NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Climate Change

  • MIL-OSI USA: WISER Awarded Eight UConn Projects to Advance Weather Innovation and Energy Resilience

    Source: US State of Connecticut

    The National Science Foundation (NSF) has awarded UConn and its partners several new projects to advance weather- and climate-based solutions for the energy industry.

    On Feb. 6-7, the NSF Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) for Weather Innovation and Smart Energy and Resilience (WISER) hosted its Industry Advisory Board meeting. During the gathering, the NSF announced funding for 10 new projects, with UConn is involved in eight of them.

    UConn Tech Park Executive Director Emmanouil Anagnostou speaks at a recent meeting with the WISER Industry Advisory Board. (contributed photo)

    Established in 2023, WISER NSF IUCRC is a two-site center shared by the University at Albany and UConn. The Center combines cutting-edge technologies with the benefits of industry partnerships to address the evolving challenges posed by extreme weather and climate change.

    “By fostering collaboration between academia and industry, WISER is poised to become a leading resource for solutions that enhance resilience and sustainability in the energy sector, says Emmanouil Anagnostou, the primary investigator for UConn’s WISER site.

    During the meeting, the 10-member Advisory Board announced the awarded projects following a highly competitive selection process. The Board was enthusiastic about WISER’s proposals, continuing a legacy of successful and impactful projects that have resulted from the collaboration between the UConn and Albany.

    The projects will expand WISER’s research portfolio in weather and power outage prediction, energy demand, grid resilience, and risk management. “I am excited by the number of highly competitive proposals submitted by UConn faculty and look forward to growing UConn’s research and technology innovation on energy resilience and security,” Says Anagnostou.

    This year WISER’s Industry Advisory Board consists of ten members: Avangrid, Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp, Con Edison, Eversource Energy, Hydro‑Québec, National Grid, New York Power Authority, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, New York State Foundation for Science, Technology, and Innovation, and Pacific Gas and Electric Company.

    The following are the eight WISER projects in which UConn will take part:

    • Wind power resources for Northeast US under a changing climate (PI: M. Astitha, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering)
    • Extreme heat metrics for more accurate energy demand prediction (PI: G. Wang, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering)
    • Integrating interdisciplinary resilience indices for power outages and restorations (PI: W. Zhang, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering)
    • Predicting extreme weather–induced power outages with spatially aware hybrid graph neural networks (PI: D. Song, School of Computing)
    • A mapping tool for addressing socioeconomic and demographic disparities in power outage impacts (PI: A. Bagtzoglou, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering)
    • Quantifying grid resiliency using GFM with HELICS co-simulation for enhancing outage management during the extreme weather events (PI: S.Y. Park, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering)
    • Weather-power-grid testbed experiments for risk contingency management during hazards: cascading failures, fragility curves, and grid and weather monitoring needs (PI: M. Peña, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering)
    • Snowstorm changes and their impact on power outages over the Northeast (co-PI: D. Cerrai, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering)

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Edinburgh Libraries launch new recycling programme to promote sustainability and digital reuse

    Source: Scotland – City of Edinburgh

    Edinburgh Libraries have held the official launch of a new recycling programme aimed at promoting sustainability and digital reuse across the city.

    The service secured £23,000 in funding from the Public Library Improvement Fund, awarded by the Scottish Library and Information Council (SLIC), which supports innovative initiatives in areas such as digital upskilling, sustainability, and inclusivity.

    This funding will allow Edinburgh Libraries to collaborate with Edinburgh Remakery to introduce Tech Donation Boxes to 15 libraries, these boxes will provide Edinburgh residents with an easy, welcoming, and accessible way to donate their old devices. Donated tech devices will be repaired and reused when possible or responsibly recycled when necessary, contributing to a circular economy and reducing electronic waste.

    The programme was officially launched at Craigmillar Library last night (Tuesday 18 February), where attendees were introduced to the project and had the chance to participate in various activities, including a Making Jewellery with Recycled Materials workshop (featuring old computer parts, circuit boards, and more), a Climate Fresk Quiz, and an exhibition showcasing children’s crafts made from recycled materials.

    Councillor Val Walker, Culture and Communities Convener said:

    In 2023 Edinburgh Remakery tech boxes were hosted within two libraries –Central Library and Wester Hailes Library. The response from the public was fantastic, and the library service was successful in securing an award from Edinburgh Remakery for the high volume of donations received.
    Thanks to this new funding, we’re able to extend our partnership with the Edinburgh Remakery, working across 15 public libraries to host Tech Donation Boxes and expand the role of our libraries in promoting sustainability throughout the city.

    Elaine Brown, Chief Executive of Edinburgh Remakery, said: 

    At Edinburgh Remakery, we are passionate about giving old tech a second life, and this partnership with Edinburgh Libraries is a fantastic step towards a more sustainable and digitally inclusive city. By making tech donation easy and accessible, we are not only reducing electronic waste but also ensuring that more people can benefit from refurbished devices. Together, we are creating a future where waste is minimised, and resources are maximised for the benefit of our community.
     

    Published: February 19th 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Budd Leads Bipartisan Inquiry Into Chinese DeepSeek on Pentagon Devices

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Ted Budd (R-North Carolina)
    Washington, D.C. — Today, Senators Ted Budd (R-NC), Eric Schmitt (R-MO), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) sent a letter to Acting Chief Information Officer at the Department of Defense, Leslie A. Beavers, requesting information on, “how many Department employees connected their work computers and/or mobile devices to Chinese servers via the DeepSeek Application”.
    Read the text of the letter:
    We write to express our concern that Department of Defense (DOD) employees accessed the Chinese artificial intelligence application DeepSeek on their work devices and, as a result, Chinese servers.
    We understand that the National Security Council (NSC) is currently reviewing the national security implications of DeepSeek and expect this will be an ongoing conversation between Congress, the NSC, and relevant agencies. However, in the immediate term, we request that the Department provide information regarding potential impacts to the Defense Information Systems Network (DISN) and the Department of Defense Information Network (DODIN) of the recent incident.
    The office of the Director of National Intelligence’s 2024 Annual Threat Assessment states that “China remains the most active and persistent cyber threat to the U.S. Government, private-sector and critical infrastructure networks”. This is evidenced by the recent Salt Typhoon Hack, a breach of at least eight U.S. telecommunications providers, among many other reports of cyberattacks originating from China.
    It is also our understanding, based on the DoD’s Use of Mobile Applications 2023 report, that misuse of mobile applications on DoD personnel devices may not be simply a series of isolated incidents. While our immediate concern is to understand the impact of DoD employees’ access to DeepSeek on national security, we are also interested in understanding the DoD’s policy regarding mobile device applications to the end of ensuring we are diminishing cybersecurity risks associated with certain platforms.
    Therefore, we request answers to the following questions by no later than March 4, 2025.
    How many Department employees connected their work computers and/or mobile devices to Chinese servers via the DeepSeek Application?
    Has the DeepSeek app now been deleted from all DoD devices? If not, what steps will you take to ensure the DeepSeek app is removed from all DoD devices?
    What steps have been made to limit access on DoD devices to only those applications with a justified and approved need?
    What is the Defense Information Systems Agency’s (DISA’s) initial assessment about whether Chinese servers were able to access and exfiltrate sensitive information due to Department personnel use of DeepSeek?
    How has the use of the DeepSeek app by Department personnel impacted the operational and cybersecurity risks to the DISN as well as the DODIN?
    What guidance or training has DISA shared with Department employees regarding accessing Chinese AI app DeepSeek or any other Chinese-affiliated app?
    We understand that the Navy issued guidance against using open-source AI systems for official work. What guidance (if any) are the other services and/or the Department issuing to employees?
    What is DISA’s process for assessing which networks, websites and or applications have a connection to the People’s Republic of China and what are DISA’s standard operating procedures when made aware of such a connection?
    What action (if any) has been taken regarding the DoD employees who connected their work computers and/or mobile devices to Chinese servers via the DeepSeek Application?
    Have all of the recommendations from Management Advisory: The DoD’s Use of Mobile Applications (Report No. DODIG-2023-041) been implemented? If not, why not?
    Thank you for your consideration and we look forward to hearing from you and working with the Department of Defense to keep our networks safe from persistent cyber threats.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Climate change is threatening Lake Ontario — lessons from the Little Ice Age show us why we need to adapt

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Daniel Macfarlane, Associate Professor of Environment and Sustainability, Western Michigan University

    Humans have always had a close connection with Lake Ontario. For centuries, this Great Lake has been a backbone of the region’s economy — relied upon for trade, food and industry. But a warming climate could dramatically change this relationship.

    This wouldn’t be the first time climate change has affected how humans use this Great Lake, as I show in my new book The Lives of Lake Ontario: An Environmental History. During the Little Ice Age, which spanned roughly the 14th to 19th centuries, Indigenous and settler societies had to adapt to the cooling Lake Ontario environment.

    As we again face a changing climate, the way our predecessors adapted during the Little Ice Age teaches us why it’s necessary we change how we use and interact with Lake Ontario today.

    The Little Ice Age

    Prior to the onset of the Little Ice Age, the Lake Ontario region was occupied exclusively by different Indigenous Peoples — including the Haudenosaunee and Anishinaabeg. These groups regularly came to Lake Ontario to hunt, harvest and trade. They were highly attuned to local climate conditions, adapting their agricultural strategies accordingly.

    But the Little Ice Age altered the climate in the region — with average temperatures about 1-2°C lower than normal. I argue in my book that the impact this period’s climate had on the environment and those living in the region helped change the course of empires in North America — both Indigenous and Euro-American.

    This cooler climate led to seasonal unpredictability. This forced the region’s various occupants to adjust their resource and food acquisition strategies. A higher frequency of summer droughts could mean failed crops — while extremely heavy snows made it harder to hunt. These factors may have contributed to the severe decline of Indigenous populations in the region.

    The origins of the fur trade — which dramatically reorganized society and altered political power in the Great Lakes region — are also at least partly attributable to the Little Ice Age. The cooler climate drove the desire for fur in Europe while also affecting the pelt thickness of North American animals.

    The climate during the Little Ice Age also influenced various military campaigns due to its effects on the region’s weather and the lake’s conditions.

    During the War of 1812, for instance, two American warships sank in a sudden summer squall north of Port Dalhousie. A lack of appreciation for the lake’s capriciousness could mean disaster — while those commanders who respected the local environment had the upper hand.

    Agriculture

    But alongside the challenges this cooling climate created, it also provided new opportunities.

    As I contend in my book, climate changes during the period encouraged the diversification of agriculture and food production — such as the cultivation of wheat strains hardy enough to survive cooler conditions. Settlers also believed the mass conversion of forests and wetlands to fields could modify the climate, making it warmer. The influx of settlers reliant on these new types of agriculture fundamentally shaped the emerging political and economic systems around Lake Ontario.

    Heavier ice cover on Lake Ontario actually made winter transportation easier in some ways.

    Temperatures during the Little Ice Age frequently caused a thick freeze in the lake’s nearshore waters. This enabled alternative forms of wintertime travel which were generally cheaper, more flexible, and more dependable than travelling by boat. Skates, sleighs and iceboats were developed for both economic and recreational needs.

    As the Little Ice Age began releasing its grip during the 19th century, Euro-Americans moved to the Lake Ontario basin in larger numbers. This climatic shift proved integral to settler expansion.

    Ice on Lake Ontario enabled cheaper forms of travel.
    (William Armstrong, Public domain/Wikimedia Commons)

    Resilient yet fragile

    The Toronto region could not have become Canada’s economic and cultural capital without the resources of Lake Ontario.

    But all this economic and political growth has come at a tremendous cost. Lake Ontario is now imperilled because of the way we’ve come to rely on it.

    In the 19th century, we cut down forests, dammed and polluted tributaries, dug canals and obliterated fish species in the region.

    In the 20th century, our impacts only expanded: overwhelming pollution, invasive species, urban sprawl, larger canals and hydroelectric dams. These human costs have led to nutrient overloads in the water from wastewater and farming runoff, impoverished biodiversity, fluctuating water levels, toxic chemicals and plastics in the lake.

    This ongoing degradation — coupled with climate change exacerbating ecological challenges and creating new ones — is further undercutting Lake Ontario’s ability to cope with our many abuses.

    A hotter lake could alter the entire food web, which could have ripple effects on local species, energy flows and biodiversity.

    The changing climate is also causing extreme fluctuations in lake levels. Recent record-high levels eroded shorelines — affecting houses and infrastructure while threatening septic systems, nuclear power stations and fuel refineries.

    Resilience

    We’re lucky that Lake Ontario is remarkably resilient. But the lake is being pushed to the brink. We have a small window to both adapt to the already changing climate and prevent it from changing further.

    Of course, the Little Ice Age involved the climate getting cooler, while today it’s getting warmer — with humanity being the primary driver for this changing climate. In the face of climate change, we too can adapt how we use and interact with the lake — just as was done in the Little Ice Age.

    But our response nowadays needs to be as much about stopping old practices as starting new ones. We need to cease contributing to global warming and other negative impacts on Lake Ontario through our unsustainable industry, flawed economic systems and overconsumption, massive pollution and reliance on fossil fuels.

    Daniel Macfarlane 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. Climate change is threatening Lake Ontario — lessons from the Little Ice Age show us why we need to adapt – https://theconversation.com/climate-change-is-threatening-lake-ontario-lessons-from-the-little-ice-age-show-us-why-we-need-to-adapt-246292

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Global: Greenland’s rapidly melting ice and landslide-prone fjords make the oil and minerals Trump covets dangerous to extract

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Paul Bierman, Fellow of the Gund Institute for Environment, Professor of Natural Resources and Environmental Science, University of Vermont

    Greenland has large deposits of rare earth minerals along its coasts, but these are also geologically hazardous regions. Alex Hibbert/The Image Bank via Getty Images

    Since Donald Trump regained the presidency, he has coveted Greenland. Trump has insisted that the U.S. will control the island, currently an autonomous territory of Denmark, and if his overtures are rejected, perhaps seize Greenland by force.

    During a recent congressional hearing, senators and expert witnesses focused on Greenland’s strategic value and its natural resources: critical minerals, fossil fuels and hydropower. No one mentioned the hazards, many of them exacerbated by human-induced climate change, that those longing to possess and develop the island will inevitably encounter.

    That’s imprudent, because the Arctic’s climate is changing more rapidly than anywhere on Earth. Such rapid warming further increases the already substantial economic and personal risk for those living, working and extracting resources on Greenland, and for the rest of the planet.

    Arctic surface temperatures have been rising faster than the global average.
    Arctic Report Card 2024, NOAA Climate.gov

    I am a geoscientist who studies the environmental history of Greenland and its ice sheet, including natural hazards and climate change. That knowledge is essential for understanding the risks that military and extractive efforts face on Greenland today and in the future.

    Greenland: Land of extremes

    Greenland is unlike where most people live. The climate is frigid. For much of the year, sea ice clings to the coast, making it inaccessible.

    An ice sheet, up to 2 miles thick, covers more than 80% of the island. The population, about 56,000 people, lives along the island’s steep, rocky coastline.

    While researching my book “When the Ice is Gone,” I discovered how Greenland’s harsh climate and vast wilderness stymied past colonial endeavors. During World War II, dozens of U.S. military pilots, disoriented by thick fog and running out of fuel, crashed onto the ice sheet. An iceberg from Greenland sunk the Titanic in 1912, and 46 years later, another sunk a Danish vessel specifically designed to fend off ice, killing all 95 aboard.

    Now amplified by climate change, natural hazards make resource extraction and military endeavors in Greenland uncertain, expensive and potentially deadly.

    Rock on the move

    Greenland’s coastal landscape is prone to rockslides. The hazard arises because the coast is where people live and where rock isn’t hidden under the ice sheet. In some places, that rock contains critical minerals, such as gold, as well as other rare metals used for technology, including for circuit boards and electrical vehicle batteries.

    The unstable slopes reflect how the ice sheet eroded the deep fjords when it was larger. Now that the ice has melted, nothing buttresses the near-vertical valley walls, and so, they collapse.

    In 2017, a northwestern Greenland mountainside fell 3,000 feet into the deep waters of the fjord below. Moments later, the wave that rockfall generated (a tsunami) washed over the nearby villages of Nuugaatsiaq and Illorsuit. The water, laden with icebergs and sea ice, ripped homes from their foundations as people and sled dogs ran for their lives. By the time it was over, four people were dead and both villages lay in ruin.

    Steep fjord walls around the island are littered with the scars of past rockslides. The evidence shows that at one point in the last 10,000 years, one of those slides dropped rock sufficient to fill 3.2 million Olympic swimming pools into the water below. In 2023, another rockslide triggered a tsunami that sloshed back and forth for nine days in a Greenland fjord.

    A cellphone video captures the June 2017 tsunami wave coming ashore in northwestern Greenland.

    There’s no network of paved roads across Greenland. The only feasible way to move heavy equipment, minerals and fossil fuels would be by sea. Docks, mines and buildings within tens of feet of sea level would be vulnerable to rockslide-induced tsunamis.

    Melting ice will be deadly and expensive

    Human-induced global warming, driven by fossil fuel combustion, speeds the melting of Greenland’s ice. That melting is threatening the island’s infrastructure and the lifestyles of native people, who over millennia have adapted their transportation and food systems to the presence of snow and ice. Record floods, fed by warmth-induced melting of the ice sheet, have recently swept away bridges that stood for half a century.

    As the climate warms, permafrost – frozen rock and soil – which underlies the island, thaws. This destabilizes the landscape, weakening steep slopes and damaging critical infrastructure.

    An excavator tries to save a bridge over the Watson River at Kangerlussuaq, Greenland. Part of the bridge and the machine were eventually swept away by the rushing meltwater from the Greenland Ice Sheet during a heat wave in July 2012.

    Permafrost melt is already threatening the U.S. military base on Greenland. As the ice melts and the ground settles under runways, cracks and craters form – a hazard for airplanes. Buildings tilt as their foundations settle into the softening soil, including critical radar installations that have scanned the skies for missiles and bombers since the 1950s.

    Greenland’s icebergs can threaten oil rigs. As the warming climate speeds the flow of Greenland’s glaciers, they calve more icebergs in the ocean. The problem is worse close to Greenland, but some icebergs drift toward Canada, endangering oil rigs there. Ships stand guard, ready to tow threatening icebergs away.

    An iceberg passes near an oil drilling rig in eastern Canada.
    Geoffrey Whiteway/500px Plus via Getty Images

    Greenland’s government banned drilling for fossil fuels in 2021 out of concern for the environment. Yet, Trump and his allies remain eager to see exploration resume off the island, despite exceptionally high costs, less than stellar results from initial drilling, and the ever-present risk of icebergs.

    As Greenland’s ice melts and water flows into the ocean, sea level changes, but in ways that might not be intuitive. Away from the island, sea level is rising about an inch each six years. But close to the ice sheet, it’s the land that’s rising. Gradually freed of the weight of its ice, the rock beneath Greenland, long depressed by the massive ice sheet, rebounds. That rise is rapid – more than 6 feet per century. Soon, many harbors in Greenland may become too shallow for ship traffic.

    Streams of meltwater flow over the silt-covered surface of the Greenland Ice Sheet as it melts in summer heat near Kangerlussuaq in western Greenland.
    REDA/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

    Greenland’s challenging past and future

    History clearly shows that many past military and colonial endeavors failed in Greenland because they showed little consideration of the island’s harsh climate and dynamic ice sheet.

    Changing climate drove Norse settlers out of Greenland 700 years ago. Explorers trying to cross the ice sheet lost their lives to the cold. American bases built inside the ice sheet, such as Camp Century, were quickly crushed as the encasing snow deformed.

    In the past, the American focus in Greenland was on short-term gains with little regard for the future. Abandoned U.S. military bases from World War II, scattered around the island and in need of cleanup, are one example. Forced relocation of Greenlandic Inuit communities during the Cold War is another. I believe that Trump’s demands today for American control of the island to exploit its resources are similarly shortsighted.

    Piles of rusting fuel drums sit at an abandoned U.S. base from World War II in Ikateq, in eastern Greenland.
    Posnov/Moment via Getty Images

    However, when it comes to the planet’s livability, I’ve argued that the greatest strategic and economic value of Greenland to the world is not its location or its natural resources, but its ice. That white snow and ice reflect sunlight, keeping Earth cool. And the ice sheet, perched on land, keeps water out of the ocean. As it melts, Greenland’s ice sheet will raise global sea level, up to about 23 feet when all the ice is gone.

    Climate-driven sea level rise is already flooding coastal regions around the world, including major economic centers. As that continues, estimates suggest that the damage will total trillions of dollars. Unless Greenland’s ice remains frozen, coastal inundation will force the largest migration that humanity has ever witnessed. Such changes are predicted to destabilize the global economic and strategic world order.

    These examples show that disregarding the risks of natural hazards and climate change in Greenland courts disaster, both locally and globally.

    Paul Bierman receives funding from the US National Science Foundation and the University of Vermont Gund Institute for Environment

    – ref. Greenland’s rapidly melting ice and landslide-prone fjords make the oil and minerals Trump covets dangerous to extract – https://theconversation.com/greenlands-rapidly-melting-ice-and-landslide-prone-fjords-make-the-oil-and-minerals-trump-covets-dangerous-to-extract-249985

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Communities gather to strengthen Climate Action at regional event

    Source: City of Derby

    A recent event in Derby brought together community groups, sustainability experts, and local organisations to explore key topics in community-led sustainability efforts. The event facilitated conversations on funding, decarbonisation, renewable energy, community engagement, and sustainable transport solutions.

