Offender Behind Bars

    Source: US Marshals Service

    Greenwood, MS – The U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) Gulf Coast Regional Fugitive Task Force and the Eastern District of Missouri May 16 arrested a man wanted on multiple felonies out of Mississippi.

    Earl G. Blue, 47, was arrested in St. Louis, Missouri, on multiple violent charges.  Blue is accused of robbing the Regions Bank in Greenwood on May 15 and getting away with thousands of dollars.  The day of the armed robbery, Greenwood Police requested assistance from the USMS.  The next day, Marshals were able to determine that Blue was on a bus bound for Chicago.  During a layover in St. Louis Investigators were able to take Blue into custody after a brief struggle.

    During the arrest, Blue was found to be in possession of a significant amount of U.S. currency believed to be evidence of the bank robbery.  Blue was also wanted on a parole violation warrant for cutting off an ankle monitor in the days leading up to the bank robbery.  Blue had recently been released from prison for multiple counts of armed robbery.  

    Blue was transported to a local medical facility to be evaluated and ultimately to the St. Louis County Jail for booking on the active warrants and to begin extradition proceedings back to Mississippi.

    Since 2006, the Gulf Coast Regional Fugitive Task Force has focused resources and efforts on the enhancement of public safety and the reduction of violence within the Gulf Coast Region, through the identification, investigation, and apprehension of fugitives wanted for egregious crimes against the community, while ensuring the equal application of Justice, Integrity, and Service for all.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI—Hagerty Joins Mornings With Maria on Fox Business to Discuss Budget Reconciliation, Iran Negotiations, GENIUS Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Tennessee Bill Hagerty
    NEW YORK CITY—Today, United States Senator Bill Hagerty (R-TN), a member of the Senate Appropriations, Banking, and Foreign Relations Committees and former U.S. Ambassador to Japan, joined Mornings With Maria on Fox Business live in-studio to discuss the budget reconciliation package, President Donald Trump’s negotiations with Iran, and the GENIUS Act.

    *Click the photo above or here to watch*
    Partial Transcript
    Hagerty on the budget reconciliation package: “[Senator] Ron [Johnson] has been focused very much on reducing our debt, reducing our deficit on an annual basis. And I agree with him in principle of what we need to do. But I also would say this: there are many things that don’t get calculated here. If you think about the massive deregulatory thrust that is underway right now, that’s not being captured, the CBO completely missed it. Back in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, they were looking for a $1 trillion revenue decrease. We had actually a massive revenue increase from a tax revenue standpoint. So, I think there’s a lot more to be done. Look, it’s coming to the Senate. I don’t think it’s going to look exactly like it came to us from the House. In fact, there are a lot of people working at pace right now to look for deeper cuts. I’m optimistic. When you add together the deregulatory thrust, the tariff reconciliation that’s going on around the world, and the actual growth components of this bill that are real, they will actually incentivize capital investment. The dynamic aspects of this, again, get missed in the calculations […] At a broad and principle level, the Senate is going to continue to look at means to actually reduce the deficit. Everything that we can accelerate in terms of reductions, we’re going to do that as well. And I think our viewpoint is we have to be responsible. We have to get on the right track here. We’re not going to solve it all in one swoop.”
    Hagerty on urgency to pass the budget reconciliation package: “I actually called up the CEOs of the companies that I had invested in. I served on their boards for years. And I asked them, what are they doing in terms of capital investment, capital planning for 2026? They said, they’re waiting. Everybody’s on hold right now. We need to deliver certainty. And my goal is, without putting a specific date on this, and I called Leader [John] Thune on this as well. I said, look, we’ve got to move this as quickly as we possibly can. I’d love to see it by the 4th of July. Certainly, we need to get it done this summer, because if we don’t, I think capital plans are going to be delayed. We’re not going to see the capital investment we want to see happen so that 2026 is the best year ever. We got to move quickly on that.”
    Hagerty on Trump’s negotiations with Iran: “I think President Trump is absolutely right. Look, I was in his administration. We put maximum pressure on Iran. We had a miss close to a deal in the previous administration. And [Former President] Joe Biden backed off, completely allowed the funds to flow again, and terrorism flowed around the Middle East. We need to maintain maximum pressure. President Trump is doing this, enrichment to the point that they could obtain nuclear grade weapons is absolutely off the table, in my view. This is going to be a tough set of negotiations. The Iranian regime, that theocracy there, has never been easy to deal with. I think the people of Iran seriously need to see change. And these negotiations, I hope, will be very fruitful.”
    Hagerty on Trump’s Middle East trip: “I think he demonstrated that America is back. We’re looking for economic ties. Economic security actually equates to national security these days. That’s a thing of the past to separate the two, and more economic prosperity is going to link our economies together. It’s going to make our security interest aligned. I thought it was a wonderful trip.”
    Hagerty on the GENIUS Act: “This is going to take us into the 21st century. We have a payment system today that was designed in the 1970s and the 1980s. It takes five to ten days to clear a payment here. With the technology available on the chain to actually do this on an almost instantaneous basis, what this will also do is provide regulatory clarity to an industry that’s been seeping offshore. Americans need to lead here. The innovation that we are capable of delivery here is enormous. And also, the benefits of this will be to extend dollar dominance, our reserve currency around the world, because it’ll be used much more in the new digital environment. Additionally, it will stimulate demand for U.S. treasuries because these digital dollars have to be backed up by cash or U.S. treasuries […] A key reason that we’ve brought stablecoin policy to the fore first [is] because this is something that my colleagues do understand. This is simply taking our payment system into the 21st century. It’s stable. It’s dollar denominated. It’s simply that these dollars have to be backed completely by cash or by U.S. treasuries. That’s safe and secure in putting these, sort of, guardrails in place. I think all my colleagues get this, but as you animated, we’re going to move into market structure. This is a complex market. This is a new market that’s evolving rapidly, that’s going to take a great deal more education. It’s going to take a great deal more time. But I’m optimistic as we embrace this piece of legislation, and I’m delighted that we’ve gotten strong, bipartisan support here, that we’re moving in the right direction. And I think that America has got to be, and will continue to be, the leader in this innovative field.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 2 Days Left To Apply for FEMA Assistance Following February Severe Storms and Flooding

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: 2 Days Left To Apply for FEMA Assistance Following February Severe Storms and Flooding

    2 Days Left To Apply for FEMA Assistance Following February Severe Storms and Flooding

    FRANKFORT, Ky

    – Homeowners and renters in Breathitt, Clay, Estill, Floyd, Harlan, Johnson, Knott, Lee, Leslie, Letcher, Martin, Owsley, Perry, Pike, Simpson and Woodford counties who experienced damage or losses caused by the February severe storms and floods have 2 days to apply for federal disaster assistance

    The deadline to apply for federal assistance is May 25

     Survivors of the April storms still have until June 25 to Apply

    How To Apply for FEMA AssistanceThere are several ways to apply for FEMA assistance:Online at DisasterAssistance

    gov

    Visit any Disaster Recovery Center

    To find a center close to you, visit fema

    gov/DRC, or text DRC along with your Zip Code to 43362 (Example: “DRC 29169”)

    Use the FEMA mobile app

    Call the FEMA Helpline at 800-621-3362

    It is open 7 a

    m

    to 10 p

    m

    Eastern Time

    Help is available in many languages

    If you use a relay service, such as Video Relay Service (VRS), captioned telephone or other service, give FEMA your number for that service

    FEMA works with every household on a case-by-case basis

    A current phone number where you can be contacted

    Your address at the time of the disaster and the address where you are now staying

    Your Social Security Number

    A general list of damage and losses

    Banking information if you choose direct deposit

     If insured, the policy number or the agent and/or the company name

    FEMA representatives can explain available assistance programs, how to apply to FEMA, and help connect survivors with resources for their recovery needs

    When you apply, you will need to provide:Survivors should keep their contact information updated with FEMA as the agency may need to call to schedule a home inspection or get additional information

     Disaster assistance is not a substitute for insurance and is not intended to compensate for all losses caused by a disaster