    Delegates were able to hear from topic experts, engage with case studies, and participate in meaningful discussions aimed at driving action and collaboration within their communities.

    As part of the event, attendees were able to take part in table discussions guided by facilitators, ensuring that key insights, innovative ideas, and critical challenges were captured and shared. 

    The event aimed to provide community groups with the knowledge and resources to take action on pressing sustainability issues. By fostering collaboration and knowledge-sharing, the event hoped to empower communities to drive change at a local level.

    Key topics at the event included: 

    • Community funding and creating bids 
    • Decarbonising community buildings and local homes 
    • Local sustainable transport and travel 
    • Local Area Energy Planning 

    Joanna Watson, Founder of Darley Community Energy Ltd commented: 

    “The Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire Community Event was packed full of interesting speakers and representatives from across the Community Energy sector. Of particular interest was insight into the Local Area Energy Plan consultation process and that Community Energy groups are recognised as key stakeholders. It was good to see many familiar faces from across the sector sharing their work, and also a great networking opportunity.” 

    Peter Burgess-Allen, Project Manager and Development Lead at Marches Energy Agency added: 

    “A lot of my work at Marches Energy Agency involves talking to community activists or council officers, and sometimes managing to get them together. It was great to see community groups given a platform to share their work and hear about council strategy to tackle emissions, in the same space.  I look forward to more debate and interaction going forwards!”

    Councillor Carmel Swan, Derby City Council Cabinet Member for Climate Change, Transport and Sustainability said: 

    “Community groups are a vital part of our journey to net-zero and really hold the key to accelerating projects in their local area. This event showed that we’re lucky to have lots of engaged communities in the area and I look forward to taking forward the learning and knowledge shared at the event.” 

    The event was funded by Fast Followers, part of Innovate UK’s Net Zero Living Programme, designed to help places and businesses across the UK to accelerate the delivery of the transition to Net Zero. 

    The event was hosted by a partnership of Derby City Council, Derbyshire County Council, Nottingham City Council, Nottinghamshire County Council, Rushcliffe Borough Council, Gedling Borough Council and Broxtowe Borough Council.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Economics: ADB Supports Digital Transformation of Uzbekistan’s Water Sector

    Source: Asia Development Bank

    MANILA, PHILIPPINES (19 February 2025) — The Asian Development Bank (ADB) approved a $125 million loan to support the Government of Uzbekistan in modernizing water management, improving water security, and increasing access to safe and reliable water in the country. 

    The Climate-Smart Water Management Improvement Project will improve asset management and sustainability of service delivery, while strengthening the institutional capacity of the country’s national water utility. This will help decision making and enhance water management and energy-use efficiency, contributing to climate change mitigation efforts.

    “Uzbekistan’s water resources are under acute threat from climate change and inefficient usage,” said ADB Country Director for Uzbekistan Kanokpan Lao-Araya. “ADB’s project introduces smart water management systems to improve water usage, reduce energy consumption, and increase operational efficiency to lower Uzbekistan’s carbon footprint.” 

    The project will support the Joint Stock Company Uzsuvtaminot (the national water utility) and its regional branches in completing the installation of an ongoing nationwide bulk flow metering and telemetry system on the main water resource’s locations. The project will also carry out an asset inventory and prepare onsite geographic mapping for all existing water supply and wastewater infrastructure, including about 4 million customer connections. 

    An integrated package of climate-smart, IT-based utility management systems will be launched, including relevant training for the national water utility staff. The project will also improve customer centers by providing new financial management software that will lead to transparent financial statements based on international standards. 

    The project will promote transformative digital solutions and technologies to decrease operational expenditure, increase workforce efficiency, and enhance customer engagement and satisfaction.

    This year marks the 30th anniversary of the partnership between ADB and the Republic of Uzbekistan. Since the Republic of Uzbekistan joined ADB in 1995, the bank has committed public sector loans, grants, and technical assistance totaling $14.3 billion to the country.

    ADB is committed to achieving a prosperous, inclusive, resilient, and sustainable Asia and the Pacific, while sustaining its efforts to eradicate extreme poverty. Established in 1966, it is owned by 69 members—49 from the region.

    MIL OSI Economics –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Hebden Bridge Flood Alleviation Scheme designs to be put on show

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Officers from the Environment Agency are hosting two events where residents can view final designs for the scheme, ask any questions and meet the project team.

    On Thursday 27 February and Thursday 6 March, designs will be displayed at Hebden Bridge Town Hall.

    People are invited to pop in from 12pm to 8pm to view the designs and ask any questions, prior to the main planning application being submitted to the council.  

    Environment Agency work to reduce flood risk from the River Calder and Hebden Water will consist of raising and strengthening river walls, using glass panels and raising barriers to minimise any intrusion on the iconic views for those living on the riverside.  

    Working in partnership with Calderdale Council, the Hebden Bridge Flood Alleviation Scheme is designed to reduce flood risk from the River Calder and Hebden Water.  

    Jo Arnold, Calderdale Programme and Partnership Manager at the Environment Agency, said: 

    We are really pleased to share our plans for the Hebden Bridge Flood Alleviation Scheme with the local community and we’d encourage all residents to attend to see what the final designs entail, ask questions and provide comment, prior to our plans being submitted for planning approval.  

    It’s a great opportunity to see the designs in detail, find out what the work will entail, ask any questions and speak directly with the team behind the project. 

    This scheme will play a key role in better protecting homes, businesses, and critical infrastructure across the town and support their long-term resilience against flooding. 

    Information on preparing for flooding

    Environment Agency officers will also be on hand to help anyone who’d like information on how to be prepared for flooding, provide practical advice, and help people sign up for flood warnings. 

    Even with flood defences in place, people can never be fully protected against flooding, so the Environment Agency always urge people to check their risk and sign up to flood warnings.

    Calderdale Council’s Cabinet Member for Climate Action and Housing, Cllr Scott Patient, said:

    It’s great news that the Hebden Bridge Flood Alleviation Scheme is reaching the final stages of development and crucial that we now move into delivery. I hope people take the time to find out more about the plans to better protect the town from flooding.

    It’s now nearly ten years since Storm Eva and five years since Storm Ciara caused significant flooding in the upper valley, but the risk is ever present, and we continue to work in partnership to minimise risk and build resilience.

    The planning application is expected to be submitted later this summer. It is anticipated that pre-construction preparation work will commence later in 2025. 

    Hebden Bridge Flood Information Centre on Valley Road continues to open on Mondays and Fridays from 10am to 2pm where people can get any further information.

    The project team can also be contacted by email.

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 February 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Ensuring a just transition to net zero

    Source: Scottish Government

    Climate action must benefit all of Scotland, says First Minister.

    First Minister John Swinney has vowed that he will take a collaborative approach to tackling the climate and nature emergency, and that the transition to net zero ‘will abandon no community’.

    Addressing key climate stakeholders at the Glasgow Botanic Gardens, the First Minister said that despite the many examples of government supported actions and projects that are contributing to a more climate resilient Scotland, there is much more to be done.

    He also called once again on the UK Government to at least match the Scottish Government’s investment in securing a future for the Grangemouth refinery.

    The First Minister said:

    “This transition will abandon no community. The importance of safeguarding jobs and livelihoods has never been more stark than in the immediacy of the situation at Grangemouth.

    “If we are going to ensure a future for the site, opportunities for its highly skilled workforce, investment is needed now. That is why yesterday, I announced that the Scottish Government will amend the 2025-26 Budget at this late stage to allocate an additional £25 million for a Just Transition Fund for Grangemouth.

    “Today, I urge the UK Government to at least match our funding – and to use the powers they have to go further.  If this is a Government for the United Kingdom, then Scotland should be getting its fair share of UK-wide investments.”

    The First Minister added:

    “If we are to persuade people to back climate action wholeheartedly, we must speak not only of the costs and challenges – which there will be – but also demonstrate clear and direct household and community benefits where these are possible. Tangible benefits at home, in terms of more jobs, lower energy bills, and new economic opportunities, delivering also tangible benefits for the planet.

    “My approach to Government has always been collaboration, which is why I want this to be the start of an ongoing conversation, with a focus on action, on delivery. I believe that we can only make the progress, and map out the next necessary steps on our climate journey, by bringing together local and central Government, agencies, stakeholders, trade unions, community organisations, and the wider public.”

    Background

    Climate action: First Minister’s speech – 19 February – gov.scot 

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: LCQ15: Hong Kong Common Law Practical Training Course

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

         Following is a question by Professor the Hon Priscilla Leung and a written reply by the Secretary for Justice, Mr Paul Lam, SC, in the Legislative Council today (February 19):
     
    Question:
     
         Regarding the Hong Kong Common Law Practical Training Course (Training Course) co-organised by the Hong Kong International Legal Talents Training Academy and the Supreme People’s Court, will the Government inform this Council:
     
    (1) how the Government assesses the actual effectiveness of the Training Course in promoting exchanges on the legal systems between Hong Kong and the Mainland, including whether there are any specific assessment indicators or supporting data;
     
    (2) of the specific feedback from the Mainland judges participating in the Training Course on the learning of Hong Kong’s common law system; whether the Government will collect and make public such feedback on a regular basis, so as to enhance the transparency of the Training Course; and
     
    (3) whether the Government will consider expanding the scope of the target participants of future legal talent training programmes to include judges or legal professionals from other regions; if so, whether it has assessed how such an approach will enhance the influence of Hong Kong’s legal system in the international community?

    Reply:
     
    President, 
     
         Concerning the question raised by Professor the Hon Priscilla Leung, our reply is as follows:
     
    (1) The Hong Kong Common Law Practical Training Course co-organised by the Hong Kong International Legal Talents Training Academy and the Supreme People’s Court was held in Hong Kong from January 6 to 17, 2025.
     
         25 judges from the Supreme People’s Court, the High People’s Court of Guangdong Province and courts of the nine Mainland cities in the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area participated in the two-week course, which was the inaugural programme of the Academy after its launch. Through lectures, dialogues and visits etc., the course provided Mainland judges with a comprehensive overview of the operation and practice of Hong Kong’s common law system, including topics such as contract law, company law, matrimonial and family law, civil and criminal procedures, arbitration and how courts in Hong Kong and the Mainland deal with foreign-related cases. Speakers (including judges and legal officers, and senior legal practitioners in Hong Kong and members of the Hong Kong International Legal Talents Training Expert Committee) had in-depth exchanges with Mainland judges on various topics.
     
         A number of dialogue sessions were organised, inviting speakers to communicate directly with participants on the same topic. For example, at the dialogue session entitled “Different Roles in Safeguarding the Rule of Law”, the Academy invited a Legislative Council member, representatives of the Department of Justice, the Hong Kong Bar Association and the Law Society of Hong Kong to engage in a dialogue on their role in safeguarding the rule of law, in which Mainland judges also had exchanges. At the dialogue session entitled “Handling of Foreign-related Law Proceedings: Comparison between Mainland and Hong Kong”, the Academy invited four senior legal practitioners to exchange views with Mainland judges on the similarities and differences in handling foreign-related cases. Through dialogue, mutual understanding and exchange between the two legal systems was promoted.
     
         Besides, at the end of the course, the Academy collected feedbacks from participants to assess the effectiveness of the course.
     
    (2) From the feedback forms, more than 95 per cent of Mainland judges indicated that the topics covered in the course were relevant to their work, contents were vivid and in-depth, speakers’ presentation were clear and detailed, and suggested that specialised training on individual topics could be organised in the future. During the graduation sharing, Mainland judges expressed the view that the course was informative, professional, persistent, progressive and productive, enabling them to gain a better understanding of the operation of the common law system in Hong Kong and its differences from those of the Mainland, as well as to strengthen their confidence in dealing with foreign-related cases, in particular those Hong Kong-related cases.
     
         The Academy will continue to collect comments on each training project and report to the Panel on Administration of Justice and Legal Services of the Legislative Council on a regular basis. At the same time, the Academy will improve and enhance its follow-up work based on the feedbacks.
     
    (3) In future, the Academy will collaborate with different institutions to conduct capacity-building projects for the Mainland, local and international legal professionals, for example, the Academy and the Ministry of Justice would jointly organise the National Training Course for Talents Handling Foreign-Related Arbitration (Hong Kong) in late-February this year, which will provide training to 80 corporate legal advisers, senior arbitrators, lawyers and arbitration practitioners handling foreign-related arbitration. In addition, the Academy will co-organise the Climate Change and International Trade Law Conference with the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) on March 14 this year. The Academy will also provide training to Hong Kong’s local legal professionals in relation to the Mainland’s legal system and conduct capacity-building projects in co-operation with more international organisations. Through a series of training programmes, the Academy could, on the one hand, provide training for local, Mainland and regional legal professionals, and at the same time, enable Hong Kong to develop into a centre for legal capacity-building and to enhance the influence of Hong Kong’s common law system in the international community.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Floods Swamp Tennessee

    Source: NASA

    A powerful storm system moved across the U.S. Southeast on February 15-16, bringing damaging winds, torrential rains, and destructive flash floods to several communities in Tennessee and Kentucky.
    Many areas received up to 6 inches (15 centimeters) of rain over a 48-hour period, according to the National Weather Service. Government data indicate that water levels in multiple rivers in the two states faced moderate to major flooding.
    The OLI-2 (Operational Land Imager-2) on Landsat 9 captured this false-color image (right) of swollen rivers in western Tennessee on February 17, 2025. The image on the left shows the same area on January 24, 2025. The band combination (7-5-4) used in the images makes it easier to distinguish between water, land, and vegetation. Water appears lighter blue in the February 17 image because it is rich with suspended sediment.
    In Tennessee, local authorities declared a state of emergency and ordered mandatory evacuations after a levee failed near Rives, a town along the Obion River with a population of about 250 people. More than half of the homes in the town suffered severe water damage, according to local news reports.
    A U.S. Geological Survey water gauge at Obion, Tennessee, recorded a water level height of 39.8 feet on February 18. Heights above 34 feet are considered flood stage. Officials in the nearby town of Dyersburg warned residents that evacuations may be necessary as water levels rose on the Forked Deer River.
    Some of the most destructive flash flooding occurred north of these images, in western Kentucky. However, clouds on February 17 prevented satellites from acquiring similar images of floodwater in that area.
    Meanwhile, forecasters are warning of new challenges for the region. A blast of frigid air is expected to pour into the region from the north, and a snowstorm from the west could drop several inches of snow on many of the same areas that flooded.
    NASA Earth Observatory images by Michala Garrison, using Landsat data from the U.S. Geological Survey. Story by Adam Voiland.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Preliminary Flood Maps for Harper County, Oklahoma Ready for Public View

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Preliminary Flood Maps for Harper County, Oklahoma Ready for Public View

    Preliminary Flood Maps for Harper County, Oklahoma Ready for Public View

    DENTON, Texas – Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are available for review by residents and business owners in all communities and incorporated areas of Harper County, Oklahoma.Property owners are encouraged to review the latest information to learn about local flood risks and potential future flood insurance requirements. Community residents can identify any concerns or questions about the information provided and participate in the appeal and comment periods for the maps.This is Harper County’s first complete set of digital FIRMs. These maps serve multiple purposes, including defining Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). SFHAs are areas at high risk for flooding. Community leaders can use these maps to make informed decisions about building standards and development that will make the community more resilient and lessen the impacts of a flooding event.FEMA stresses that flooding can and does happen outside of the most vulnerable areas.Review the preliminary flood maps by visiting the local floodplain administrator (FPA). A FEMA Map Specialist can help identify community FPAs. Specialists are available by telephone at 877-FEMA-MAP (877-336-2627) or by email at FEMA-FMIX@fema.dhs.gov.The preliminary maps may also be viewed online:The Flood Map Changes Viewer at http://msc.fema.gov/fmcv FEMA Map Service Center at http://msc.fema.gov/portalThe Base Level Engineering-to-FIRM Viewer at https://webapps.usgs.gov/fema/ble_firmFor more information about the flood maps:Use a live chat service about flood maps at floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html (just click on the “Live Chat Open” icon).Contact a FEMA Map Specialist by telephone at 877-FEMA-MAP (877-336-2627) or by email at FEMA-FMIX@fema.dhs.gov.There are cost-saving options available for those newly mapped into a high-risk flood zone. Learn more about your flood insurance options by talking with your insurance agent or visiting floodsmart.gov.
    toan.nguyen
    Tue, 02/18/2025 – 20:51

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: India is no longer just a follower; it is now leading the way in multiple fields: Dr. Jitendra Singh

    Source: Government of India (2)

    Posted On: 19 FEB 2025 3:04PM by PIB Delhi

    • India’s Space Sector Soars: From Chandrayaan-3 to Bharatiya Antariksh Station, Nation Emerges as a Global Leader in Space Exploration
    • India Leads Global Healthcare Innovation with DNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccine and First Herpesvirus Vaccine for Cervical Cancer
    • India’s Bioeconomy Booms: From $10 Billion to $140 Billion, Poised to Reach $250 Billion with Thriving Biotech Startups
    • India Pioneers Space Biology: Advancing Research in Space Medicine and Sustainable Life Beyond Earth
    • India’s Nuclear Energy Vision: 100 GW by 2047 to Drive Sustainability and Global Climate Leadership
    • India Rises as a Global Research Powerhouse, Poised to Lead the World in Scientific Publications by 2030
    • India’s Space Economy Poised for 10X Growth, Strengthening Global Leadership in Science and Bio-Manufacturing

    Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Science and Technology; Earth Sciences and Minister of State for PMO, Department of Atomic Energy, Department of Space, Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Dr. Jitendra Singh has asserted that India is no longer just a follower but is now setting global benchmarks, offering leadership and pioneering innovations across sectors. He highlighted the remarkable advancements India has made in recent years, in the fields of space, biotechnology, and nuclear energy etc positioning itself as a key player on the world stage.

    Dr. Jitendra Singh pointed out that India’s space sector has witnessed an unprecedented transformation, with a surge in ambitious missions and international collaborations. The Space Docking Experiment (SpaDeX) is a testament to India’s technological progress, paving the way for future space missions, including Gaganyaan, Chandrayaan-4, and the Bharatiya Antariksh Station, India’s upcoming international space station.

    India has also emerged as a preferred destination for satellite launches, earning global credibility. The nation has successfully launched 433 foreign satellites, of which 396 were deployed in the last decade alone, generating $157 million and €260 million in revenue from 2014-2023. The historic success of Chandrayaan-3, which made India the first country to land near the Moon’s south pole, has positioned ISRO at the forefront of lunar exploration. The world’s leading space agencies, including NASA, are now awaiting India’s findings from the Moon’s southern pole, a milestone that underscores the nation’s rising dominance in space research.

    The Minister also highlighted India’s pioneering role in biotechnology and bioeconomy. India became the first country to develop a DNA-based COVID-19 vaccine, demonstrating its leadership in vaccine research and development. Furthermore, India has introduced the first herpesvirus vaccine for cervical cancer, reinforcing its position as a leader in preventive healthcare.

    India’s bioeconomy has surged from $10 billion in 2014 to nearly $140 billion today, with projections to reach $250 billion in the coming years. The number of biotech startups has skyrocketed from just 50 in 2014 to nearly 9,000 today, making India a global hub for biotech innovation. In bio-manufacturing, India now ranks third in the Asia-Pacific region and 12th globally, with its influence expanding rapidly.

    India has also taken a bold step into space biology, laying the foundation for human survival beyond Earth. ISRO and the Department of Biotechnology have signed an MoU to advance space biotechnology research, focusing on growing plants in space to sustain long-term space missions. The study of space medicine and human physiology in extraterrestrial environments is becoming a critical area of research, and India is now setting global standards instead of just following them.

    India’s nuclear energy program, once met with scepticism, is now recognized for its peaceful and sustainable ambitions. The country has set an ambitious target of 100 gigawatts of nuclear energy by 2047, aiming to reduce carbon emissions by 50%, a commitment that is influencing global climate strategies. The world has now acknowledged India’s nuclear policy, which was envisioned by Homi Bhabha for peaceful purposes, as a model for responsible energy development.

    India’s scientific output is gaining global recognition, with the country now ranked fourth worldwide in scientific publications. Projections suggest that by 2030, India could surpass the United States to become the world’s top-ranked country in scientific research.

    India’s space economy is set to grow 5 to 10 times in the next decade, further solidifying its leadership. The nation’s rapid economic ascent is evident in its global rankings, including its 12th position in bio-manufacturing and fourth place in scientific research publications.

    Dr. Jitendra Singh concluded by emphasizing that India’s rise is no longer just about catching up but about setting the agenda for the world. “The clock has turned 360 degrees. Earlier, we learned from others; now, the world is looking up to us. The traffic is both ways,” he remarked.

    *****

    NKR/PSM

    (Release ID: 2104674) Visitor Counter : 20

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness

    Source: European Investment Bank

    EIB

    • EIB Group’s fresh financing in Greece last year amounted to €2.2 billion
    • Focus last year on energy supply, business growth and disaster management
    • Latest annual results bring EIB Group support in Greece over past five years to €14.5 billion

    The European Investment Bank (EIB) Group’s new financing in Greece amounted to €2.2 billion last year, with major support to bolster energy supplies, strengthen businesses and protect against environmental disasters in the country.

    The total for 2024 included €2.03 billion from the EIB and portfolio guarantees of €152 million from the European Investment Fund (EIF), which focuses on innovative and technology-driven small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as well as Small Mid-Caps in Europe.

    Top operations included loans of €390 million to natural-gas supplier DEPA Commercial to build solar parks, €150 million to power provider HEDNO to upgrade the grid, loans and guarantees of €550 million to domestic banks to expand financing for SMEs and Mid-Caps and €220 million to the government to bolster disaster management.

    Kostis Hatzidakis, Minister of Finance of the Hellenic Republic noted: “Greece’s relationship with the European Investment Bank is long-standing and strong. This was reaffirmed in 2024, with new financing reaching €2.2 billion. These funds will be used for investments in renewable energy sources, upgrades to the electricity grid, support for SMEs, and the purchase of firefighting aircraft and rescue equipment. The EIB was a valuable ally when Greece was cut off from the markets. It will remain a partner, but with a new approach. Going forward, priorities will focus on energy interconnections, research and technology, climate adaptation, and defense investments, as outlined in the EIB’s Strategic Roadmap”.

    “Our work in Greece is a testament to the transformative power of strategic financing,” said EIB Vice-President Yannis Tsakiris. “In 2024, we reinforced our commitment to the country by supporting clean energy, climate resilience and critical infrastructure while strengthening SMEs, innovation, job creation and social cohesion.”

    The latest annual results bring total EIB Group financing in Greece over the past five years to €14.5 billion. The yearly average in the country since 2000 is almost €2.9 billion, which reflects an unusually high sum of almost €5 billion in 2021 as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic.

    The EIB Group’s support last year was almost 1% of Greece’s gross domestic product (GDP), the third-highest level among European Union countries behind only Croatia and Estonia. That means that EIB Group financing in Greece last year averaged €631 per inhabitant, making the country one of the biggest beneficiaries based on the size of the population and the economy. The funding is projected to catalyse investments in Greece of up to €6.6 billion – about 2.5% of its GDP.

    Energy supply

    The €390 million EIB loan to DEPA Commercial is for new photovoltaic (PV) parks in the regions of western Macedonia, Thessaly and central Greece. The sites will add approximately 800 megawatts (MW) of renewable energy – enough to power 278,000 households for a year.

    Also in the area of clean energy, the EIB last year provided a €195 million loan to supplier PPC Renewables to develop 580 MW of solar plants and 175 MW of battery storage. The moves will boost renewables capacity, grid stability and energy security.

    The €150 million EIB credit to HEDNO covers upgrades to Greece’s electricity-distribution network, improving grid reliability and facilitating integration of renewables.

    The EIB last year also took part in the creation of an EU “Decarbonisation Fund” for Greece that will channel €1.6 billion in revenue from the European emissions-trading system into sustainable energy and development projects on Greek islands. These include grid interconnections with the mainland and the phase-out of local power plants.

    Business boost

    The EIB last year allocated a total €702 million to strengthen SMEs and Mid-Caps in Greece. The support – 28% of the total – took the form of intermediated loans and guarantees.

    Top operations included €300 million guarantees to Eurobank and National Bank of Greece covering €600 million new loans to Mid-Caps. In addition, the EIB provided a €250 million loan to the National Bank of Greece to bolster green investments by Greek SMEs and Mid-Caps. The credit raised total EIB support for such investments in Greece to €1 billion.

    The EIF also showed its agility in supporting vital investments for both debt and equity. It signed €152m with several of Greece’s financial institutions for capped portfolio guarantees. They are expected to mobilise up to €1,8bn in financing for small and medium-sized enterprises, while making the Greek economy greener, and supporting innovation and the country’s digital transition.

    The EIF also signed a new €200 million equity mandate to support innovative companies in Life Sciences & Healthcare and Sustainability & Social Impact by improving their access to vital financing. Funded by Cohesion policy and national resources of the Hellenic Republic, the mandate will cover a financing gap in these sectors, supporting investments from pre-seed to growth stages based on market needs.

    Disaster protection

    The €220 million EIB loan last year to the Greek government is to buy fire trucks, rescue vehicles and aircraft needed to fight to natural disasters such as wildfires and floods, both of which have caused extensive damage in Greece in recent years. The credit also covers upgrades to essential disaster-management services.

    The financing forms part of a European climate-adaptation plan by the EIB Group and brings its total support for Greek civil protection and disaster preparedness to €595 million.

    EIB Advisory

    There were also key technical assistance projects delivered from EIB Advisory, a highlight being an agreement with the Athens Water Supply and Sewerage Company (EYDAP) to back its €2 billion, 10-year investment programme to ensure the Greek capital has a more resilient water supply and supporting investments in lignite-dependent regions such as Western Macedonia and Megalopolis in the Peloponnese, facilitating their transition to a future of clean energy.

    In December 2024, the continuation of advisory support by EIB advisors from the PASSA team to the Greek administration was approved. This support aims to ensure the smooth implementation of sustainable development and Just Transition projects financed by the EU.

    Background information

    EIB

    The European Investment Bank (ElB) is the long-term lending institution of the European Union, owned by its Member States. Built around eight core priorities, , we finance investments that contribute to EU policy objectives by bolstering climate action and the environment, digitalisation and technological innovation, security and defence, cohesion, agriculture and bioeconomy, social infrastructure, important investments outside the EU, and the Capital Markets Union.  

    The EIB Group, which also includes the European Investment Fund (EIF), signed nearly €89 billion in new financing for over 900 high-impact projects in 2024, boosting Europe’s competitiveness and security.  

    All projects financed by the EIB Group are in line with the Paris Climate Agreement, as pledged in our Climate Bank Roadmap. Almost 60% of the EIB Group’s annual financing supports projects directly contributing to climate change mitigation, adaptation, and a healthier environment.  

    Fostering market integration and mobilising investment, the Group supported a record of over €100 billion in new investment for Europe’s energy security in 2024 and mobilised €110 billion in growth capital for startups, scale-ups and European pioneers

    Approximately half of the EIB’s financing within the European Union is directed towards cohesion regions, where per capita income is lower than the EU average.

    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    ©EIB
    Download original
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    ©EIB
    Download original
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    ©EIB
    Download original
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    ©EIB
    Download original
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    Greece financing from EIB Group totals €2.2 billion in 2024 with focus on energy supply, business growth and disaster preparedness
    ©EIB
    Download original

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: WTW and Cornell University partner to predict drought and prepare for water scarcity

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LONDON, Feb. 19, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking, and solutions company, announced today a new scientific partnership with Cornell University to quantify the risks of severe and sustained drought worldwide. This collaboration will provide an in-depth view of global exposure to drought risks and the potential effects of water shortages on business operations.

    Around two-thirds of the global population live in places that encounter water stress for at least part of the year. When water supplies are further diminished by drought, many communities experience reduced agricultural yield, energy production, and slower economic growth. The adverse effects of drought are more serious in low-income and middle-income countries and are particularly disruptive to agriculture-dominated areas of the developing world.

    Climate change has already increased drought risks in many regions, but unfortunately even the latest generation of climate models still underestimate the potential severity, duration, and correlation of future droughts. Under this new initiative, WTW and Cornell University will collaborate to identify geographical ‘hotspots’ for climate-amplified drought, produce more accurate estimates of drought risk, and create new tools and datasets to anticipate single and multi-year drought. At Cornell, the research is supported by the Atkinson Center for Sustainability and led by Prof. Toby Ault, a leading global expert in future drought under climate change.

    Scott St. George, Head of Weather & Climate Research for the WTW Research Network, said, “Water is essential to all industries, so no one can afford to have drought take them by surprise. We know climate change has already supercharged droughts in some places — witness the ongoing drought in the American Southwest, now in its third decade. Prof. Ault and his team at Cornell will provide us with a clear view of the real risk of drought and water scarcity. Those insights are absolutely critical for our clients’ operations and planning in water-dependent sectors such as food and beverage, energy producers, and waterborne transport.”

    “We’re excited to work with WTW to translate cutting-edge climate science into actionable insights for the insurance industry,” said Prof. Toby Ault, Associate Professor in the Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Cornell University. “Our research has shown that traditional climate models often underestimate the risk of severe, prolonged droughts, particularly in regions already facing water stress. By combining our expertise in drought modeling with WTW’s industry knowledge, we can better prepare for the complex drought risks of the future.”

    About Cornell University
    Cornell University is an Ivy League and statutory land-grant research university located in Ithaca, New York. Founded in 1865, Cornell is consistently ranked among the world’s leading academic institutions, with strengths in atmospheric sciences, engineering, and environmental research. The university’s Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences is internationally recognized for its leadership work in climate science, drought research, and applied climatology.

    About WTW

    At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance.

    Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Learn more at wtwco.com.

    Media Contacts

    Sarah Booker
    Sarah.Booker@wtwco.com
    +44 20 3124 7671

    The MIL Network –

    February 20, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Plantings replace storm-affected trees

    Source: Scotland – City of Dundee

    Dundee City Council is undertaking a widespread programme to plant trees in city greenspaces replacing those affected by recent storms.

    This year, 6500 whips are to be planted at mostly storm-damaged areas including Templeton Woods and Camperdown Park, following the impact of Storm Éowyn and other recent weather-related events.

    The native species trees have been acquired through funding from charity Trees for Cities and, so far this year, over 2000 have been planted with the help of over one hundred volunteers.

    Climate, Environment & Biodiversity Convener Cllr Heather Anderson said: “Trees are so special and it’s always distressing when we lose trees to storms. However, this is a great initiative involving the whole community and hopefully these new plantings will thrive, and everyone involved will check on their growth over the coming years.”

    An event also took place recently at the city’s Baxter Park which saw the re-planting of same species trees through funding support from Trees for Cities. This initiative will see twenty trees planted at Baxter Park this year, with plans for a further twenty-three in 2026.

    Cllr Heather Anderson added: “Sadly, Baxter Park lost several of its grand trees in the storms of the last few years. Some of these were part of the original planting when the park was first created and gifted to the people of Dundee by the Baxter family away back in 1863.

    “With support from Trees for Cities, the Council’s Countryside Ranger Service have worked with the Forestry Section to support the community to undertake this planting to regenerate the tree coverage in this much-loved park.

    “Scouts and parents from 7th Scout Group Dundee planted the first tree, with support from Stobswell Forum and the Friends of Baxter Park. It’s been a truly collaborative effort.”

    More tree planting events will be taking place throughout 2025 with some open to volunteers from the public to take part. The details of upcoming plantings can be found on the Dundee Countryside Ranger Service’s Facebook page.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Alexander Novak met with the Special Representative for Climate Change of the President of Kenya, Chairman of the African Group of Negotiators Ali Daoud Mohamed

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Alexander Novak met with the Special Representative for Climate Change of the President of Kenya, Chairman of the African Group of Negotiators Ali Daoud Mohamed

    February 19, 2025

    Alexander Novak met with the Special Representative for Climate Change of the President of Kenya, Chairman of the African Group of Negotiators Ali Daoud Mohamed

    February 19, 2025

    Alexander Novak met with the Special Representative for Climate Change of the President of Kenya, Chairman of the African Group of Negotiators Ali Daoud Mohamed

    February 19, 2025

    Previous news Next news

    Alexander Novak met with the Special Representative for Climate Change of the President of Kenya, Chairman of the African Group of Negotiators Ali Daoud Mohamed

    Deputy Prime Minister of Russia Alexander Novak met with the Special Representative for Climate Change of the President of Kenya, Chairman of the African Group of Negotiators within the framework of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) process Ali Daoud Mohamed.

    The parties discussed national efforts and international cooperation in implementing the goals of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming and climate change.

    The meeting also discussed cooperation in the carbon market, the need to take into account the contribution of forests to absorbing emissions, and the possibility of coordinating the efforts of Russia and African countries in matters of adaptation to climate change.

    Alexander Novak stressed the need to implement a smooth transition to a zero-emissions economy with equal access to modern technologies.

    “The transition to a low-carbon economy must be fair and take into account various national climate and natural conditions and development priorities. I believe that the transition to zero emissions will be gradual, using a wide range of technologies. Harmonious coexistence of both green and traditional energy, which can complement each other, is necessary. The transition from fossil fuels is not the only way to reduce emissions, but one of the possible ways. A ban on investment in projects related to the use of fossil fuels cannot be the basis for a fair transition,” said Alexander Novak.

    The Deputy Prime Minister noted the important role of the transition from coal to natural gas in the process of moving towards carbon neutrality. This allows for a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and helps to overcome technological gaps.

    The meeting participants recognized that any unilateral barriers or artificial restrictions that hinder the achievement of climate goals are inappropriate, since global warming is one of the main challenges for future generations.

    Russia has emphasized its commitment to climate issues and intends to continue participating in the international dialogue on combating climate change regardless of the changing course of other countries. In total, Russia has already managed to reduce emissions by almost 70% compared to the 1990 level – this is an absolute record among all countries participating in the international climate agenda.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Schatz, Marshall Introduce Legislation To Improve Weather Forecasts, Help Communities Better Prepare For Extreme Weather

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Hawaii Brian Schatz

    U.S. Senators Brian Schatz (D-Hawai‘i) and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) today introduced a bill to strengthen the collection of weather and soil moisture data, improving the accuracy of extreme weather warnings and agriculture forecasts. The Improving Flood and Agricultural Forecasts Act of 2025 codifies and expands the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) Mesonet Program, an initiative that aims to fill gaps in local weather data that impact forecasting and disaster response, as well as supporting agriculture and other weather-dependent industries through improved data collection.

    “For Hawai‘i and other states vulnerable to floods, droughts, and severe weather, better data means better forecasts, better prepared communities, and faster emergency response times,” said Senator Schatz, a member of the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. “This same data also helps farmers and ranchers navigate droughts.”

    “The mesonet and soil moisture monitoring probes are crucial tools for Kansans. Weather affects everything on the farm, and a deeper understanding of what’s happening above and below the ground provides farmers more certainty when making crop decisions,” said Senator Marshall. “Better weather data collection for Kansas also helps us predict wildfires and tornadoes before they arrive, which has the potential to save lives in cases of extreme weather. I’m proud to introduce this important, bipartisan legislation.”

    Mesonets are weather observation data networks crucial for forecasting weather, flood, fire, and agricultural impacts. The legislation would provide grants to states, Tribes, private entities, and universities to expand local weather observation systems. By authorizing and enabling NOAA to purchase local weather data, assess its quality and cost-effectiveness, and integrate it into key forecasting systems, the bill aims to improve disaster preparedness and agricultural production nationwide. The legislation builds on Schatz’s efforts to increase funding for NOAA’s Mesonet Program, which has supported a key soil moisture sensing network in Hawai‘i.

    The text of the bill is available here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: ‘A peaceful, prosperous, democratic Pacific’

    Source: New Zealand Government

    Good Evening
     
    Let us begin by acknowledging Professor David Capie and the PIPSA team for convening this important conference over the next few days. Whenever the Pacific Islands region comes together, we have a precious opportunity to share perspectives and learn from each other. That is especially true in our region, where distances between us are large. 
     
    We acknowledge, too, members of the Diplomatic Corps, Parliamentary colleagues, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.
     
    New Zealand’s place in the world
    New Zealand, as a country, has a myriad of influences. We have enduringly strong connections – for reasons of history, migration and foreign policy alignment – to our traditional partners of Australia, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada. 
     
    First and foremost, among these is Australia, New Zealand’s one formal ally, and our closest and most likeminded partner. We cooperate extremely closely with Australia, in the Pacific and around the world. 
     
    We are increasingly integrated socially, economically and strategically into Asia, with large and increasing Asian communities here in New Zealand and ever closer diplomatic relationships in South, South East, and North East Asia.
     
    At the same time, the starting point for understanding how New Zealand views the Pacific is the following, very simple statement: New Zealand is a Pacific Island country, linked by geography, history, culture, politics, demography and indeed DNA. 
     
    Fully 1.3 million New Zealanders, or about one-in-four of us are in full or part Polynesian, Melanesian or Micronesian, with either Māori heritage or relatives or ancestors from other Pacific islands. 
     
    Auckland is home to more Polynesians than any other city. Around the same number of Samoans and Tongans live in New Zealand as do in Samoa and Tonga. Vastly more Cook Islanders, Niueans and Tokelauans live in New Zealand than back in their homelands.
     
    The original discovery and settlement of the Pacific Islands, including New Zealand, is one of the most remarkable stories of exploration in human history. The late New Zealand historian Michael King compared it to space exploration as both were voyages into the unknown. 
     
    But Pacific navigation is arguably even more remarkable because the canoes that set out from the Asian landmass knew not where they would land, nor when, nor indeed if they would find any new territory. 
     
    But find land they did, as they forged new identities and societies on atolls and islands that today stand as a testament to their imagination, endurance and the resilience to overcome formidable challenges of distance, geography, demography, and resource scarcity. 
     
    Last year, we had the enormous privilege of visiting almost all of those island nations spread across our vast Blue Continent. So, this evening we’d like to share some reflections about the Pacific, within the context of New Zealand’s Foreign Policy Reset. 
     
    We note, too, your conference theme, which raises the question of whether the Pacific Islands are a zone of peace or ocean of discontent. In 1520, the great Portuguese explorer Ferdinand Magellan named this massive body of water the Pacific, due to its calmness – Pacific meaning peaceful. Ironically, it didn’t end that way for him, or some of his crew, so your conference theme holds both historical justification and appeal.
     
    An active, engaged Pacific policy
    When we again took on the role of New Zealand Foreign Minister in November 2023, we were determined to put the Pacific at the forefront of an energetic, engaged and active New Zealand foreign policy once more. This lay behind our decision to undertake the most ambitious, intensive year of Pacific diplomacy in New Zealand history. 
     
    Never before has a New Zealand political leader tried to spend time in all 18 member countries of the Pacific Islands Forum in a single year. But try we did: meeting the many diverse peoples scattered across this vast, beautiful blue continent. 
     
    As often as we were able, we took Parliamentary colleagues from across the spectrum of New Zealand’s political parties to reinforce that our friendship is bipartisan, enduring and long-term. 
     
    The purpose of all these discussions was to take the pulse of the region. As a democratic country operating in a democratic region, New Zealand is driven in our Pacific policy by three foundational questions focused on our region’s people: 

    Is what New Zealand is doing in the region reflective of what the people of the Pacific Islands want and need? 
    Are we effectively supporting the prosperity and security of Pacific Island peoples?; and 
    Are we undertaking and explaining this work in a way which maintains New Zealanders’ support for our objectives in the region? 

     
    When describing our observations of last year’s travel, an obvious starting point is the unimaginable vastness of our region. It is a massive ocean, covering over 30 percent of the Earth’s surface.
     
    While in the Marshall Islands, Micronesia and Palau, we learned of the logistical difficulties they faced in getting to last year’s Pacific Islands Forum in Tonga. We decided on the spot to offer the use of one of our 757 aircraft to take Micronesian leaders to and from Nuku’alofa. We have also announced, over the past year, significant investment in digital connectivity in the Pacific, alongside such partners as the Australia, Taiwan, United States and Japan. 
     
    Connecting all members of the Pacific family is vital given the huge, isolating physical distances between us. But because we believe that all Pacific voices are important and that talanoa – coming together for dialogue – must be regular and meaningful, we were happy to facilitate their coming together in Nuku’alofa. 
     
    Why? Because Pacific regionalism sits at the core of our Pacific approach, with the Pacific Islands Forum at its centre. We are a region with challenging issues that can polarise us, such as deep seabed mining and how best to manage strategic competition. The Forum plays a critical role in helping us to form a cohesive approach, resolve differences, bolster regional development and security, and use our collective voice to hold bigger countries to account.
     
    The Blue Continent’s challenges
    We have also reflected on how the Blue Pacific Continent and its peoples face a multitude of challenges. Our region is faced with the sharpest strategic competition it has confronted since World War 2 ended almost eighty years ago. As we face external pushes into our region to coerce, cajole and constrain, we must stand together as a region – always remembering that we are strongest when we act collectively to confront security and strategic challenges. 
     
    Climate change is a great threat facing the Pacific and we are at the global forefront of disaster risk exposure. Our ambition is that all Pacific peoples remain resilient to the impacts of climate change and other disasters and that New Zealand can support building resilience in practical ways. 
     
    Fisheries are vital to the economies, livelihoods, food security, and social and cultural wellbeing of many Pacific Island countries and is a crucial source of government revenue. But they face several complex interrelated and transboundary issues, such as illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing and the management of migratory fish species. 
     
    After years of volatility, the long-term growth trajectory risks settling well below pre-COVID averages for Pacific Island countries. Increasing investment, building fiscal and climate resilience, and improving the access to finance and greater regional connectivity will be key to improving long-run growth prospects in the Pacific.  
     
    Answering to the people
    One truism that runs through our three stints as Foreign Minister is this: there are no votes in it. Struggling New Zealand taxpayers and their families find it difficult to understand why their government is handing out multi-million-dollar aid grants overseas.
     