    The assistance is intended to meet basic needs and supplement disaster recovery efforts

     Homeowners and renters in Woodford County may be eligible for federal assistance, if you had property damage or loss in Woodford County from the February severe incident, and then again from the April severe incident, you would need to complete two separate disaster assistance applications

    For an accessible video on how to apply for FEMA assistance, go to youtube

    com/watch?v=WZGpWI2RCNw

     For more information about Kentucky flooding recovery, visit www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4860

    Follow the FEMA Region 4 X account at x

    com/femaregion4

    martyce

    allenjr
    Fri, 05/23/2025 – 14:38

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Disaster Recovery Center in Jessamine County To Permanently Close; Help Is Still Available

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Disaster Recovery Center in Jessamine County To Permanently Close; Help Is Still Available

    Disaster Recovery Center in Jessamine County To Permanently Close; Help Is Still Available

    FRANKFORT, Ky

    –The Disaster Recovery Center in Jessamine County will permanently close May 22

    Other centers are still operating throughout the state

      The Disaster Recovery Center in Jessamine County is located at: Jessamine County Senior Citizens Center, 111 Hoover Drive, Nicholasville, KY 40356 Working hours are 9 a

    m

    to 7 p

    m

    Eastern Time, today through Thursday, May 22

    You can visit any Disaster Recovery Center to get in-person assistance

    No appointment is needed

     To find all other center locations, including those in other states, go to fema

    gov/drc or text “DRC” and a Zip Code to 43362

    FEMA representatives can explain available assistance programs, how to apply to FEMA, and help connect survivors with resources for their recovery needs

    The U

    S

    Small Business Administration (SBA) will also be available at the recovery centers to assist survivors

    FEMA is encouraging Kentuckians affected by the April severe storms, straight-line winds, flooding, landslides and mudslides to apply for federal disaster assistance as soon as possible

    The deadline to apply is June 25

    You don’t have to visit a center to apply for FEMA assistance

     There are other ways to apply: online at DisasterAssistance

    gov, use the FEMA App for mobile devices or call 800-621-3362

    If you use a relay service, such as Video Relay Service (VRS), captioned telephone or other service, give FEMA the number for that service

    When you apply, you will need to provide:A current phone number where you can be contacted

    Your address at the time of the disaster and the address where you are now staying

    Your Social Security Number

    A general list of damage and losses

    Banking information if you choose direct deposit

    If insured, the policy number or the agent and/or the company name

    For more information about Kentucky flooding recovery, visit www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4860 and www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4864

    Follow the FEMA Region 4 X account at x

    com/femaregion4

    martyce

    allenjr
    Fri, 05/23/2025 – 12:45

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Another Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Jefferson County

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Another Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Jefferson County

    Another Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Jefferson County

    FRANKFORT, Ky

    – A second Disaster Recovery Center has opened in Jefferson County to offer in-person support to Kentucky survivors who experienced loss as the result of the April severe storms, straight-line winds, flooding, landslides and mudslides

    The new Disaster Recovery Center in Jefferson County is located at: Anchorage Middletown Fire Station 10, 8905 US 42, Prospect, KY 40059 Working hours are 9 a

    m

    to 7 p

    m

    Eastern Time, Monday through Saturday and 1 – 7 p

    m

    Eastern Time, Sunday

    FEMA representatives can explain available assistance programs, how to apply to FEMA and help connect survivors with resources for their recovery needs

     FEMA is encouraging Kentuckians affected by the April storms to apply for federal disaster assistance as soon as possible

    The deadline to apply is June 25

    You can visit any Disaster Recovery Center to get in-person assistance

    No appointment is needed

    To find all other center locations, including those in other states, go to fema

    gov/drc or text “DRC” and a Zip Code to 43362

     You don’t have to visit a center to apply for FEMA assistance

    There are other ways to apply: online at DisasterAssistance

    gov, use the FEMA App for mobile devices or call 800-621-3362

    If you use a relay service, such as Video Relay Service (VRS), captioned telephone or other service, give FEMA the number for that service