    Foreign policy practitioners and academics may focus intently on our obligations to New Zealand’s development partners and the way we conduct our relations with them. But the bottom line is that we are accountable first and foremost to the New Zealand taxpayer. 
    During our three tenures as Foreign Minister, we have demonstrated a staunch commitment to a well-resourced New Zealand development programme with a predominant focus on the Pacific. 
     
    Few New Zealand Governments have gone to the wire to significantly lift the size of our international development programme as a proportion of New Zealand’s Gross National Income. One was Norman Kirk’s Government in the 1970s. Two others were during my two previous terms as Foreign Minister. 
     
    In short, we have been determined to use all of our influence and all of our negotiating power to get the best possible New Zealand development programme for the Pacific. 
     
    And while times are very tough here at home right now, we will continue to advocate with our Cabinet colleagues and the New Zealand people for the importance of an active Pacific policy and a properly-resourced international agenda – whether in defence, foreign policy, or development. That’s what is right for New Zealand and it’s what is in the best interests of the Pacific.
     
    We will never apologise for directly connecting New Zealand’s security and prosperity to the security and prosperity of the region and world around us. 
    The Coalition Government’s Foreign Policy Reset established a new strategic direction for New Zealand, including for our international development programme, with an emphasis on sustaining our deep focus on the Pacific. 
     
    As part of ensuring our accountability to the New Zealand taxpayer, last year the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade undertook a review of our development programme to gauge alignment with government priorities and assess its overall impact and efficiency. A report on the review’s findings is being released today.
     
    The review found that while our development is generally aligned with Government priorities, some reshaping and streamlining is required. In short, we will achieve more impact by doing fewer, bigger, projects better. This work is already under way.
     
    Our predominant focus remains on the Pacific, where we will be working with partners including the United States, Australia, Japan and in Europe to more intensively leverage greater support for the region. We will maintain the high tempo of political engagement across the Pacific to ensure alignment between our programme and New Zealand and partner priorities. And we will work more strategically with Pacific Governments to strengthen their systems, so they can better deliver the services their people need.
     
    Greater development funding is being devoted to South East Asia to meet our ambition for closer relations overall with this important region. We have also increased humanitarian funding in response to the scale of need regionally and globally. And we have reduced multilateral funding, to focus on those partners who make the most concrete impact.
     
    We see this work of reshaping our development programme as part of meeting our obligation to the New Zealand taxpayers whose continuing support underpins its social licence.
     
    Friendship, challenges and dialogue
    Over the decades, our Pacific-oriented foreign policy has been defined as much by our actions as our words. We are there in times of need, whether in response to natural disasters, helping with budget support during fiscal emergencies, spurring economic development, or helping to resolve conflicts. 
     
    Our 2018 Pacific Reset emphasised that exhibiting friendship in all our engagements was the cornerstone of our Pacific foreign policy orientation. What does friendship in that context mean? 
     
    It means we are honest, empathetic, trustful and respectful through frequent engagement. And it means having frank and open conversations with our Pacific counterparts.
     
    Over the past year, we have consistently stressed that we see all states as equal, whatever their size. We are guided by the mutual respect and trust that has grown over time between New Zealand and other Pacific Island countries. A second theme that has run through all our public engagements is just how important diplomacy is in our troubled world. 
     
    New Zealand has faced two isolated challenges in the past twelve months in our relations with the Pacific. In these two very different cases, our accountability to our taxpayers and our fidelity to promoting the interests of Pacific peoples throughout the region require that we explain openly what has taken place. 
     
    Of the 18 Pacific Islands Forum member countries, the only one we did not spend time in during the past year was Kiribati. That was not for a lack of trying. 
     
    For more than a year we respected Kiribati’s preference to avoid outside engagement. But with over $100 million of development assistance committed to Kiribati over the past three years, we had to review the status of existing projects and understand Kiribati’s ongoing development needs. After all, we all have to negotiate with our Ministers of Finance. 
     
    This requirement was urgent given our own budget cycle and the need to make decisions about how future development spending is allocated in Micronesian countries and across the region for the next three years. 
     
    So, we were pleased when a visit to Kiribati was finally scheduled for January 2025. We began organising our cross-party Parliamentary group to visit Tarawa. Then, with about a week to go, we were told President Maamau, who is also my counterpart as Kiribati’s Foreign Affairs Minister, would no longer meet with our delegation. 
    We made public our regret and concern, as well as our consequent decision to review our development programme to Kiribati. We are accountable to the worker in Kaitaia, the builder in Gore, and the farmer in the Waikato for the spending of taxpayer money, and we felt it important to express our concerns openly and transparently. 
     
    At the same time, we have a long-standing relationship with the Kiribati people, which has overcome previous challenges. We will weather this one too. 
     
    We have made clear that we are still working towards meaningful dialogue with Kiribati’s President and Foreign Minister, whether in Kiribati, New Zealand or elsewhere in the region. We are taking positive steps towards that goal in coming weeks. 
     
    The second isolated challenge we have faced has been developments in our relationship with the Cook Islands Government. Unlike the people of Samoa, the people of the Cook Islands have never opted for their country to be fully independent from New Zealand – though they are of course always free to choose to do so. 
     
    Rather, they have opted since 1965 to be in free association with New Zealand. This means that New Zealand is bound constitutionally to the Cook Islands by sharing the King of New Zealand as a head of state, a common, single citizenship and passport, as well as by shared values and interests. 
     
    Over the past 60 years, New Zealand has taken very seriously its obligations and commitments to the Cook Islands people. Every year we deliver for the Cook Islands people in areas as broad as health and education, economic development, defence and security, good governance, resources and environment, and culture and heritage.
     
    The Cook Islands, in exercising self-government, is supported by New Zealand funding and provision of expertise. As long as the Cook Islands remain tied to New Zealand constitutionally, we have an expectation that the Government of the Cook Islands will not seek benefits only available to fully independent states – such as separate passports and citizenship, or membership of the United Nations or the Commonwealth – or pursue policies that are significantly at variance with New Zealand’s interests. 
     
    We also have an expectation that New Zealand will be fully and meaningfully consulted on all major international actions that the Cook Islands contemplates that affect our interests.
     
    These are not unreasonable expectations. And they are not new. For example, our Prime Ministers, Norman Kirk in 1973, David Lange in 1986 and Helen Clark in 2001 all expressed these expectations formally. 
     
    To use but one example: in 2001, Helen Clark stated that Cook Islanders retained New Zealand citizenship “on the basis that there will continue to be a mutually acceptable standard of values in Cook Islands’ laws and policies”. She again repeated our longstanding position that if full independence from New Zealand was what the Cook Islands people wanted, then they were free to opt for it at any time.
     
    These have been well-established and previously settled understandings between us, although there have been periodic attempts by Cook Islands Prime Ministers to test the boundaries of this constitutional pact. 
     
    But our free association relationship in its current form has endured because the overwhelming majority of Cook Islands people have wanted to maintain their New Zealand citizenship and passport and the rights it affords them to the same opportunities and privileges as all other New Zealanders, including in health and education. The wishes of the Cook Islands people are paramount here.
     
    Our explicit advice to Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown and his officials since he first raised the issue with us in July 2024 was that if he proceeded with trying to implement a separate Cook Islands citizenship and passport system then the people of the Cook Islands would risk losing their New Zealand citizenship and passport – an outcome we know is opposed by the vast majority of Cook Islanders.
     
    There is also the matter of the Cook Islands Government’s decision to enter into a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) and a number of other agreements with China last week without any meaningful consultation with New Zealand or its own people over either the architecture or details of those deals. 
     
    New Zealand and the Cook Islands people remain, as of this evening, in the dark over all but one the agreements signed by China and the Cooks last week. 
     
    Given this lack of consultation, the New Zealand Government, once it has seen the text of all of the agreements that were signed, will need to undertake its own careful analysis of how they impact our vital national interests. Only then will we be able to fully gauge the deals’ impact on the relationship between New Zealand and the Cook Islands. 
     
    While the connection between the people of the Cook Islands and New Zealand remains resolutely strong, we currently face challenges in the government-to-government relationship. 
     
    But this state of affairs – disagreements and debates between the leaders of New Zealand and the Cook Islands – has been a periodic feature of our 60 years of free association. We have always found a way through, guided by the wisdom and wishes of the Cook Islands people. 
     
    As then US President Franklin Roosevelt said in 1945, “We shall strive for perfection. We shall not achieve it immediately – but we still shall strive. We may make mistakes – but they must never be mistakes which result from faintness of heart or abandonment of moral principle”.
     
    During 2025, as we celebrate 60 years of free association, we are going to need to reset the government-to-government relationship. We will also need to find a way, as we did in 1973 and 2001, to formally re-state the mutual responsibilities and obligations that we have for one another and the overall parameters and constraints of the free association model.
     
    Resetting and formally re-stating the parameters of the relationship is not a small task. But it is one which we are confident we can meet – powered by the history of goodwill and common bonds between New Zealand and the Cook Islands people.
     
    Another issue on which the region has devoted significant attention over the past year has been New Caledonia – which is, geographically, New Zealand’s closest neighbour. Uncertainty and discord there is obviously something that prompts concern and discussion right around our region. 
     
    From the moment of the unrest onwards, New Zealand has been very clear that everyone – no matter their view on New Caledonia’s political status – should agree that violence is not the answer. 
     
    The focus must be on dialogue – and finding a new pathway forward on the important issues facing New Caledonia. We had the benefit – working closely with authorities in Paris and Nouméa – to have had a productive visit to New Caledonia in December. 
     
    We went there to listen and to learn, and to engage with a very wide range of New Caledonians of all backgrounds. Hearing New Caledonians voice their hopes and dreams for economic development led us to the view that there may be lessons from New Zealand’s own experiences that might be of value. 
     
    We hope lessons from New Zealand’s own economic development as a multi-ethnic Pacific Island country can be shared with New Caledonians, who might be able to adapt them to their unique context.
     
    Conclusions
    When we reflect on the past year, it is impossible not to be optimistic about this region’s future. As we travelled to places as diverse as Suva, Pohnpei, Alofi, Port Vila, Nauru and Apia, we were struck also by a profound commonality. 
     
    Pacific Islanders scattered around our vast, beautiful region all want a brighter, more prosperous and more secure future for their children and for future generations. 
     
    As a founding member of the Pacific Islands Forum, and as a Pacific and Polynesian country itself, New Zealand has always been at the forefront of efforts to bring about that future. 
     
    Over the past year, we have done our very best to deliver, through words and actions, on New Zealand’s commitment to contribute to a brighter future for all Pacific peoples. This very important work – involving discussion, debate and, yes, sometimes disagreement – will continue.
     
    The Pacific Islands region is a profoundly democratic one. People from every village, town or city in every Pacific Island country have a direct say in how their affairs are run. Just this year, people in six Pacific Islands Forum countries – Australia, the Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, New Caledonia, Tonga and Vanuatu – are heading to the polls to cast ballots which will help determine the future direction of their countries. 
     
    And so it is Pacific peoples’ hopes and aspirations which must drive political leaders and policy makers. Our policies must be responsive and accountable to the perspectives of those we represent. 
     
    And no matter the future we face, or the challenges we encounter, we will always be members of the same Pacific family. We inhabit the most vast and breathtaking ocean continent in the world. And as family, we will always find a way forward, together, towards the secure and prosperous future that our people deserve.
     
    Thank you. Kia kaha. Go well. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA News: Interview of President Trump and Elon Musk by Sean Hannity, “The Sean Hannity Show”

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-center”>Roosevelt Room

    11:48 A.M. EST

         Q    Mr. President, great to see you again.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much.  Thank you.

         Q    How are you?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you. 

         Q    Elon Musk.

         MR. MUSK:  Hi.

         Q    Great to see you. 

         MR. MUSK:  Thanks.  Thanks for having me.

         Q    I’ve been reading a lot about you.  I’ve got to start with this.  So, he’s working for free with DOGE.  He’s — he’s kind of put a lot of his life on hold, and you sued Twitter a number of years ago.  You just made him pay you $10 million?

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  That’s right.

         Q    That’s — that’s right.  (Laughs.)

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I sued — I sued from long before he had it. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Yeah.  (Inaudible.)

         THE PRESIDENT:  And, I mean, they really did a number on me, you know.  And I sued, and they had to pay.  You know, they paid $10 million settlement.

         Q    You’re okay with that?
        
         MR. MUSK:  I mean, I left it up to the lawyers and, you know, the team running Twitter.  So, I said, “You guys do what you think is the right — makes sense.”

         Q    I think it’s funny.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I think —

         Q    Because —

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s a very low — I was looking to get much more money than that.
        
         Q    So, you gave him a discount w- — in the lawsuit?

         THE PRESIDENT:  He got — oh, he got a big discount.  I don’t think he even knows about it.

         Q    He’s become one of your — if you read and believe the media — he’s become one of your best friends.  He’s working for free for you.  He’s —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I love the president.  I just want to be clear about that.  

         Q    You don’t care about that? 

         MR. MUSK:  I — no, I love the pr- — I —

         Q    You love the president? 

         MR. MUSK:  I think — I think President Trump is a good man, and — and he’s, you know — I — I —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the way he said that.  You know, there’s something nice about.  (Laughter.)

         MR. MUSK:  No, it is.  I, you know —

         THE PRESIDENT:  It is.

         MR. MUSK:  Because, I mean, the president has been so — so unfairly attacked in the media.  It’s truly outrageous.  And I’ve sp- — at this point, spent a lot of time with the president, and not once have I seen him do something that was mean or cruel or — or wrong.  Not once. 

         Q    You know, I’ve known him for 30 years.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And I’ve never seen anybody take as much as he’s taken.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And we’ve discussed this.  And I’m like, “How do you deal with it?”

         THE PRESIDENT:  Did have a choice?  (Laughs.)  I didn’t have a choice.

         Q    Well, you would say that to me.  I’m like, “What — what am I going to do?  Worry about it?”

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the only thing I can say.

         Q    And, you know — and then culminating in two assassination attempts, which resulted in your endorsement. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I was going to do it anyway, but that was —

         Q    That was it?

         MR. MUSK:  — a precipitating event, yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  That speeded it up a little bit?

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  Yeah.

         Q    The day of the assassination? 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Nice.  I didn’t know that. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, it just — it sped it up, but I was going to do it anyway.

         Q    Mr. President, with your indulgence, I’m convinced that people only know a little bit about Elon.  I don’t think they know everything about Elon, because as I studied for and prepared for this interview, I learned a lot about you that I didn’t know.  I think people will think about Tesla.  Democrats are demonizing you and — and trying to make the country hate you. 

         I just want people to understand you a little bit better, and the person that you’ve gotten to know and have now put a lot of trust in. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sure.

         Q    And, you know, just — let’s go over a little bit of your bio, starting —

         MR. MUSK:  Ah, okay.

         Q    — with PayPal and how you became involved in Tesla and SpaceX and Neuralink —

         MR. MUSK:  This — this could take a while.

         Q    — and all these —

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, you know, I — I think the way you think of me is, like, I’m a technologist and I try to make technologies that improve the world and make life better.

         Q    You can show them your shirt.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, and that’s why, like, my t-shirt says “tech support” — (laughter) — because I’m here to provide the president with — with technology support. 

         And now, that — that may seem, like, well, is that a silly thing?  But actually, it’s a very important thing, because the president will make these executive orders, which are very sensible and good for the country, but then they don’t get implemented, you know?

         So, if you take the — for example, all the funding for the migrant hotels, the president issued an executive order: Hey, we need to stop taking taxpayer money and — and paying for luxury hotels for illegal immigrants —

         Q    It’s crazy.

         MR. MUSK:  — which makes no sense.  Like, obviously, people do not want their tax dollars going to — to fund high-end hotels for — for illegals.  And yet, they were still doing that, even as late as last week. 

         And so, you know, we went in there, and we were like, “This is in violation of the presidential executive order.  It needs to stop.” 

         So — so, what we’re — what we’re doing here is — is — one of the biggest functions of the DOGE team is just making sure that the presidential executive orders are actually carried out.  And this is — I just want to point out, this is a very important thing, because the president is the elected representative of the people, so he’s representing the will of the people.  And if the bureaucracy is fighting the will of the people and preventing the pres- — the president from implementing what the people want, then what we live in is a bureaucracy and not a democracy.

         Q    Yeah.  You — you’re both aware — you have to be keenly aware that the media and — and the punditry class — not that — you know, I think you’ve proven they have no power anymore, because they threw everything they had at you, and they didn’t win.  And that was, you know, the New York Times, Washington Post, three networks, every late-night comedy show, two cable channels — they — they just threw — they threw everything — lawfare, weaponization. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

         Q    And now I see they want you two to start — they want a divorce.  They want you two to start hating each other.  And they try — “Oh, President Elon Musk,” for example.  You do know that they’re doing that to you?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, I see it all the time.  They tried it, then they stopped.  That wasn’t — they have many different things of hatred. 

         Actually, Elon called me.  He said, “You know they’re trying to drive us apart.”  I said, “Absolutely.” 

         You know, they said, “We have breaking news: Donald Trump has ceded control of the presidency to Elon Musk.  President Musk will be attending a Cabinet meeting tonight at 8 o’clock.”  (Laughter.)  And I say — it’s just so obvious.  They’re so bad at it. 

         I used to think they were good at it.  They’re actually bad at it, because if they were good at it, I’d never be president because I — I think nobody in history has ever gotten more bad publicity than me. 

         I could do the greatest things; I get 98 percent bad publicity.  I could do — outside of you and a few of your very good friends.  It’s, like, the craziest thing. 

         But you know what I have learned, Elon?  The people are smart.  They get it. 

         MR. MUSK.  Yeah.  They do, actually.  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They get it.  They really see what’s happening. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    And at the end of this interview, I — what I would like is, I — I want people to know the relationship and know more about you. 

         What is the relationship, Mr. President?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, I respect him.  I’ve always respected him.  I never knew that he was right on certain things, and I’m usually pretty good at this stuff.  He did Starlink.  He did things that were so advanced and nobody knew what the hell they were. 

         I can tell you, in North Carolina, they had no communication.  They were wiped out.  Those people were — you know, they had rivers in between — land that never saw water, all of a sudden, there was a river and a vicious — like, rapids.  People were dying all over.  They had no communication. 

         They said, “Do you know Elon Musk?”   And they didn’t really know I knew him.  I said, “Yeah.”  They said, “Could you get Starlink?”  It’s, like, the first time I ever heard of it.  I said, “What’s Starlink?”  “A communication system that’s unbelievable.” 

         Q    I have it.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And he — yeah.  And he said — I called him, and I said, “Listen, they really need it.”  And he got, like, thousands of units of this communication, and it saved a lot of lives.  He got it immediately.  And you can’t get it.  I mean, you have to wait a long time to get it.  But he got it to him immediately. 

         And I said, “That’s pretty amazing.”  And I didn’t even know he had it. 

         We watch the rocket ships, and we watch Tesla.

         I think, you know, something that had an effect on me was when I saw the rocket ship come back and get grabbed like you grab a beautiful little baby.  You grab your baby.  It just —

         MR. MUSK:  Just hug the rocket. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’d never seen —

         MR. MUSK:  Everyone — right.  Everyone needs (inaudible) —

         Q    You hug the rocket.  You hug the rocket.

         MR. MUSK:  — (inaudible) rockets. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  No, but — and he said, “You know, you can’t really have a rocket program if you’re going to dump a billion dollars into the ocean every time you fly.  You have to save it.”  And he saved it.  First time —

         Q    That’s ever been done.
        
         THE PRESIDENT:  — I’ve ever seen that done.  Now nobody else can do it. 

         If you look at the U.S., Russia, or China, they can’t do it, and they won’t be able to do it for a long time.  He has the technology.  So, you learn — I wanted somebody really smart to work with me, in terms of the country — a very important aspect.  Because, I mean, he doesn’t talk about it.  He’s actually a very good businessman.  And when he talks about the executive orders — and this is probably true for all presidents: You write an executive order and you think it’s done, you send it out; it doesn’t get done.  It doesn’t get implemented.  They don’t implement it. 

         They — maybe they’re from the last administration — and they are, in some cases.  You try and get them out as fast as you can.  But I could — as soon as he said that, I said, “You know, that’s interesting.”  You write a beautiful executive — and you sign it and you assume it’s going to be done, but it’s not.  What he does is he takes it, and with his hundred geniuses — he’s got some very brilliant young people working for him that dress much worse than him, actually —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, the do.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — they dress in just t-shirts.  (Laughter.)  You wouldn’t know they have 180 IQ.

         Q    Wait.  Wait.  So, what — he’s — he’s your tech support?

         MR. MUSK:  I —

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  He is —

         MR. MUSK:  I actually virtually am tech support.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s much more than that.

         MR. MUSK:  I actually am tech support, though.  But that’s —

         THE PRESIDENT:  But he gets it done.  He’s a leader.  He really is a — he gets it done.  You get a lot of tech people, and you have people, they’re good with tech, but they — he gets it done. 

         You know, I said, in real estate, you had guys that would draw beautiful renderings of a building, and they’d draw the rendering, it would be great, and you’d say, “Great.  When are you starting?”  But they were never able to get it built.  They couldn’t get the finances.  They couldn’t get the approvals.  It would never get done.  And then you have other guys that are able to get it done.  You know, they could just get it done. 

         I was in real estate.  Same thing in this.  He gets it done. 

         So, when he said that — he said, “You know, when you sign these executive orders, a lot of them don’t get done, and maybe the most important ones,” and he would take that executive order that I’d signed, and he would have those people go to whatever agency it was — “When are you doing it?  Get it done.  Get it done.”  And some guy that maybe didn’t want to do it, all of a sudden, he’s signing — he just doesn’t want to bothered.

         Q    Does — do a lot of those executive orders have to be codified into law to — do you need the Republican Congress to follow up?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, and they will.  A lot of them will be.  Yeah.

         Q    They will?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Look, in the meantime, we have four years.  The beauty is, we have four years.  That’s why I like doing it right at the beginning.  Because an executive order is great.  I mean, the one problem — it’s both good and bad, because when they did all these executive orders, I’ve canceled most of them.  They were terrible.  I mean, we were going to go radical left, communist, okay?  It was crazy.  Their —

         MR. MUSK:  Really crazy.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — executive orders were so bad, if they ever got them codified, you’d never be able to break them.  So, the damage that Biden has done to this country — and it’s not even Biden; it’s the people that circled him in the Oval Office, okay? — but the damage they did to this country, in terms of, let’s say, open borders — you know, there’s so many things, but open borders, where millions of people poured into our country, and hundreds of thousands of those people are criminals.  They’re murderers.  They’re drug dealers.  They’re gang members.  They’re people from prisons from all over the world. 

         And we have a great guy, Tom Homan, and he is doing so incredibly.  You saw the numbers.  They’re down like 96 percent.

         Q    Ninety-five percent.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He is a phenomenal guy.  And Kristi Noem is doing an unbelievable job.  And he wanted her.  He said, “She’s so tough.”  And I said, “I don’t think of her as that way.  You know, she’s very nice.”  He said, “No, she’s so tough.”  And she is.  I see her with the horses.  She’s riding the horse.  Let’s — (laughter) — she’s great. 

         But the team we have is — is really unbelievable. 

         But those executive orders, I sign them, and now they get passed on to him and his group and other people, and they’re all getting done.  We’re getting them done.

         Q    Let me go back a little bit to your background, because —

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

         Q    — it’s beyond impressive.  You were the chief engineer, for example — you were an early believer in Tesla.  You became the CEO and — and then the chief engineer, which was phenomenal.  SpaceX, same thing, which is unbelievable. 

         I mean, you were the first company — private company to send astronauts successfully into — into space, first private company to send astronauts into orbit. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    That’s — that’s pretty deep. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s going to go into orbit soon.

         Q    Okay.

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, he’s going to go to Mars.  He’s going to fly on his —

         Q    Starlink.

         MR. MUSK:  At some point, yeah.

         Q    As in (inaudible) —

         MR. MUSK:  But they say — they always ask me, like, “Do you want to die on Mars?”  And I say, “Well, yes, but not on impact.”  (Laughter.)

         Q    Star- — Starlink is in 100 countries. 

         This is going to be hard.  I feel like I’m interviewing two brothers here.

         MR. MUSK:  You go ahead. 

         Q    Starshield, which could be used for national defense. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, it is already being used for national defense. 

         Q    Then you have a — what is it called?  Optimus, a part of Tesla.

         MR. MUSK:  They’re a robot, yeah.

         Q    A robotic arm.  Then you have an AI arm.  And then you have something that really fascinated me, and it’s called Neuralink. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    You might help the blind to see and people with spinal cord injuries that they — that they can recover, where in the past — how close is that to becoming a success?

         MR. MUSK:  At Neuralink we’re — we’ve ha- — we’ve implanted Neuralink in three patients so far, who are quadriplegics, and it allows them to directly control their phone and computer just using their mind, just by thinking.  It’s like — so, we call this product Telepathy, so you control your computer and phone just by thinking, and it’s possible to actually control the computer and phone faster than someone who has working hands.

         Then the next step would be to add a second Neuralink implant past the point where these — the neurons are damaged, so that somebody can walk again and so the pe- — they can have full-body functionality restored.  And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you like Bobby, right?

         MR. MUSK:  I like Bobby, actually.  Yeah.  I — I supported Bobby Kennedy.  I think he — you know, he’s unfairly maligned as someone who is anti-science.  But I think he — he isn’t.  He just wants to question the science, which is the essence of the science — the scientific method, fundamentally, is about always questioning the science. 

         Q    Well, they didn’t tell us the truth about COVID.

         MR. MUSK:  Correct.

         Q    That’s for sure. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

         Q    And we learned a lot with the Twitter files.  And that just, then, raises a question.  You’re the richest man in the world.  You may not like that part. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    You’re pretty competitive.

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, it’s neither here nor there.

         Q    I’ve known you a long time.

         MR. MUSK:  I don’t think it matters.

         Q    But —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s why I became president.

         Q    — he’s on your team.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    Well, that’s true.  He can’t top that.

         THE PRESIDENT:  He’s good.  You know, I wanted to find somebody smarter than him.  I searched all over.  I just couldn’t do it.  I couldn’t.  I couldn’t.
        
         Q    You really tried hard.

         THE PRESIDENT:  I couldn’t find anyone smarter, right?  So, we had to — we had to, for the country.

         Q    But this is the thing —

         THE PRESIDENT:  So, we settled on — we settled on this guy.

         MR. MUSK:  Well, thanks for having me.

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

         Q    So —

         MR. MUSK:  I’m just trying to be useful here.

         Q    But this is the interesting — but this is where we are as a so- — a society.  And I — I hate to do this to you, but I’m going to do it anyway.  You’re doing all of these things.  At DOGE, nobody at DOGE gets paid a penny, correct?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, actually, some people are federal employees, so they do. 

         Q    Oh, okay.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  They’re (inaudible).  But it’s fair to say that the software engineers at DOGE could be earning millions of dollars a year and instead of earning a small fraction of that as federal employees.

         Q    Okay.  So, just —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And they’re very committed people. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    So — you’re — you’re committed to helping the blind see, people with spinal cord injuries recover. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    You’re committed to getting to Mars.  You’re committed to rescue — you’re going to help rescue, next month, two astronauts that I think were abandoned.  They — they dispute that in an interview.

         THE PRESIDENT:  When are you — when are you getting them?

         MR. MUSK:  At the — at the president’s request, we — or instruction, we are accelerating the return of the astronauts, which was postponed, kind of, to a ridiculous degree.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They got left in space. 

         Q    They’ve been there.  They were supposed to be there eight days.  They’re there almost 300.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Biden. 

         MR. MUSK:  They were put —

         Q    Yeah.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, they were left up there for political reasons, which is not good. 

         Q    Okay, it’s not good.  Now, if I had the weight and pressure of doing that successfully on my shoulders, I think I’d be, you know — but you — when we spoke before we did this interview, you were very confident.  You think this will be a successful mission. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, we don’t want to be complacent, but we have brought astronauts back from the space station many times before, and always with success.  So, as long as we’re not complacent —

         THE PRESIDENT:  When are they — when are you going to launch?

         MR. MUSK:  I think it’s about — about four weeks to

    bring them back. 

         Q    About four weeks? 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  And you have the go-ahead.

         MR. MUSK:  We’re being extremely cautious.

         Q    Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You now have the go-ahead.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Well, thanks to you —

         THE PRESIDENT:  They didn’t have the go-ahead with Biden. 

         Q    What’s that?

         THE PRESIDENT:  He was going to leave him in space.  I think he was going to leave them in space.

         Q    Well, it’s like the (inaudible) —

         THE PRESIDENT:  He considered it a —

         Q    — growing up, lost in space. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, he didn’t want the publicity.  Can you believe it?

         Q    Unbelievable.  And so —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — I want to echo something that the president said and then ask an overarching question.  So, people in — get hit with Hurricane Helene, they have no communication with the outside world.  You come to the rescue.  You donated that, I believe?

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

         Q    You donated to the people of —

         THE PRESIDENT:  He saved a lot of lives.  In North Carolina, he saved a lot of lives. 

         Q    And California, after the wildfires?

         THE PRESIDENT:  California.  But, I mean, in North Carolina, where they were really in trouble, they had no communication, people were dying.

         Q    Nothing.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They were dying of starvation.  He saved a lot of lives in North Carolina.

         Q    Okay.  Now you’re going to rescue astronauts.  And now — again, you do — you do all of this — I would think liberals would love the fact that you have the biggest electric vehicle company in the world. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, I used to be adored by the left, you know.

         Q    Not anymore.

         MR. MUSK:  Le- — less so these days.

         Q    He killed that, huh?

         MR. MUSK:  I mean, less —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I really (inaudible) —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, this — this whole sort of, like, you know — it was — they call it, like, “Trump derangement syndrome.”  And I didn’t — you know, you don’t realize how real this is until, like, it’s — you can’t reason with people. 

         So, like, I was at a friend’s birthday party in L.A., just a birthday dinner, and it was, like, a nice, quiet dinner, and everything was — everyone was behaving normally.  And then I happened to mention — this was before the election, like a month or two before — I happened to mention the president’s name, and it was like they got shot with a dart in the jugular that contained, like, the methamphetamine and rabies.  Okay?  (Laughter.)

         And they’re like, “Whyy?”  And I’m, like, “What is wrong — like, guys, like” — you just can’t have, like, a normal conversation.  And it’s like — it’s like they become completely irrational. 

         Q    He — he has no idea, if you’re friends with him —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — you pay a price.  You know, it’s like, I walk into a restaurant in New York, and it’s like half the room gets daggers and they want to —

         MR. MUSK:  The eye-daggers — eye-daggers level is insane.  (Laughter.)

         I mean, there was, like — I had, like, some — some invitation because — so, I got invited to, like, so- — basically, a big, sort of, damn — damn event like that was — but I’d received the invitation, like, the beginning of last year and then — and I still attended, even after I’d endorsed President Trump, and I didn’t realize how profoundly that would affect, you know, how I was received.  (Laughter.)

         I mean, I walk into the room and I’m getting just the dirty looks from — from everyone.  Like, if looks could kill, I would have been dead several times over.

         Q    But that was not — (laughter) — before Trump

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    Before Trump: “BC” —

         MR. MUSK:  — ashes on the floor.  (Laughs.)

         Q    — or “BT.”  Before Trump, that never happened.  Right?

         MR. MUSK:  No.

         Q    No.  So —

         MR. MUSK:  I — I just — doesn’t seem strange?  Like, what — what is up with this total, like, madness?

         Q    You’re smarter than me.  Can you — I actually think that there’s a level of irrationality.  It’s almost like a trigger and —

         MR. MUSK:  It totally triggers. 

         Q    And it’s like — look, I — I’ve been on TV — this is my 29th year.  I’ve been on radio 35 years.  I will — I’ve gone hard in the paint to — for candidates that lost.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    And guess what?  I get over it.

         MR. MUSK.  Sure.  Yeah, yeah.

         Q    And I just keep doing my show, and I just — you know, I come back to fight another day.

         So, here’s the big — then this is the million dollar or billion dollar — I’m among billionaires — question.  So, you have all this going on and you stop, in a way — you’re still doing it — and you partner with him.  And this is what you get for it from the Democrats.  You get “nobody voted for Elon.”  Well, nobody voted for any of your Cabinet nominees.  Okay?  “People are dying because of DOGE cuts.”  I’ll give you a chance to respond to all that.  “What DOGE is doing is illegal.”  “Elon Musk is” — more street vernacular for a male body part.  “It’s a constitutional crisis.”

         MR. MUSK:  How c- — why — why are they reacting like this?

         Q    Well, first of all, do you give a flying rip?  Number one.  And —

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I guess we must be — if we’re the target, we’re doing something right.  You know, if — like, they wouldn’t be complaining so much if they — we weren’t doing something useful, I think. 

         What — all we’re really trying to do here is restore the will of the people through the president.  And — and what we’re finding is there’s an unelected bureaucracy.  Speaking of unelected, there’s a — there’s a vast federal bureaucracy that is implacably opposed to the — the president and the Cabinet. 

         And you look at, say, D.C. voting.  It’s 92 percent Kamala.  Okay, so we’re in 92 percent Kamala.  That’s a lot. 

         Q    Yeah.  They don’t like me here either. 

         MR. MUSK:  I think about that number a lot.  I’m like, 92 percent.  That’s, basically, almost everyone.  And so — but if — but how can you — if — if the will of the president is not implemented, and the president is representative of the people, that means the will of the people is not being implemented, and that means we don’t live in a democracy, we live in a bureaucracy. 

         And so, I think what we’re seeing here is the — sort of, the thrashing of the bureaucracy as we try to restore democracy and the will of the people.

         Q    You —

         MR. MUSK:  Is this making sense?  I mean — sorry.

         Q    Y- — no, of course it does.  I mean, to me, if you look at our framers and our founders — and you’ve really become a student of history, Mr. President, and we’ve ta- — we’ve had conversations both on air and off air — and if we talk about constitutional order or transformational change, nobody can argue that what’s happening here is going at the speed of light. 

         But however, what were the principles of our framers and our founders?  They wanted limited government, greater freedom for the people — and we’ll get to the specific cutting of waste, fraud, and abuse.  That — that is your goal, is it not?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  And my goal was to get great people.  And when you look at what this man has done, I mean, it was something — I knew him a little bit through the White House. Originally, I’d see him around a little bit.  I didn’t know him before that, and I respected what he did.  And he fought hard.  You know, he was a — he was maybe questioned for a while.  He was having some difficulties.  It was not easy doing what he did. 

         I mean, how many people have started a car company and made it really successful and made a better car where it’s, you know, beating these big companies that that’s all they do is cars?  I mean, it’s really amazing the things that he’s done.

         But I didn’t know it as much then as now.  I mean, the fruits have sort of taken hold.

         But I wanted great people, and he’s a great person.  He’s an amazing person.  He’s also a caring person.  You know, he uses the word “care.” 

         So, they sign a contract in a government agency, and it has three months.  And the guy leaves that signed the contract, and nobody else is there, and they pay the contract for 10 years.

         So, the guy is getting checks for years and years and years, and he’s telling his family, obviously — maybe it was crooked, maybe he paid to get the contract, or maybe he paid that they didn’t terminate him.  But, you know, we have contracts that go forever, and they’ve been going for years, and they’re supposed to end in three months or five months or two years or something, and they go forever.  So, the guy is either crooked — you know, where he knew this was going to happen — or he’s crooked because he’s getting payments that he knows he shouldn’t be getting.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  But they’re finding things like that.  They’re finding things far worse than that.  And they’re finding billions — and it will be hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of fraud.  I say waste and abuse, but fraud, waste, and abuse.  And he’s doing an amazing job.

         And he attracts a young, very smart type of person.  I call them high-IQ individuals, and they are.  They’re very high Q and — high IQ.  And when they go in to see the people and talk to these people — you know, the people think they’re going to pull it over.  They don’t.  These guys are smart, and they love the country.  You know, there’s a certain something. 

         But he uses the word “care.”  So, people have to care.  Like, when I bought Air Force One —

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — I negotiated the price.  It was $5.7 billion, and I got it — I got them down $1.7 billion.  Now they’re not building the plane fast enough.  I mean, they’re actually in default — Boeing.  They’re supposed to —

         Q    When is it —

         THE PRESIDENT:  They’ve been building this thing forever.  I don’t know —

         Q    This is the new Air Force One?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — what’s going on.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  We don’t build the way we used to build.  You know, we used to build like a ship a day, and now to build a ship is, like, a big deal, and we’re going to get this country back on track.  We could do it, but so many things — it takes so long to get things built and get things done. 

         And a lot of it could be something we’ve been discussing.  The regulators go in and they make it impossible to build.  They make it very difficult to build anything, whether it’s a ship, a plane, or a building or anything.  And some of them do it because they want to show how important they are.  Some of them do it maybe because they think they’re right.  They use the environment to stop progress and to stop things.  It’s always the environment.  “It’s an environmental problem.”  It’s not an environmental problem at all.  But they do a lot of things. 

         And, by the way, speaking of that, Lee Zeldin is going to be fantastic in the position.  So important.  He could take 10 years to approve or disapprove something, or he could do it in a month.  You know, just as good.

         Q    Sure. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think you’re going to see some fantastic — a fantastic job done by him.  He’s a tremendous guy. 

         Q    Newt — you echoed something when I had just met you, and it was very similar to what Newt has been saying, that we’re — he brought this country to the dance.  This is the opportunity to be transformational, and to have, I would argue, a — the most consequential presidency if we — if we’d really dig down and do something that had never been done before, and that is get rid of this bureaucracy.  And I’m going —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — to get to specifics.  You say the same thing.  It’s not done yet. 

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    And what did you mean by that?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean the — w- — winning the election is really the opportunity to fix the system.  It is not fixing the system itself.  So, it’s an opportunity to fix the system and to restore the power of democracy. 

         And, you know, people — like, it’s funny how — how often it — you — when these attacks occur, the thing that they’re accusing the administration of is what they are guilty of.  They’re saying that things are — are being done are unconstitutional, but what they are doing is unconstitutional.  They are guilty of the crime of which they accuse us.

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s always the first thing they do.

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  “He’s in violation of the Constitution.”  They don’t even know what they’re talking — well, they know.

         MR. MUSK:  It’s absurd. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s just a con job.  It’s a big con job.  And they’re so bad for the country, so dangerous and so bad.

         And the media is so bad.  When I watch MSNBC, which I don’t watch much, but you have to watch the enemy on occasion, the level of arrogance and — and cheating and — they’re just horrible people.  These are horrible people.

         Q    They lie. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  These are horrible people. 

         Q    They tell conspiracy theories.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They lie, and they start up with the Constitution.  They couldn’t care less about the Constitution.

         CNN, likewise.  I mean, I watched them asking questions with, you know, the hatred with the — why — I said, “What are you asking the question with such anger?  You’re asking me a normal question.”  But you see the bias.  The bias is so incredible.  Those two are bad.

         PBS is bad.  AP is bad.  CBS is terrible. 

         I mean, CBS now — they changed an answer in Kamala.  They asked her some questions.  She answered them like, you know, a low-IQ person.  The opposite of him — the absolute opposite.  But she gave a horrible answer.  They took the entire answer out, and they put another answer that she gave 20 minutes later into the — in- — as the answer.  

         Q    It was part of her word salad. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve never even heard of that be- — I thought I heard of it all.

         MR. MUSK:  Right. 

         Q    That wh- — “60 Minutes” once — one — wanted to do an interview with me, and I said, “Live to tape.” 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly. 

         Q    They said, “No.”  And I said, “No” —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — “No deal.” 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  They can- —

         Q    Like, this interview will —

         THE PRESIDENT:  I’ve never even heard — you know, I’ve seen where they take a sentence off or something and they’ll do — but they —

         Q    Sometimes you cut for time o- — 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, no.  They took the entire — this long, terrible statement that she made and put another. 

         Nobody’s ever seen what’s happening.  And, you know, the people that do all this complaining, they’re very dishonest people. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah. 

         Q    Yeah.  I — I’m going to, just for the sake of saving time —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

         Q    — because I could spend — and I’ve done this on radio and TV, I — I can spend an hour finding the outrageous amounts of money being spent abroad, like USAID.

         MR. MUSK:  Sure.

         Q    And I do want to mention a couple, but I’m going to —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — scroll it and —

         MR. MUSK:  Well — well, I guess, at a high level, I think it’s what the president mentioned earlier, which is that in order to save taxpayer money, it comes down to two things: competence and caring.  And —

         THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right. 

         MR. MUSK:  — and when — when president was shown the outrageous bill for the new Air Force One and — and then negotiated it down, if he had — if the president had not applied competence and caring, the price would have been 50 percent higher — literally, 50 percent higher.  The president cared.  The president was competent.  The price was not 50 percent higher as the result. 

         And so, when you add more competence and caring, you get a better deal for the American people. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  But we could take — we were talking about this yesterday.  I could take — give me thousands of bills — any — I could pick any one of them, and I could —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — take all thousand.  And let’s say it’s a bill for $5,000 — just $5,000, and it’s done by some bureaucrat.  And if he would say, “I’ll give you three.  I don’t want to pay you five.  It’s too high.  I’ll give you three.”  But they don’t do that.  If a guy sends in a bill for $5,000, they pay $5,000.  They expect to be cut.  Everybody expects to be cut.  When you send in a bill, you expect to be cut.  They send in the bill higher, for the most part.  This is true with lawyers, legal fees.  When they send in legal fees, you — I can cut — I wish I had the time, I would save so — but I could cut these bills in half — much better than half. 

         But you offer people a much lower number because you know they — they actually put fat — I’m not even saying it’s — it’s like a way of business.  They put more on because they expect to be negotiated.  When you send in a bill to the government, there’s nobody to negotiate. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You send it a bill for $10,000, and they send you a check back for $10,000.  If you would call them and said, “We’ll give you five.”  “No, no, no.  I need more than five.”  “We’ll give you a five.”  “I’m not going to pay any more than five.”  “Make it six.”  “No, I’m not going to make it six.”  And you’ll settle for $5,500.  You’ve just cut the bill almost in half, and it took, like, two minutes.  When did that stop?  But —

         Q    (Inaudible) the art of the deal?

         THE PRESIDENT:  — that’s caring.  No, it’s not even the art of the deal.  It’s caring.  He uses the word —

         MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s competence and caring.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s caring. 