    When you apply, you will need to provide:A current phone number where you can be contacted

    Your address at the time of the disaster and the address where you are now staying

    Your Social Security Number

    A general list of damage and losses

    Banking information if you choose direct deposit

    If insured, the policy number or the agent and/or the company name

    For more information about Kentucky flooding recovery, visit www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4860 and www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4864

    Follow the FEMA Region 4 X account at x

    com/femaregion4

    martyce

    allenjr
    Fri, 05/23/2025 – 12:38

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Mobile Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Powell County

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Mobile Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Powell County

    Mobile Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Powell County

    FRANKFORT, Ky

    – A Mobile Disaster Recovery Center has opened in Powell County to offer in-person support to Kentucky survivors who experienced loss as the result of the April severe storms, straight-line winds, flooding, landslides and mudslides

    The new Disaster Recovery Center in Powell County is located at: Powell County Emergency Operations Center, 33 Commerce Drive, Stanton, KY 40380 Working hours are 9 a

    m

    to 7 p

    m

    Eastern Time, Monday through Saturday and 1 – 7 p

    m

    Eastern Time, Sunday

    FEMA representatives can explain available assistance programs, how to apply to FEMA and help connect survivors with resources for their recovery needs

     FEMA is encouraging Kentuckians affected by the April storms to apply for federal disaster assistance as soon as possible

    The deadline to apply is June 25

    You can visit any Disaster Recovery Center to get in-person assistance

    No appointment is needed

    To find all other center locations, including those in other states, go to fema

    gov/drc or text “DRC” and a Zip Code to 43362

     You don’t have to visit a center to apply for FEMA assistance

    There are other ways to apply: online at DisasterAssistance

    gov, use the FEMA App for mobile devices or call 800-621-3362

    If you use a relay service, such as Video Relay Service (VRS), captioned telephone or other service, give FEMA the number for that service

    When you apply, you will need to provide:A current phone number where you can be contacted

    Your address at the time of the disaster and the address where you are now staying

    Your Social Security Number

    A general list of damage and losses

    Banking information if you choose direct deposit

    If insured, the policy number or the agent and/or the company name

    For more information about Kentucky flooding recovery, visit www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4860 and www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4864

    Follow the FEMA Region 4 X account at x

    com/femaregion4

    martyce

    allenjr
    Fri, 05/23/2025 – 12:40

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Hart County

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Hart County

    Disaster Recovery Center Opens in Hart County

    FRANKFORT, Ky

    – A Disaster Recovery Center has opened in Hart County to offer in-person support to Kentucky survivors who experienced loss as the result of the April severe storms, straight-line winds, flooding, landslides and mudslides

    The new Disaster Recovery Center in Hart County is located at: Community Center basement, 7035 Raider Hollow Road, Munfordville, KY 42765 Working hours are 9 a

    m

    to 7 p

    m

    Central Time, Monday through Saturday and 1 – 7 p

    m

    Central Time, Sunday

    FEMA representatives can explain available assistance programs, how to apply to FEMA and help connect survivors with resources for their recovery needs

     FEMA is encouraging Kentuckians affected by the April storms to apply for federal disaster assistance as soon as possible

    The deadline to apply is June 25

    You can visit any Disaster Recovery Center to get in-person assistance

    No appointment is needed

    To find all other center locations, including those in other states, go to fema

    gov/drc or text “DRC” and a Zip Code to 43362

     You don’t have to visit a center to apply for FEMA assistance

    There are other ways to apply: online at DisasterAssistance

    gov, use the FEMA App for mobile devices or call 800-621-3362

    If you use a relay service, such as Video Relay Service (VRS), captioned telephone or other service, give FEMA the number for that service

    When you apply, you will need to provide:A current phone number where you can be contacted

    Your address at the time of the disaster and the address where you are now staying

    Your Social Security Number

    A general list of damage and losses

    Banking information if you choose direct deposit

    If insured, the policy number or the agent and/or the company name

    For more information about Kentucky flooding recovery, visit www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4860 and www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4864