         Q    Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  It’s — it’s a certain competence, but I think it’s more caring. 

         MR. MUSK:  I — if you —

         THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  Actually, if you add either ingredient — either competence or caring — you’ll — you’ll get a better outcome.  But it stands to reason —

         Q    Right.  People don’t want to do this (inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK: — that’s the reason that if you don’t have competency and you don’t have caring, you’re going to get a terrible deal.  And the problem is that the American taxpayer has been — been getting a terrible deal, because — look at the last administration.  Can you — can anyone — can any reasonable person say that last administration was either competent or caring?

         Q    But they lied to us and said that Joe didn’t have a cognitive decline.

         MR. MUSK:  They fully lied. 

         Q    They said the borders were closed.  They said that the borders were secure.  They said that —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    You know, they said Obamacare would save —

         MR. MUSK:  They flat out lied. 

         Q    They flat out lied — 

         MR. MUSK:  It was insane.

         Q    — on many occasions. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    I tell my audience all the time: Don’t trust government. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    So, the — I want — as I scroll this information, and it’s — it’s — I’ll scroll a lot more than I’ll mention to both of you, and this is the cost savings.  I want you — I want people at home to understand this part: The average American makes $66,000 a year. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    Okay?  We have $37 trillion in national debt. 

         MR. MUSK:  Yes. 

         Q    Now, all the money I’m about to mention and what we’re going to scroll on our screen — and all of this is going to foreign countries.  It is not being spent here in America —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — for better schools, law and order. 

         MR. MUSK:  I — I think the average taxpaying American should be mad as hell because their tax money is being poorly spent.

         Q    I’m mad.  It’s stealing from —

         MR. MUSK:  It’s a — it’s an outrage —

         Q    — our kids and grandkids.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, and the — and people —

         THE PRESIDENT:  And a lot of fraud, Sean.  A lot of fraud.

         Q    Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And a lot of kickbacks. 

         They’re sending money out.  They’re not that stupid.  These people aren’t that stupid.  They’re sending for transgender — something having to do with the opera, and they’re sending out $7 million —

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  Literally.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — $7 million.  (Inaudible) —

         Q    You just stole my next line.  I can’t believe that. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, it’s incredible. 

         Q    I was going to mention that.

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, but it’s incredible: $7 million.

         Now, you know they — they’re not so stupid.  They’re sending all this money.  They expect to get a lot of it back.  And that’s what happens.

         Q    Okay.  So, let’s go through it.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes, they’re — a bunch of —

         Q    So, for the average person at home —

         MR. MUSK:  — this stuff is round-tripping.  To the president’s point, they’ll — they’ll make it sound like it’s going to help some people in a foreign country, but then they — then they get kickbacks. 

         Q    All right.  Let me go to the ne- — to the fir- —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

         Q    — to the second question first.  I want to know, because people like Joni Ernst, and — and House —

         MR. MUSK:  Yeah, Joni — Joni Ernst has been —

         Q    They tried to get —

         MR. MUSK:  — has tried for a long time, and she’s actually got a lot of good data.  Senator Ernst has been really helpful, actually.

         Q    Okay, but they — they actually hide what the real purpose of the spending is. 

         MR. MUSK:  That’s true.

         Q    In other words, they — and — and h- — this is a question: How did you decipher?  It will say, “Humanitarian blah, blah, blah in Serbia or Afghanistan.”  We’ve been giving money to China for crying out loud, which I think is nuts.

         MR. MUSK:  Well, we’re giving money to the Taliban.

         Q    Money to the Taliban?

         MR. MUSK:  Like a lot.

         Q    All right.  So —

         MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)  I’m like, for what?

         Q    But they —

         MR. MUSK:  I — I want to see pictures of what they did.

         Q    But they try to obscure it, and — and — but then you got to the bottom line, which is what I’m now scrolling on the screen —

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    — and that is: $20 million on a Sesame Street show in Iraq; $56 million to boost tourism in Tunisia and Egypt; $40 million to build schools in Jordan; $11 million to tell the Vietnamese to stop burning trash; $45 million for DEI scholarships in Burma; $520 million for consultant-driven ESG investments in Africa; DEI programs in Serbia; the president’s favorite — I’m sure you — you love that taxpayer money was spent on a DEI musical in Ireland or a chan- — transgender opera in Colombia or a —

         MR. MUSK:  If I could, like, it sounds like —

         Q    — transgender comic book in Peru. 

         MR. MUSK:  It sounds like — it sounds like how can these things be real?  But this is actually what was done. 

         Q    Okay.  The — I —

         MR. MUSK:  It — it sounds like a comedy sketch or something.  It’s like —

         Q    I have 20 pages of this.

         MR. MUSK:  Right.  It’s not — the list is a mile long.

         THE PRESIDENT:  The one thing you didn’t mention, the media.  The media is getting millions of dollars. 

        MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Now, they say Politico, which is a radical left —

         Q    Subscriptions. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  — you know, garbage magazine or — or program.  I guess they have magazine and they have some — some media of all types.  $8 million. 

         I hear the New York Times got a lot.  I hear they get subscriptions — where they have subscriptions but maybe the paper is not sent.  I have no idea if that’s true or not, but it’s — they call it subscriptions.  Lots of subscri- — to different media, not just the Times — maybe the Times, and maybe not the Times.

         Q    A million dollars in subscriptions is a lot.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well — but — but millions of dollars going to media that’s radical-left, crooked, dishonest media.

         MR. MUSK:  Well — well, Reuters — this is actually really wild: Reuters got like — something like $10 million for something that was literally titled “mass disinformation campaign.” 

         Q    Well —

         MR. MUSK:  That was on the purchase order.  Well, I — I

    thought that was a little bold.  (Laughs.) 

         Q    I will tell you what was bold is when you released —

         MR. MUSK:  I’m like —

         Q    — the Twitter files.

         MR. MUSK:  — shouldn’t you at least try to call it something else?  (Laughs.)

         Q    The Twitter files — how they targeted him; how Twitter, at the time, worked closely with the FBI, the CIA; and, even before the release of Hunter’s very real laptop, they were feeding them disinformation.  That —

         MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

         Q    — you found all that out. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, I think —

         Q    That’s called transparency, right?

         THE PRESIDENT:  The FBI has to be rehabbed.  The FBI —

         MR. MUSK:   Yeah.

         THE PRESIDENT:  What’s happened with the FBI and the DOJ is just — their — their stock has gone way down.  I mean, their reputation is shot.

         Q    And intelligence.

         THE PRESIDENT:  And I think Pam is going to do great.  I think Kash is going to do great.  I think they have to do great or we have a problem. 

         But when you look at what they did, the raid of Mar-a-Lago — the raid of Mar-a-Lago — you look at what they did, their reputation is shot.

         Q    It is. 

         What — you were going to say, Elon?

         MR. MUSK:  Well, no, I was going to say that I think probably a — like, a lot of people still —

         Q    How — how did you find (inaudible)?

         MR. MUSK:  — still believe, like, the Russia hoax, even though you’ve done a lot to combat that.  The — you know, the — the Steele dossier was an incre- — a massive scam that was concocted by Hillary Clinton and her — her campaign.

         Q    She bought and paid it — for it —

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         Q    — Russian disinformation. 

         MR. MUSK:  There was — it was — the — people still think the — the Russia hoax is real.  Like a lot of people s- — because they never — they never heard the counterpoint.  I mean — I mean, a bunch of people should be in prison for that.  That was a — that was outrageous election interference, creating a fake Russia hoax. 

         Q    How much — if you had to put a number on it, how much do you think you’ve identified waste, fraud, abuse, corruption at this point?  And again, we’ve been — we’re going to be scrolling this throughout the program. 

         MR. MUSK:  Well, the — the overall goal is to try to get a trillion dollars out of the deficit.  And if we — if we — if the deficit is not brought under control, America will go bankrupt.  This is a very important thing for people to understand.  A country is no different from an individual, in that if an individual overspends, an individual can go bankrupt, and so can a country. 

         And — and the out- — the massive waste, fraud, and abuse that has been going on, which is leading to a $2-trillion-a-year deficit, that — that’s what the president was handed on Jan. 20th, a $2 trillion deficit.  It’s insane. 

         Q    For this fiscal year?

         THE PRESIDENT:  Two trill- — yeah.  We inherited it.

         MR. MUSK:  Two —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  And inflation is back.  I’m only here for two and a half weeks. 

         Q    That was January —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Inflating is back —

         Q    — you were there for a week. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, think of it, inflation is back.  And they said, “Oh, Trump infla-” — I had nothing to do with it.  These people have — have run the country.  They spent money like nobody has ever spent.  They were — they were given $9 trillion to throw out the window — $9 trillion, and they spent it on the Green New Scam, I call it.  It’s the greatest scam in the history of the country.  One of them.  We have a lot of them, I guess.  But one of them.

         Q    Well —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Dollar-wise, probably —

         Q    — and DEI —

         THE PRESIDENT:  — it is.

         Q    — and wokeism —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, yeah.

         Q    — and transgenderism —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Well, that’s all part of it.  Yeah.

         Q    — and LGBTQ+.

         MR. MUSK:  Yes.

         Q    And, by the way, not in America — other countries, not here. 

         THE PRESIDENT:  You know, the amazing thing is when you see, like, the teaching of DEI: $9 million.  How do you spend $9 million to teach no matter what it is?

         MR. MUSK:  Right.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You could teach physics. 

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  Totally.

         THE PRESIDENT:  You could go to MIT for a lot less.

         MR. MUSK:  It’s (inaudible) expensive.  (Laughs.)  Expensive.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, the teaching —

         MR. MUSK:  Expensive BS.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — of DEI.

         Q    Well, I think it would be better spent on —

         THE PRESIDENT:  No, it’s a kickback.  It’s got to be a kickback.  Nobody is that — nobody could do that.  Nobody is —

         Q    Well, it —

         THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody is giving — to assess the dialog of an audience coming out of a theater: $4 million.

         Q    How much do you believe, Elon, you’ve identified in — in waste, fraud, abuse, corruption now?  And how much —

         MR. MUSK:  Well —

         Q    — do you anticipate you will?

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.  Well, the — I — I think —

    THE PRESIDENT:  One percent.

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, because it’s so massive.  It’s — this is —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, exactly.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — huge money.  Huge money.  Look —

    Q    So, what we’ve found now is one percent?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, we’ve j- — we’ve just gotten started here.

    THE PRESIDENT:  As good as they are, they’re not going to find some contract that was crooked — you know, crooked as hell.  And, I mean, there’s going to be so much that isn’t found.  But what is found — I think he’s going to find a trillion dollars.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, I think so. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  But I think it’s a very small percentage compared to what it is.  I mean, he could tell you about treasuries; he could tell you about a woman that worked for Biden that became a very wealthy woman while she was working for him.  Right?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Yeah, I know who you’re talking about.

    MR. MUSK:  I mean, there are some strange situations where people — where, you know, someone’s working for the government earning $200,000 a year, and then, suddenly, they’re worth tens of millions of dollars within a few years.  Where’d the money come?

    Q    How’d they earn it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    They have a private company on the side? 

    MR. MUSK:  We’re just curious.  Like, can you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  While they were working.

    MR. MUSK:  Can you show us — because, like, in order to be worth tens of millions of dollars, you’d have to start a company, or you’ve got to get some kind — the compensation has got to come from somewhere.  So, how does a civil servant with — earning $200,000 a year suddenly, within a span of a few years, be worth tens of millions dollars?

    Q    W- —

    MR. MUSK:  So, I just want to connect the dots here. 

    Q    All right, s- —

    MR. MUSK:  Maybe there’s a legitimate explanation, but I don’t think so.  (Laughter.)

    Q    So, you know, and this gets to kind of the heart of where I am.  I — I looked at your work, and I look at this amount of money, and I get angry.  And I don’t get v- — I’m not an angry person. 

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    Q    I don’t get angry.  I get a- — I get annoyed sometimes, but I don’t get angry. 

    And I did live paycheck to bay- — paycheck a part of my life.  And I think of, you know, the working men and women in this country that the — 56 percent of which cannot afford a $1,000 emergency after four years of Harris and Biden.

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    Q    Okay?  That is serious, you know, financial trouble.  Or they’re putting bare necessities on credit cards. 

    And I’m looking at this and I’m thinking, well, how much — when we — when all is said and done, we could have written a check or cut the taxes or fixed our schools —

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Yes.

    Q    — or deported these illegals that we keep finding, known terrorists, cartel members, gang members. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    And — and we’re not doing it.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Sean, the saddest thing is they don’t talk about the individual lines.  I could go on your show right now,  I could get a list that I have on the beautiful Resolute Desk in the Oval Office, and it’s got 40 points, and all they are is the heading of what this money is. 

    You don’t have to go deep into it, and you see it’s, you know, all different things and it’s so ridiculous. 

    I mean, normally, when you look for fraud, you’re looking for one thing out of a hundred.  Here, out of a hundred, 95 are going to be bad.  I mean, they’re — and they’re so obvious just by the heading.

    But they never mention that.  They only mention, “This is a violation of our Constitution.  This is a” — the word they give, you know, it’s like a sound bite — “constitutional crisis.”  It’s a new thing, “constitution-” —  But they never mention about where the money is going. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  Exactly.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And when people hear that — I had a very smart man, John Kennedy — he’s actually a very smart man.  He said, “Sir, you should just go on television and just read the name of the topic that you’re giving all the money — just the topic that you’re giving this money to, and don’t say anything more,” and he’s right.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I’ll do it at some point, you know, when — 

    But they never talk about where the money is going.  They just talk about, “It’s a constitutional crisis.” 

    It’s so sad.  And honestly, I think they’re bad people.  I used to give them the benefit of the doubt, but you almost think they hate the country.  I think they hate the country.  They’re sick people. 

    Q    Remember, what they can’t — what they couldn’t accomplish at the ballot box, what they can’t accomplish legislatively, now they’re using the courts.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    And they c- — they’re trying to bury you in lawsuits.

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s right.  You know the good news, though?  They’ve lost their confidence.  They’re not the same people. 

    Q    I think you’re right.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’re — they’re not the same people. 

    This election was brutal for them.  We won every swing state.  We won by millions and millions of votes.  We won everything.  We — all 50 states went up — all 50.  It’s never happened.

    Q    Popular vote. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Every one.  All 50 states went up. 

    They’ve lost their confidence.  I see it.  And they’re — they’re just swirling and twirling.  They don’t know what the hell is happening.  They’re much different.  They’re just as mean, but they’re not getting to the point.

    Q    Why do you invite them into the Oval Office nearly every day?

    MR. MUSK:  (Laughs.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, the media — you’re talking about the media.

    Q    Yeah, your friends in the media.

    THE PRESIDENT:  The media — no, they’re — you know, the anger that — they ask questions so angry — a question — a normal question.  I give them an answer.  They — but they — I say, “Why are you so angry when you ask a question?”  Just a standard question.  And, I don’t know, there’s something —

    Q    They haven’t had a- — they haven’t been allowed in that office for the last four years, and here you’re giving them access. 

    Let me go to an area that I think is key, and — and you talked about this in recent interviews, and that is: We don’t need a Department of Education.  Okay.  And what some people are trying to do is stoke fears that, “Oh, my gosh, my kid is not going to get the money for education.”

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  Yeah.

    Q    Or “grandma’s Social Security and Medicare.”  This was a big promise of yours on the campaign trail.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  Yeah.

    Q    So, I really want to give you both an opportunity to assure the American people you will keep — that money will be allocated for students, but with higher standards.  For example, I would assume associated with monies given or vouchers.

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) so much and — and then Elon goes.  But, look, Social Security won’t be touched — 

    Q    Won’t be touched.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — other than if there’s fraud or something — we’re going to find it; it’s going to be strengthened — but won’t be touched.  Medicare, Medicaid, none of that stuff is going to be touched.  It’s just — 

    Q    Nothing.  I want you to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Inaudible) don’t have to.

    Now, if there are illegal migrants in the system, we’re going to get them out of the system, and all of that fraud.  But it’s not going to be touched.

    School — I want to bring school back to the states, so that Iowa, Indiana — all these places — Idaho, New Hampshire — there’s so many places, the states.  I figure 35 really run well. 

    And right now, it’s Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, China — China, can you imagine? — has top — top schools.  We’re last. 

    So, they have a list of 40 countries.  We’re number 40.  Usually we’re 38, 39, but last time, we were number 40.  And what I say is you’ve got to give it back. 

    So, it doesn’t work. 

    I’ll tell you what we’re number one in: cost per pupil.  We spend more money than any other country by far — it’s not even close — per pupil.  Okay?  So, we know it doesn’t work. 

    So, we spend the most and we have the worst — right? — the worst result.  When we give that — when we give that back to Indiana, when we give that b- — back to Iowa and back to a lot of the states that run well — they run well, a lot of them — 35, 37, 38 — now, you’re going to have 10 laggards, but you’re going to have 5 real laggards, but that’s going to be okay. 

    Take New York — you give it to Westchester County, you give it to Suffolk County, you give it to Upstate New York, and you give it to Manhattan — but you give it to four or five subsections.  Same thing in California.  Los Angeles is going to be a problem, but you’re going to give it to places that run well.  We can change education

    Now, school choice is important, but that will get care — taken care of automatically. 

    We want to bring education back to the states.  You will spend half the number.  And I’m not even doing this —

    Q    So, you’re leaning more towards grants not vouchers, like to parents?

    THE PRESIDENT:  I’m not even — I’m not even doing this to save, but you will save.  It will cost you much less money.  You get a much better education. 

    If you go to some of these states, you’ll be the equivalent of Norway, Sweden, Denmark — places that really have a good school system.  You’ll have — those places will be the equivalent, and your overall numbers will get so much better. 

    Q    Do you want standards associated with the money?

    THE PRESIDENT:  The only thing I want to do from — from Washington, D.C., is make sure they’re teaching English, reading, writing —

    Q    Math and science.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — and arithmetic.  Okay?

    Q    Science?  Science might help.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Okay.  A little science.  You know —

    Q    Computers.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — you’re not going to have much of a problem with that, but that’s it. 

    Do you know, we have half the buildings — I mean, you look at Department of Education —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s empty.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Look at the real estate and the —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — the level.  For what?  To — to — I mean, for — what do they do?

    We have really bad educa- — the teachers — I love teachers.  I respect teachers.  And, by the way, there’s no reason why teachers can’t form a union.  They can do whatever they want to do, if it’s back in the states.  So, we’re not looking to hurt the teacher — I’m — I’m going to help the teachers.  I think the teachers should be incentivized, because a good teacher is like a good scientist, is like a great doctor.

    MR. MUSK:  Sure.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s a valuable commodity. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I think they should be incentivized. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  So, I’m totally for the teachers.

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

    Q    I interview a guy a lot on radio.  He’s from Wichita, Kansas.  And he started —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    — as a medical doctor.  Started Atlas.MD, and he’s now — he’s rolled it out nationwide.  Concierge care, $50 a month, 24-hour access to a doctor. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    You know, they use a lot of telemedicine now as part of it — very innovative.  He negotiates directly with pharmaceutical companies.  People — if they have high blood pressure, they walk out with their medicine.  They have high cholesterol, they walk out with their medicine.  And they pay pennies on the dollar.

    You mentioned —

    THE PRESIDENT:  By the way, forms of that could be done.

    Q    Forms of that?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Forms of that could be done.

    Q    Innovation. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  We got hurt when we didn’t get the vote on Obamacare.  I made Obamacare — I had a choice: I could let it rot and win a point, or I could do the best you could do with it.  And that’s what I did.  We did a great job with it, and we made it sort of work, but it’s lousy.  We could do so much better. 

    And when you say — you go to certain areas, they — they have doctors round the clock.  They have great medical care for a fraction of what we’re paying right now. 

    There are things we could do. 

    But, look, just overall, this man has been so valuable.  I hate to see the way they go after him.  They go after him.  It’s so unfair.  He doesn’t need this.  He wants to do this. 

    First of all, this is bigger than anything he’s ever done.  He’s done great companies and all, but this is much — you know, this is trillion — everything’s trillions, right?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  The numbers are crazy.

    Q    To go back to my original point —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He can save —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    But let me — give him his $10 million back.

    MR. MUSK:  Well — well — I — no.  So, people ask me, like, “What’s — what’s the — what’s the — what’s, like, the — what’s your biggest surprise in — in D.C.?”  And I’m like, “The sheer scale.”

    Q    It’s massive.  So, you love the challenge?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’ll never do anything bigger.

    MR. MUSK:  To the president’s point —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s the only thing you can say, “He’ll

    never do anything” —

         MR. MUSK:  But, I mean, you do something slightly better, and you save billions of dollars for the American taxpayer — just slightly better.  Slightly.  (Laughs.)

         Q    When you say “tech support” —

         MR. MUSK:  You go one percent better, and it’s, like, you know, tens of billions of dollars saved to the American taxpayer. 

    Now, if I may address the point that you — the question you asked earlier, which is, you know, how do we assure people that —

    Q    They want to know.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, how do we assure people that we’re going to do the right thing, that their — that their Social Security benefits will be there, that their — the medical care will be good and s- — and — in fact, how do we make it — ensure that there’s better medical care in the future?  How do we improve their benefits?  How do we make sure that their Social Security check goes further than it did in the past and not — it doesn’t get weakened by inflation?

    So, the — if we — if we address the — the massive deficit spending, the sort of — the — the waste in the government, then — then we can actually address inflation. 

    So, provided the economy grows faster than the money supply, which means you stop the government overspending and the waste, and the output of real useful goods and services exceeds the increase in the money supply, you have no inflation.

    Q    Yeah.

    MR. MUSK:  And — and you also drop the — the interest payments that people pay, because if the government keeps —

    Q    Way too high.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.  The — the reason the interest payments are so high is because the — the national debt keeps increasing.  So, the — the government is competing for — to sell debt with — for — with — with the private citizens.  This drives up the interest rate. 

    So, if you have a — if you have a — if you cut back on the deficit, you actually have an amazing situation for people, because you get r- — you get rid of inflation and you drop the interest rates.  And that means people’s mortgage payments go down, their credit card payments go down, their car payments go down, their student loans go down.  Everything — their — their life becomes more affordable and they’re standard of living improves.

    Q    How quickly?  Because I think people are suffering now.  We’re still living under the Biden-Harris economy. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  But, Sean, you have states right now —

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You have some states that operate that way.  They operate as well as any corporation.  They really operate well.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Florida.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They have surpluses.  They ha- — they don’t —

    MR. MUSK:  Texas is — has a surplus, for example.

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  When they — when they look at New York and — and California and some of these places that should have an advantage — I mean, there’s a big advantage — or Pritzker does such a bad job in Illinois; it’s horrible how bad he is — and they don’t have that advantage. 

    You know, New York has stock exchange and a lot of things.  And California has the weather and the beautiful water and all the thing- —

    MR. MUSK:  California has — has great weather.  The most expensive weather on Earth.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.  (Laughter.)  But — but —

    Q    I like Florida.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  But some states operate the way he’s talking about.

    Q    Efficiently.

    THE PRESIDENT:  When you go into some of these states, you’re going to find very little.  You’re going to find almost nothing.  They really operate well — big surpluses, low taxes.  And —

    Q    You know, my taxes went up the first time you were president, because you took away the SALT deduction —

    THE PRESIDENT:  I — well, I did.

    Q    — which, by the way, I thought was the right decision.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It was the right decision — in fact, Reagan tried to do it — because it rewards badly run states.

    But at the same time, it’s a tough — it was — it’s tough for the states.  I mean, it really is tough for the states. 

    The sad part is it rewards really badly run states. 

    Q    Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And Reagan tried to do it.  He was unable to do it.  I got it done. 

    Q    You got it done, and —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And now we’re going to give some back.

         Q    A little bit.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Because you know what?  We’ve got to help them.

    Q    It’s only a little.

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’ve got to help.

    Q    Because otherwi- — we’re encouraging people to elect high taxes, spen- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody had any idea it would be that devastating.  I did the right thing.  I got something that Reagan couldn’t do.  I got it done, where everybody is — are the same.  But you know what?  We’ve got to help them out.

    Q    Reagan had the Grace Commission, some of the best business minds in the country.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    Q    And they came up with recommendations.  Congress adopted none of them, and none of them were implemented. 

    I’ve got to ask this question, because the media is obsessed about it: What — what if there is a conflict?  In other words, because you do business — it was funny, when it came out the other day, that there was going to be, I think, $400 million — billio- — I don’t know if it was millions or billions — a lot of money on Teslas that Joe Biden’s administration w- — did with Tesla, and —

    MR. MUSK:  I’m not familiar with that.

    Q    You’re not even familiar with it?  But —

    MR. MUSK:  I — I don’t think — are you talking about, like, the Inflation Reduction Act stuff or —

    Q    It was some — it was a purchase order of Tesla vehicles. 

    MR. MUSK:  Oh.  Oh, that was — that was incorrect.  There was s- — like, there’s some sort of — the media claim that there was, like, $400 million worth of Cybertrucks —

    Q    That was it.

    MR. MUSK:  — being bought by the DOD.

    Q    And that he gave it to you.

    MR. MUSK:  No — well, first of all, that was —

    THE PRESIDENT:  No, actually, it was —

    MR. MUSK:  Th- — it was fa- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  It was Biden.

    Q    It was Biden.

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you know Biden wouldn’t give him much.

    MR. MUSK:  But — but it wasn’t even — it was fake news, six weeks to Sunday.  Tesla is not getting $400 million for Cybertrucks.  And the — and the — and this alleged —

    Q    That’s what it was, Cybertrucks.

    MR. MUSK:  This — yeah.  This alleged award occurred in December, before the president took office.  So, it’s — it’s fake on multiple levels.  There i- — Tesla isn’t getting $400 million.  And even if it — even if it was, which it isn’t, it was awarded during the Biden administration. 

    Q    Okay, but you’re — you — you —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s total fake news. 

    Q    There — there is —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s fake on, like — it’s like multiple leverals —

    Q    There is some integration —

    MR. MUSK:  — multiple layers of fake.

    Q    So, you’re — you’re tasked now — and I pray to God this is successful.  I really do.  I wish you Godspeed. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    You know, “Godspeed, John Glenn.”

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s — it’s going to be, by the way.  I really believe it’s going to be.

    Q    But — but there —

    MR. MUSK:  Oh, yeah.

    Q    But there are legitimate areas —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Because the country is going to do well beside this. 

    This is cutting.  We’re only talking about cutting. 

    We’re also going to make a lot of money.  We’re g- — we’re taking in so much money.

    Q    But what about his business?  What if — if there is —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Then we won’t let him do it.

    Q    — a contract he would otherwise get?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We’re not going to let him do it.  He — if —

    Q    You’re not going to let him do it?

    THE PRESIDENT:  If he’s got a conflict — I mean, look — he —

    Q    Y- — now y- —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s in certain areas — I mean, I see this morning — I didn’t — I didn’t know, but I said, “Do the right thing” — where they’re cutting way back on the electric vehicle subsidies.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They’re cutting back.

    Q    You’re losing —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not only cutting back —

    Q    It hurts you.

    MR. MUSK:  Correct.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Now, I will tell you —

    Q    You don’t care? 

    MR. MUSK:  Well —

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s probably not that happy with it, but that would have been one thing he would have come to me and said, “Listen, you got to do me a favor.  This is crazy.”  (Laughter.)  But this was in the tax bill.  They’re cutting back on the subsidies. 

    I didn’t — I wasn’t involved in it.  I said, “Do what’s right, and you get” — and they’re coming up with the tax, but it’s just preliminary. 

         But I mean, if he were involved, wouldn’t you think he’d probably do that?  Now, maybe he does better if you cut back on the subsidies.  Who knows.  Because he figures — he does think differently.  He thinks he has a better product, and as long as he has a level playing field, he doesn’t care what you do —

         MR. MUSK:  Exactly.

         THE PRESIDENT:  — which he’s very — he’s told me that.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, I haven’t asked the president for anything ever.

    THE PRESIDENT:  It’s true.

    Q    And if it comes up, how — how will you handle it?  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  He won’t be involved. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, I’ll — I’ll re- — I’ll recuse myself if it is a conflict.

    THE PRESIDENT:  If there’s a conflict, he won’t be involved. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, I wouldn’t want that, and he won’t want it.

    MR. MUSK:  Right.  And — and also, I’m getting a — sort of a daily proctology exam here.  You know, it’s not like I’ll be getting away from something in the dead of night. 

    Q    Welcome to D.C.  If you want a friend, get a dog. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I do have a dog, but I also have friends.  (Laughter.)  My dog loves me, poor little creature. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  You know the truth was —

    MR. MUSK:  I need to bring him to D.C.

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s — I know every businessman.  I know the — the good ones, the bad ones, the smart ones, the lucky ones.  I know them all.  This guy is a ver- — he’s a brilliant guy.  He’s a great guy.  He’s got tremendous imagination and scientific imagin- — far beyond — you know, you keep talking about a technologist and all, but you’re much more than a technologist.  You are that.  But he’s also a good person.  He’s a very good person, and he wants to see the country do well. 

    And I know a lot of great businesspeople, really great business people, but, you know, they’re not really, in some cases, very good people.  And I know people that would try and take advantage of the situation. 

    This guy is somebody that really cares for the country, and I saw that very early on.  I saw it, really, a long time ago when I got to know him.  He’s a very different kind of a character. 

    That’s why — you know who loves him: young people that are very smart and that love the country.  He’s got, like, a tremendous following, because that’s what he’s — he’s a good person.

    And he doesn’t need this.  He didn’t need this, and he’s doing this to help the country.  If I didn’t win this election, this country was — I don’t think it could have made it.  I don’t — I mean, we’re allowing criminals — millions of criminals into our country, where everything is transgender, it’s men playing in women’s sports. 

    I mean, none of this stuff — you could go — I could give you a hundred things.  It’s almost like they’re trying to destroy the fabric of — of the country, of the world, because the world was following us.  Now the world is following us out of this pit. 

    We’ve done a lot.  I’ll tell you what, in three weeks, we’ve done more — I think we’ve done more — in — in terms of meaningful, not just dollars — than maybe any president ever.  And a lot of people are saying that.

    Q    Shock — it’s been shock and awe. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, if we can keep it going at this level, this country is going to be at a level that it’s never seen before. 

    Q    You know one of the things you did that I really thought was pretty clever and smart and fair, and that was reciprocal tariffs. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, reciprocal. 

    Q    Ta- — I didn’t know India charged so much.  I didn’t know the European Union to charge them. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

    Q    I didn’t know Canada was charging us.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Everybody.  Everybody.  Everybody but us.

    Q    Brazil, why?

    THE PRESIDENT:  And I was doing it — you know, I charged China tariffs.  I took in hundreds of billions of dollars, and I was doing that.  But when we got — we had the greatest economy in history.  But then we got hit with COVID, and we had to solve that problem, because I was doing it — and now I said, I want to come back and do the recipri- — because every country in the world almost — we have a deficit with almost every country — not every one, but just about, pretty close.

    And — but every country in the world takes advantage of us, and they do it with tariffs.  They makes — make it — it’s impossible for him to sell a car, practically, in, as an example, India.  I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I think —

    MR. MUSK:  The tariffs are like 100 percent import duty. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  The tariffs are so high —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — they don’t want to — now, if he built the factory in India, that’s okay, but that’s unfair to us.  It’s very unfair. 

    And I said, “You know what we do?”  I told Prime Minister Modi yesterday — he was here.  I said, “Here’s what you do.  We’re going to do — be very fair with you.”  They charge the highest tariffs in the world, just about.

    Q    36 percent?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Oh, much — much higher.

    MR. MUSK:  It’s 100 percent on — auto imports are 100 percent.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, that’s peanuts.  So, much higher.  And — and others too.  I said, “Here’s what we’re going to do: reciprocal.  Whatever you charge, I’m charging.”  He goes, “No, no, I don’t like that.”  “No, no, whatever you charge, I’m going to charge.”  I’m doing that with every country. 

    MR. MUSK:  It seems fair.

    Q    Don’t you —

    THE PRESIDENT:  (Laughs.)  It does.

    MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s like fair is fair.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nobody can argue with me.  You know, the media can’t argue — I said — they said, “Tariffs — you’re going to charge tariffs?”  You know, if I said, like, 25 percent they’d say, “Oh, that’s terrible.”  I don’t say that anymore —

    Q    Can I — (inaudible) —

    THE PRESIDENT:  — because I say, “Whatever they charge, we’ll charge.”  And you know what? 

         Q    They stop.

         THE PRESIDENT:  They — then they say, “Oh, that sounds fair.”

    MR. MUSK:  All the president is saying is that —

         Q    (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  — it needs to be at a level playing field and — and fair and square.

    Q    Yeah.  And how does — how —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And we’re going to make a lot of money and a lot of businesses are going to come pouring in.

    MR. MUSK:  How can you argue with a fair and square situation?

    Q    Don’t — don’t you think most of them will look at the — the — for example, without America, China’s economy will tank.  They need our business. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  They do.  Everybody needs us. 

    Q    Everybody needs it. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you know what?

    Q    Do- — don’t you think they’ll stop?

    THE PRESIDENT:  We only have so long left where we’re in this position.  We’re the bank, and the bank is getting smaller and smaller and smaller.  We — we’re the bank.  We got to do this now.  We can’t wait another 10 years and have a shell of a country left, because that’s what was going to happen.

    Q    Mr. President —

    THE PRESIDENT:  This country — if I didn’t win this election and have people like this man right here that really do care, because that’s the other word — if you don’t care, you could be the smartest guy in the world, it’s not going to matter.  But if we didn’t win this election, I’m telling you, we would not have had a country for very long.

    Q    How quickly —

    MR. MUSK:  May I say —

    Q    — do you balance the budget and — and when do we start paying down that debt?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, potentially, very quickly, between what he’s doing and with income coming in from tariffs and other things.  I mean, I hope we can — I don’t want to give a date, because then these people are going to say, “Oh, well, he didn’t make the date.”  But I think we can do it very quickly. 

    We would have never done it if this didn’t happen.  Never.  It would have never been — it would only get worse and worse, and ultimately, it would have exploded. 

    This country was headed down a very bad track.  And the whole DEI thing, that was — that was a trap.  That was a sick trap.

    Q    (Inaudible.)

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  And, you know, we’ve destroyed that.  That’s gone.  That’s pretty much gone. 

    Q    I agree. 

         MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible) —

         Q    We’re not — we’re not funding it. 

    MR. MUSK:  If — I really want to — I really want to emphasize to people that — this is a very important point — if we don’t solve the deficit, there won’t be money for medical care.  There won’t be money —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Right.

    MR. MUSK:  — for Social Security.  We either solve the deficit or all we’ll be doing is paying debt.

    Q    Nobody — 

    MR. MUSK:  It’s — it’s got to be solved, or there’s no medical care, there’s no Social Security, there’s no nothing.  That’s got to be solved.  It’s not optional.  America will go bankrupt if this is not done.  That’s why I’m here. 

    Q    The president’s —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Europe takes advantage of us.

    MR. MUSK:  And — and I’d like to also just send a message — like, because, as the president said, like, this — there’s a lot of rich people out there.  They should be caring more about the country because — the reason they should be caring about — more about country is: America falls, what do you think is going to happen to your business?  What do — what do you think — do you think you’re be going to be okay if — if the ship of America sinks?  Of course not. 

    Like, what — what I’m doing here, what the president is doing is it’s just long-term thinking.  The ship of America must be strong.  The ship of America cannot sink.  If it sinks, we all sink with it.

         THE PRESIDENT:  Sean, you’re a —

    Q    This is what — this is what drives you? 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    This is important.  It says “tech support.”  So, you’re not trying to be president, as the media suggests.  You are really here because your heart and your passion is this.  And the president described you as being — this is the biggest thing you ever done.  Now you trying to bring sight to —

    THE PRESIDENT:  There could be nothing bigger.  There’s nothing —

    Q    You’re sending ships up to Mars — you know, spaceships up in the sky all the time —

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s peanuts.

    Q    — and saving astronauts.  That’s pretty big. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s peanuts compared to what we’re talking about.

    Q    It’s peanuts?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    Do you agree with that?

    MR. MUSK:  Well, it’s esse- — it’s essential that America be healthy, that America’s economy be strong.  And — and if that — if — basically, like, my concern is like, if — if — America is the central pillar holding up Western civilization.  That pillar must be strong.  If that pillar falls, the whole roof comes crashing down.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships.

    MR. MUSK:  There’s no place to hide.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Including his ships going up.

    MR. MUSK:  There’s no place to run.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Nothing.  There’s nothing left. 

    Q    Why — why, if this is your goal, your motivation, you’re losing money in the process, you’re offeri- — you do all these nice things for people for free; you’re trying to solve, you know, blindness; you’re going to rescue astronauts; you help the people in North Carolina, California; you’re cutting money that was sent abroad that’s not helping the American people, then why the rage —

    MR. MUSK:  Actually, I think it was like —

         Q    But why this rage?

         MR. MUSK:  — it was not helping the American people and hurting people overseas, to be clear.

    Q    Why this rage against you now?  First, they hated him.  Now they hate both of you. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I think we’re seeing an antibody reaction from — from those who are receiving the — the wasteful and fraudulent money. 

    Q    They’re being exposed. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    Nobody wants to be exposed when you’re corrupt. 

    MR. MUSK:  I’ll — I’ll tell you a lesson I learned at PayPal.  You know who complained the loudest — the quickest and the loudest and with the most amount of righteous indignation?  The fraudsters.  That’s who complained first, loudest, and — and they would generally have this immense overreaction.  That’s how we knew there were the fraudsters.  That’s how we knew.  There’s a tell.

    Q    What di- — I’ve never — I’ve never met you before today.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    And it’s nice to meet you, by the way.  Thank — thank you for doing this. 

    You guys are really friends.  I could s- — you guys — I could see you kicking up your shoes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Well, he doesn’t do this kind of thing.  And the way I figured that you’d get to know him is if I did it with him.  I said, “Come on, let’s do it together.”  He doesn’t do this. 

    I think he’s smarter not doing it, overall.  Because, you know, I mean, he’s done very well without doing it.  But he doesn’t feel it’s really worthwhile.  He wants the product to speak for itself, or whatever he does speak for itself.  But he views it as — you know, does it matter? 

    And I’m doing this with you today because I wanted to have people understand him.  And I think it’s very important — I disagree with him.  I think it’s very important that they do understand him. 

    He doesn’t need this.  He doesn’t need it.  Now, I happen to think it’s made him very popular.  I think it — he’s more popular now because there are so many people — you know, you’re talking about the radical left — they have the lowest ratings.  MSNBC is dying.  CNN is dying.  They’re all dying.  The New York Times is doing lousy.  The Washington Post is doing horribly.  They’re all doing badly because people don’t buy it anymore. 

    But I think it was important that he do this one interview.  You’ve been a very fair guy.  I think you were the right guy to do it.  If we could get some radical left guy — and he’d do just as well, frankly, because it’s all about common sense.

    Q    They would attack him —

    THE PRESIDENT:  But this — Sean —

    Q    — as being unconstitutional, not — a fascist. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  — to me this was a — it was important for people to understand, he’s doing a big job.  He’s doing a very thankless job.  He’s doing a thankless job, but he’s helping us to save our country. 

    Our country was in serious trouble, and I had to get the best guy, somebody with credibility, because if he were just a regular, good — very good, solid businessman, he wouldn’t have the credibility.  He’s got the best credibility for this. 

    And people also know he’s an honest guy.  He’s an honest guy.  He’s just a very, very smart guy who’s done amazing things.  And this will be the biggest thing he’s ever done, because, you know, his companies are all great.  But if this country goes bad — I guess where he is a little selfish is this.  He knows one thing and probably doesn’t think — but if his — if this country goes bad, his stuff is not going to be worth very much, I can tell you.

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I’d say, if the — if the ship of America sinks, we’re all go- — going down with it.  You know, this idea that people can escape to New Zealand or some other place is false.  If the central pillar of Western civilization that is America falls, the whole roof comes crashing down and there is no escape. 

    Q    It’s amazing, since you’ve been elected, to watch Canada, Mexico, Venezuela, Colombia — I — I was shocked at the statements that Vladimir Putin made about you.  I — I was shocked at the hostage release.  I was shocked that Venezuela had done it — had done it.  Zelenskyy wants a deal.  Putin wants a deal. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  All good statements.

    Q    King Abdullah was interested.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You mean by that all good statements.  Look, they respect the president of this country.  They respect — they did not respect the last president.  They laughed at him, and they laughed at our country, and he’s done great damage to our country. 

    Q    Have foreign leaders told you what they thought of Biden?

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, they have, but I’d rather not say.  They — they have.  It’s not — it — look —

    Q    It’s the obvious. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  He was not George Washington, let’s put it that way. 

    MR. MUSK:  (Inaudible.)

    THE PRESIDENT:  Not the greatest. 

    Q    Sorry, if that’s (inaudible).

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s done a tremendous disservice. 

    Q    Will you be here —

    THE PRESIDENT:  And, by the way, the Democrats have done a great disservice, and they ought to get their act together and use a little judgment, and they ought to work with us on straightening out this mess that — 

    Q    Who?  John Fetterman?

    THE PRESIDENT:  — a lot of people have —

    Q    Maybe?  Who — what Democrat is not radicalized? 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Actually, you mention John.

    Q    John Fetterman. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  He’s become the best voice in the Democrat party.  You know, I had lunch with him, and I thought he was terrific, but he’s a much different man than he was before he had this difficulty.  He used to be radical left, and I think he became much smarter, actually.  He’s really — he’s really a voice of reason. 

    But the Democrats have to get together.  They have to get their act together, because the stuff they — they talk about makes no sense.  It makes — none whatsoever.  And they must know it.  They must know.

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.  I mean, like, the country has spoken very clearly and rejected the core tenets of the Demo- — Democratic Party.  The country voted t- — fo- — I mean, the country made the — America has made its vote clear.  The president won the popular vote decisively.  The Republicans won the House.  Repub- — Republicans won the Senate.  What more do you need?

    The Democratic Party needs to take a hard look in the mirror and — and change their ways. 

    Q    I think they went from shock, denial, into the depression stage of grief, and now they’re in the rage stage, where I anticipate they’ll stay for four years, and if they get the chance, they’ll want to impeach him 10 times.  Do you anticipate you’ll be here in four years?  My last question.