    Follow the FEMA Region 4 X account at x

    com/femaregion4

    martyce

    allenjr
    Fri, 05/23/2025 – 12:27

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 3 Days Left To Apply for FEMA Assistance Following February Severe Storms and Flooding

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: 3 Days Left To Apply for FEMA Assistance Following February Severe Storms and Flooding

    3 Days Left To Apply for FEMA Assistance Following February Severe Storms and Flooding

    FRANKFORT, Ky

    – Homeowners and renters in Breathitt, Clay, Estill, Floyd, Harlan, Johnson, Knott, Lee, Leslie, Letcher, Martin, Owsley, Perry, Pike, Simpson and Woodford counties who experienced damage or losses caused by the February severe storms and floods have 3 days to apply for federal disaster assistance

    The deadline to apply for federal assistance is May 25

      Survivors of the April storms still have until June 25 to Apply

    How To Apply for FEMA AssistanceThere are several ways to apply for FEMA assistance:Online at DisasterAssistance

    gov

    Visit any Disaster Recovery Center

    To find a center close to you, visit fema

    gov/DRC, or text DRC along with your Zip Code to 43362 (Example: “DRC 29169”)

    Use the FEMA mobile app

    Call the FEMA Helpline at 800-621-3362

    It is open 7 a

    m

    to 10 p

    m

    Eastern Time

    Help is available in many languages

    If you use a relay service, such as Video Relay Service (VRS), captioned telephone or other service, give FEMA your number for that service

    FEMA works with every household on a case-by-case basis

    A current phone number where you can be contacted

    Your address at the time of the disaster and the address where you are now staying

    Your Social Security Number

    A general list of damage and losses

    Banking information if you choose direct deposit

     If insured, the policy number or the agent and/or the company name

    FEMA representatives can explain available assistance programs, how to apply to FEMA, and help connect survivors with resources for their recovery needs

    When you apply, you will need to provide:Survivors should keep their contact information updated with FEMA as the agency may need to call to schedule a home inspection or get additional information

     Disaster assistance is not a substitute for insurance and is not intended to compensate for all losses caused by a disaster

    The assistance is intended to meet basic needs and supplement disaster recovery efforts

     Homeowners and renters in Woodford County may be eligible for federal assistance, if you had property damage or loss in Woodford County from the February severe incident, and then again from the April severe incident, you would need to complete two separate disaster assistance applications

    For an accessible video on how to apply for FEMA assistance, go to youtube

    com/watch?v=WZGpWI2RCNw

     For more information about Kentucky flooding recovery, visit www

    fema

    gov/disaster/4860

    Follow the FEMA Region 4 X account at x

    com/femaregion4

    martyce

    allenjr
    Fri, 05/23/2025 – 12:22

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Phoenix Woman Sentenced to Over Eight Years in Prison for Narcotics Trafficking and Bankruptcy Fraud

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    TUCSON, Ariz. – Betty Nora Anderson, 65, of Phoenix, was sentenced yesterday by United States District Judge Rosemary Márquez to 100 months in prison, followed by 60 months of supervised release. Anderson previously pleaded guilty to Conspiracy to Distribute Fentanyl and Methamphetamine, Possession with Intent to Distribute Fentanyl, Possession with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine, and Falsification of Records in a Bankruptcy Proceeding.

    In September 2022, United States Customs and Border Protection officers arrested Anderson as she attempted to smuggle 4.54 kilograms of fentanyl and 13.42 kilograms of methamphetamine into the United States from Mexico in her vehicle. After her arrest, Anderson was permitted to reside in the community pending the disposition of her case; however, she absconded twice from court supervision, ultimately leading to her pre-trial incarceration.

    In March 2023, while a fugitive from justice in the case, Anderson filed a petition for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Arizona. Anderson’s petition contained false and misleading statements, which resulted in the discharge of debts that Anderson owed to her creditors. As part of her sentence in this case, Anderson was ordered to make restitution to those creditors in the amount of $52,358.00, the approximate total of her debt.         

    This prosecution is part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

    United States Customs and Border Protection and Homeland Security Investigations in Nogales, Arizona conducted the investigation in this case. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael R. Lizano and Micah Schmit, District of Arizona, Tucson, handled the prosecution.

    CASE NUMBER:           CR-22-02124-RM-JR
    RELEASE NUMBER:     2025-082_Anderson

    # # #

    For more information on the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, visit http://www.justice.gov/usao/az/

    Follow the U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona, on Twitter @USAO_AZ for the latest news.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: Norway/OPT: Divesting pension fund a crucial step towards dismantling Israel’s unlawful occupation

    Source: Amnesty International –

    Ahead of the May 27 conclusion of the Norwegian parliamentary review into a proposal to divest The Government Pension Fund from companies unlawfully operating in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), Agnès Callamard, Secretary General of Amnesty International said:

    “Norway’s Government Pension Fund is the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world. The Norwegian government should divest its pension fund from any companies found to be involved in maintaining Israel’s unlawful occupation in the OPT. It should also engage in rigorous screening of all investments, in line with international business and human rights standards. Divestment would chart a new human rights course.

    “After 58 years of brutal military occupation, it is unjust that the Norwegian Pension Fund is benefiting from investments in companies profiting from Israel’s grave violations of Palestinians’ rights.  Amnesty International has documented the commission, over decades, of war crimes in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

    “Furthermore, Amnesty International and many other human rights organizations and UN bodies, have provided abundant evidence of Israel’s ongoing genocide in the occupied Gaza Strip. Any companies unlawfully operating in the OPT risk reinforcing, normalizing and sustaining one of the world’s longest and deadliest military occupations.

    “States must ensure that their sovereign wealth funds are not contributing to or profiting from Israel’s unlawful occupation, its system of apartheid, or the genocide in Gaza. Under international law, as reflected in the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice in July 2024, states are under an obligation to take steps to prevent trade or investment relations that assist in maintaining the unlawful occupation and illegal settlements.

    “Israel’s genocide in Gaza is simultaneously unbearable and undeniable as are its cruel system of apartheid and unlawful occupation. As European governments are finally compelled to live up to their commitments, they must move from words to action. There is no time to lose, every delay costs human lives in Gaza and emboldens Israel to commit further atrocity crimes throughout the OPT.”

    Background

    The Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global is the world’s largest government owned investment fund. Worth $1.8 trillion, the Norwegian fund has been an international leader in the environmental, social and governance investment field.

    Norges Bank, the state-owned financial institution that manages Norway’s Government Pension Fund has a responsibility to respect human rights as reflected in the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has determined that investors’ operations, including that of minority shareholders such as Norges Bank, are directly linked to their investee companies’ involvement in human rights abuses and, therefore, that they have a responsibility to seek to prevent that involvement.

    This requires conducting human rights due diligence to ensure that all the companies invested in by the pension fund do not cause or contribute to violations of international law and, where it finds they do and yet is unable to exercise leverage to prevent their unlawful activity, to responsibly divest its funds from those companies.

    The obligation to prevent trade or investment relations that assist in maintaining the unlawful occupation and illegal settlements arises from states’ duty to ensure respect for international humanitarian law. This includes the duty to cooperate to bring to an end through lawful means serious breaches of international law; the duty to not recognize as lawful the situation created by such breaches; and the duty to not render aid or assistance in maintaining that situation.   States also have an obligation to prevent genocide.

    The Fund is currently invested in several companies listed in the UN database of businesses involved in the unlawful occupation of Palestine. This starkly exposes the shortcomings of the Fund’s current ethical framework, risking financially contributing to violations of international law, including the unlawful occupation of Palestine. Amnesty International has also documented the role of several of the companies under scrutiny.

    Earlier this month, Amnesty Norway and 49 Norwegian organizations demanded action in a joint letter to the Ministry of Finance. 

    Last year the International Court of Justice confirmed that Israel has a legal obligation to end its unlawful occupation of the OPT and its systemic discrimination against the occupied Palestinian population. As a result of a UNGA resolution, in September 2024, Israel was given 12 months to withdraw from the OPT and third states must cooperate to make this happen.

    MIL OSI NGO –