    MR. MUSK:  I’ll — I’ll be as helpful as long as I can be helpful.

    THE PRESIDENT:  That’s a good question.  I mean, I was thinking about that just now.  I said, “I wonder how long he’s going to be doing it.”  You can’t get somebody like this.  He cares, and he’s brilliant, and he’s got energy. 

    You need energy, also, in addition to those other things.

    You know, I have a lot of guys that are very smart, but they have no energy.  They want to sleep all day long.  You need a lot of energy.  He’s got a lot of energy.  He’s doing a great job. 

    If there’s any conflict, he — he will stop it.  But if he didn’t, I’d stop it.  I’d see if there’s a conflict.  I mean, we’re talking about big stuff.

    But he’s under a pretty big microscope. 

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, seriously.

    THE PRESIDENT:  I mean, everybody is watching him.  If there’s a conflict, you’re going to be reading about it within about two minutes after the conflict.

    MR. MUSK:  Exactly.  There — there’s — the possibility of me getting away with something is 0 percent — 0.0.  I — I’m scrutinized to a ridiculous degree. 

    And — and the other thing is that we — you know, what — what’s — you know what’s better than saying “trust — trust me” is just full transparency.  So, what we’re doing with — with the DOGE — DOGE dot — just go to DOGE.gov.  You can see every single action that’s being taken. 

    And now –and I want to be clear, we are going to make some mistakes.  We’re not going to be perfect.  Nobody bats a thousand.  But we’re going to fix the mistakes very quickly.  That’s what matters: not that you don’t make mistakes, but that you fix the mistakes very fast. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  And you’re going to ask the other side, when they talk about, “This is a constitutional crisis,” you got to a- — what are they paying for?  Where are those tax — because when you read off the list of things, it’s a big con job.  See, when they talk Constitution —

    MR. MUSK:  Totally.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — it’s a total con job.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    THE PRESIDENT:  They never talk — and I watch some of the shows —

    MR. MUSK:  It’s specifics — they avoid specifics.

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah, when you start talking about how did — how come they spent money on transgender here and transgender there —

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah, totally.

    THE PRESIDENT:  — and all the stuff in some country that nobody ever heard of, they don’t want to talk about it.  They just talk about, “This is a constitutional crisis.” 

    Q    It shocks the conscious.

    THE PRESIDENT:  The money is being squandered purposely — tremendous theft, tremendous kickbacks, everything — and we’re straightening it out.  And thank goodness.  I look up, and I say, “Thank you,” because I think if it went on for four more years, it would not be salvageable.  You wouldn’t be able —

    MR. MUSK:  Absolutely.

    THE PRESIDENT:  You wouldn’t be able to save it. 

    Q    You believe, too, that when you were in Butler, came within a millimeter being assassinated —

    THE PRESIDENT:  Yeah.

    Q    The day you endorsed him, that was that day.

    MR. MUSK:  Yes.

    Q    But you had been planning on it?

    MR. MUSK:  Yeah.

    Q    Pretty — I think everybody will never forget that iconic blood on your face.  “Fight, fight, fight.”  I actually was afra- — watching it and thought you might drop again.  You know, I didn’t know if it had hit you.  You can sometimes get up and then the blood starts to accumulate.  It was scary — pretty scary. 

    MR. MUSK:  Well, I mean, th- — this is how you know someone’s true character, because everyone can say they’re brave, but the president was actually shot.  Okay?  Courage under fire.  “Fight, fight, fight,” blood streaming down the face.  That’s true courage.  You can’t fake that. 

    Q    Yeah.  Thank you both. 

         Mr. President, thank you, sir. 

    THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much. 

    Q    Appreciate it.  Elon, thank you for your time.  Really nice to meet you. 

                                  END                    1:01 P.M. EST

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: Yes, Australia needs new homes – but they must be built to withstand disasters in a warmer world

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Francesca Perugia, Senior Lecturer, School of Design and the Built Environment, Curtin University

    Australia’s housing crisis has created a push for fast-tracked construction. Federal, state and territory governments have set a target of 1.2 million new homes over five years.

    Increasing housing supply is essential. However, the homes must be thoughtfully located and designed, to avoid or withstand natural disasters such as bushfires, floods and cyclones.

    Recent severe weather, including floods in Queensland and severe storms in north-east Victoria, underscore the growing vulnerability of Australian homes. As climate change worsens, the risk becomes ever-greater.

    Our new research examined how disaster risk informs housing location and design in New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia. We spoke to planners, developers, insurers and housing providers, and found crucial problems that leave communities exposed.

    Getting to grips with disaster data

    Australia’s towns and cities are increasingly affected by natural disasters. The consequences extend beyond physical destruction to social, psychological and health effects. Disasters also harm the economy.

    Despite this, government housing policies and strategies often fail to adequately focus on natural disasters.

    Accurate, up-to-date information is crucial when seeking to protect new homes from natural disasters. Informed decisions typically require three types of data:

    • foundational: relating to vegetation, landscape features, weather, climate change and building characteristics such as height and materials

    • hazards: the risks of different disaster types such as historical flood data, maps of bushfire-prone areas and the recurrence of cyclones

    • vulnerability: the potential and actual impacts of natural disasters such as building damage, fatalities and injuries, displacement, psychological and health impacts and insurance losses.

    Our research, for the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, examined how data could be better used and shared to plan and deliver new housing and protect Australians from disasters.

    What we did

    We started by identifying what data was available in Australia for bushfire, flood and cyclone risk.
    Then we examined who owned and managed the data and how it was, or wasn’t, shared.

    The next step was to explore how decision-makers use the data to assess disaster risks for new housing. This involves interviews, workshops and questionnaires with:

    • government planning agencies (both state and local government)

    • housing providers (public and not-for-profit/community housing)

    • housing and land developers (private and public)

    • banks and insurers.

    What we found

    Overall, we found data on disaster risk was fragmented and inconsistent across multiple agencies, and not regularly updated.

    Decision-makers in state and local planning agencies often cannot access accurate information about disaster risk. This means they lack the power to restrict housing in areas prone to bushfires, floods or other extreme events.

    Flood hazard data is particularly problematic. One planner from Queensland described it as “patchy, of variable quality and currency and not always open source” – the latter meaning it was hard to access.

    Many households only learn about their disaster risk when discovering their homes are uninsurable or premiums are prohibitively high. Others become aware of the problem when premiums rise with an existing insurer.

    A community housing provider told us:

    I think the way people are finding out about risk now is by their insurance policies going up. That’s the market reality. When they get an increase in their insurance policy next year, that will wake them up that they are actually in a high-risk area.

    Data held by emergency service agencies and insurers is mostly inaccessible to planners, developers and households due to privacy and commercial sensitivities.

    However, this information is crucial. Government agencies should establish protocols to enable data-sharing while protecting privacy and commercial interests.

    Lack of transparency for homebuyers

    A recent report suggested only 29% of Australian home buyers know the disaster risks associated with the homes they live in.

    Disclosure statements are required by the vendor (seller) when marketing their house or land for sale. These vary between states and territories and, in most cases, do not compel the owner to reveal all known risks.

    For example, in Victoria, a vendor is required to disclose whether the land is in a designated bushfire-prone area, but not whether it is exposed to flooding.

    What’s more, a vendor motivated to sell a house is probably not the best source to provide accurate, impartial information about its exposure to disaster. This is better left to an independent entity such as a local council.

    Thorough investigations into a home’s disaster risk is usually at the discretion of the buyer.

    Making this information readily available to prospective homebuyers prior to purchase would allow more informed consumer decisions. It would also pressure governments and housing suppliers to address disaster risks.

    Where to next?

    Australia urgently needs a national framework to ensure data on housing and disaster risk is comprehensive, current and embedded in housing development decisions.

    The federal government’s Digital Transformation Agency could establish and implement this system, with input from state and local governments.

    Technology known as “spatial digital twins” could also vastly improve how disaster risk is assessed and communicated. These tools enable users to pull together and arrange large amounts of data, to visualise it in the form of models.

    For example, a spatial digital twin could combine real time flood sensor data with historical flooding patterns to predict and visualise flood risks before they occur. Federal and state governments are already investing in such technology.

    Australia’s push to increase housing supply must be matched with a commitment from governments to ensure the homes are safe, resilient and sustainable in the face of our changing climate.

    Addressing the housing crisis isn’t just about numbers – it’s about making sure homes are built in the right places, with the right protections, for the long-term safety of communities.

    Francesca Perugia
    receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI)

    Courtney Babb receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI) and is a member of the Greens (WA).

    Steven Rowley receives funding from the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute and the Australian Research Council. He is a member of the Housing Industry Forecasting Group in Western Australia

    – ref. Yes, Australia needs new homes – but they must be built to withstand disasters in a warmer world – https://theconversation.com/yes-australia-needs-new-homes-but-they-must-be-built-to-withstand-disasters-in-a-warmer-world-249702

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Real change boosts farmer confidence, but Paris commitments still cause concern

    Source: ACT Party

    ACT Agriculture spokesperson Mark Cameron is welcoming Federated Farmers’ latest Farm Confidence Survey, which shows farmer confidence has jumped to a 10-year high, but says there is more work to be done – including resolving challenges posed by our climate commitments.

    “Finally, we’ve got a Government committed to letting farmers farm, and it’s clear the real change ACT is resonating with rural New Zealand.

    “We’ve reined in waste and refocused the Reserve Bank on tackling inflation to bring interest rates down. We’ve kept agriculture out of the Emissions Trading Scheme and axed Labour’s anti-farmer policies including the ute tax and new resource management regime,” says Mr Cameron.

    “The progress is good, but farmers still deserve better. More work is underway to cut rural red tape, such as the repeal and replacement of the RMA that puts property rights first, so farmers can farm without having to worry about vacuous concepts like the mana and mauri of the water. The work I’m leading on the rural banking inquiry will ascertain exactly why farmers are getting a raw deal and how much woke banking practices have to do with it.

    “The Farm Confidence Survey shows climate policy has farmers increasingly on edge. This reflects what farmers are telling me. The Paris Agreement requires us to sign up to increasing costly targets, prime rural land gets covered in pine trees, farmers get lumped with new bills and red tape.

    “People need to eat, they need their baby formula, and if we shut down efficient Kiwi farms, that production will just be shifted offshore to countries that are less efficient. How’s that good for the environment? It’s a nonsense.

    “Rural New Zealand deserves an honest conversation about what these targets mean, how much they’ll cost, and the implications if we were to consider withdrawing. Resolving these questions would do a great deal to lift confidence higher.”

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Australia: City welcomes new Youth Council members

    Source: State of Victoria Local Government 2

    The City of Greater Bendigo Youth Council has commenced a two-year term with ten new, and eight returning Youth Councillors for 2025-2026.

    New Youth Councillors Annie Dalton, Ella Filsell, Freiya O’Connor, Heather Bell, Lea Bursac, Leila Bennett, Lucas Thredgold, Mollie Hartje, Rafferty Brasier, and Rose Norton – have joined returning Youth Councillors Aidan Sanders, Alyssa Beaton, Amelia Westbrook, Bailey Dolan, Hamish Knight, Levity Camilleri, Moon Vincent, and Rohan Tyler.

    City of Greater Bendigo Mayor Cr Andrea Metcalf said the Youth Council met this week with Levity Camilleri elected Youth Mayor and Alyssa Beaton and Bailey Dolan installed as Deputy Mayors.

    “I would like to welcome both new and returning Youth Councillors and congratulate our new Youth Mayor Levity Camilleri and our Deputy Youth Mayors Alyssa Beaton and Bailey Dolan,” Cr Metcalf said.

    “The Youth Council is an initiative to engage with local young people in the City’s decision-making process for the future and Council is again looking forward to working with the Youth Council in 2025.

    “The Youth Council represents the views of young people on City plans, policies and programs that impact them and represent young people at civic events and activities such as the National Volunteer Week Morning Tea and the IDAHOBIT Flag raising ceremony.

    “It also contributes to a key goal of the City’s Council Plan 2021-2025 to ensure young people are supported to explore, engage and be empowered to shape the world they live in.”

    2025 Youth Mayor Levity Camilleri said they are incredibly grateful for the trust placed in them as Youth Mayor.

    “I am honoured to be working with such a driven and passionate group of young people.  I have gained so much more from Youth Council than I’ve contributed, and I look forward to the opportunity to give back to this community, Levity Camilleri said.

    “I want to thank all the past and current Youth Councillors for their support through my leadership journey.

    “In 2025 the Youth Council is excited to provide input into the City’s youth programs and continue to provide a youth perspective on City plans and strategies, including the Council Plan 2025/2029 and the new Health and Wellbeing Plan.”

    The Youth Council is starting its seventh year. The first six years of the Youth Council have been very successful with Youth Councillors providing input into over 50 City plans, strategies, policies, and projects, including the Council Plan 2021-2025, the Zero Emissions Roadmap, the Biodiversity Strategy, the LGBTIQA+ Action Plan, the Fair Access Action Plan, the E-scooter trial, and the Managed Growth Strategy. Youth Councillors also co-designed and oversaw the development of the City’s Youth Action Plan.

    They have also represented young people on several advisory committees including the Greater Bendigo Climate Collaboration, the Arts and Creative Industries Advisory Committee, and the Heritage Advisory Committee.

    MIL OSI News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: An Updated Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI 4.0) for Species Climate Adaptation Planning

    Source: US Geological Survey

    Breadcrumb

    1. News

    An Updated Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI 4.0) for Species Climate Adaptation Planning

    NatureServe recently released CCVI 4.0, the latest version of the Climate Change Vulnerability Index for terrestrial and freshwater species. Developed in collaboration with multiple CASCs, the update integrates a decade of new science and features a new web-based platform. 

    A new version of NatureServe’s Climate Change Vulnerability Index (CCVI 4.0) is now available online, offering practitioners and policymakers an improved cost-effective way to evaluate species vulnerability to climate change. The newest update was developed in collaboration with multiple USGS Climate Adaptation Science Centers and incorporated direct input from partners, including many state fish and wildlife agencies who use the CCVI to inform State Wildlife Action Plans. The CCVI tool can be used in many ways, including to identify at-risk species and areas home to a high number of at-risk species, to determine which climatic factors are significant for a species, and to help researchers identify species that have been insufficiently studied. 

    The CCVI determines species vulnerability using three key factors: Climate exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Climate exposure refers to the magnitude and rate of climate change a species experiences, sensitivity evaluates how strongly those changes affect it, and adaptive capacity describes the species’ ability to adjust to changing conditions. The last major update to the CCVI was made in 2015, but much has changed since then. The updated CCVI 4.0 now incorporates a decade of new scientific insights on how climate change impacts terrestrial and freshwater species and provides a new web-based platform to improve data sharing and collaboration. It also includes updated climate exposure data, a new vulnerability comparison across two future emissions scenarios, and a refined adaptive capacity framework created by researchers from the Northwest CASC.  

    Looking ahead, researchers from NatureServe and the USGS CASC network plan to keep refining the CCVI 4.0 by testing additional climate variables and including scenario-planning features. These improvements will help natural resource managers navigate uncertain futures in conservation planning and decision-making. 

    Access CCVI 4.0 on the NatureServe website 

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: SiriusPoint reports ninth consecutive quarter of underwriting profits with FY Core combined ratio of 91.0%

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    HAMILTON, Bermuda, Feb. 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — SiriusPoint Ltd. (“SiriusPoint” or the “Company”) (NYSE:SPNT) today announced results for its fourth quarter ended December 31, 2024

    • Combined ratio of 90.2% in the fourth quarter for Core business, representing a 3.2 point improvement versus prior year, resulting in a full year 2024 Core combined ratio of 91.0% and Core underwriting income of $200 million
    • Growth in the quarter of 21% on gross premiums written for continuing lines business (excluding 2023 exited programs), contributing to 10% growth for the full year
    • Fourth quarter net loss of $21 million, materially impacted by three significant items linked to our efforts to reposition the Company, including the CM Bermuda repurchase transaction, closure of previously announced LPT transaction with Enstar, and the write-down of a single MGA investment. This marks the end of the significant reshaping of the Company
    • Underlying net income of $44 million in the fourth quarter contributing to $304 million for the full year, up 14% versus prior year
    • Return on equity for 2024 of 9.1%, or 14.6% on an underlying basis and at the upper end of the target range of 12-15%
    • Book value per diluted common share (ex. AOCI) of $14.64, up 2.7% in the quarter and up 9.8% from December 31, 2023. Balance sheet remains strong post CM Bermuda transaction with Q4’24 BSCR estimate at 214%
    • Permanent retirement of the 45.7 million common shares repurchased from CM Bermuda on closure of the transaction, driving greater than 20% earnings per share accretion

    Scott Egan, Chief Executive Officer, said: “2024 has been a remarkable year of delivery for SiriusPoint. Despite increased catastrophe activity, our Core combined ratio has improved meaningfully from last year to 91.0%, excluding the impact from the loss portfolio transfer in 2023. Our 4.2 point improvement in attritional loss ratio demonstrates our focus on improving the quality of our underwriting. We saw 21% growth of gross premiums written for the quarter and 10% for the full year for our continuing lines business.

    Our underlying return on equity of 14.6% is at the upper end of the 12-15% target range set out a year ago. In optimizing our capital position, we have returned over $1 billion to investors during 2024 while maintaining robust capital ratios, due to our strong performance, reshaping actions, and capital generation over the past two years.

    We have strengthened our underlying business performance year-over-year, providing a strong basis for 2025. While this quarter our net income was impacted by several one-off items, we see 2024 as the end of the repositioning and reshaping of the Company. Our efforts are now fully focused on both growing the business and continuing to enhance performance.

    I take great pride in the accomplishments of the SiriusPoint team, who have worked with commitment and dedication to produce improvements in our underlying results, quarter after quarter. I am immensely grateful for all that they do every day for our customers, partners and shareholders.”

    Fourth Quarter 2024 Highlights

    • Net loss attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders of $21.3 million, or $0.13 per diluted common share
    • Core income of $66.7 million, including underwriting income of $56.3 million, Core combined ratio of 90.2%
    • Core net services fee income of $10.4 million, with service margin of 20.2%
    • Net investment income of $68.9 million and total investment result of $29.0 million
    • Book value per diluted common share decreased $0.13 per share, or 0.9%, from September 30, 2024 to $14.60
    • Annualized return on average common equity of (4.0)%

    Year Ended December 31, 2024

    • Net income available to SiriusPoint common shareholders of $183.9 million, or $1.04 per diluted common share
    • Core income of $244.6 million, including underwriting income of $200.0 million, Core combined ratio of 91.0%
    • Core net services fee income of $46.7 million, with service margin of 21.0%
    • Net investment income of $303.6 million and total investment result of $224.6 million
    • Book value per diluted common share increased $1.25 per share, or 9.4%, from December 31, 2023 to $14.60
    • Return on average common equity of 9.1%
    • Debt to capital ratio increased to 24.8% compared to 23.8% as of December 31, 2023

    Key Financial Metrics

    The following table shows certain key financial metrics for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023:

           
      Three months ended   Twelve months ended
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      ($ in millions, except for per share data and ratios)
    Combined ratio   94.4 %     93.6 %     88.3 %     84.5 %
    Core underwriting income (1) $ 56.3     $ 37.0     $ 200.0     $ 250.2  
    Core net services income (1) $ 10.4     $ 9.3     $ 44.6     $ 41.2  
    Core income (1) $ 66.7     $ 46.3     $ 244.6     $ 291.4  
    Core combined ratio (1)   90.2 %     93.4 %     91.0 %     89.1 %
    Annualized return on average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders (4.0 )%     17.1 %     9.1 %     16.2 %
    Book value per common share $ 14.92     $ 13.76     $ 14.92     $ 13.76  
    Book value per diluted common share $ 14.60     $ 13.35     $ 14.60     $ 13.35  
    Book value per diluted common share ex. AOCI (1) $ 14.64     $ 13.33     $ 14.64     $ 13.33  
    Tangible book value per diluted common share (1) $ 13.42     $ 12.47     $ 13.42     $ 12.47  
    (1) Core underwriting income, Core net services income, Core income and Core combined ratio are non-GAAP financial measures. See definitions in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and reconciliations in “Segment Reporting.” Book value per diluted common share ex. AOCI and tangible book value per diluted common share are non-GAAP financial measures. See definition and reconciliation in “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
       

    Fourth Quarter 2024 Summary

    Consolidated underwriting income for the three months ended December 31, 2024 was $32.7 million compared to $36.7 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023. The decrease was primarily driven by higher catastrophe losses, partially offset by an increase in favorable prior year loss reserve development. Catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance and reinstatement premiums, were $38.6 million, or 6.5 percentage points on the combined ratio, for the three months ended December 31, 2024 mainly from Hurricane Milton, compared to minimal losses for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Favorable prior year reserve development was $37.3 million primarily driven by favorable development in Reinsurance, mainly in Property and Specialty from reserve releases relating to prior year’s catastrophe events, as well as in Insurance & Services, mainly due to lower than expected reported attritional losses in A&H, compared to $11.1 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023 which included reserve strengthening for specific areas of uncertainty for the loss reserves.

    Consolidated underwriting income for the year ended December 31, 2024 was $276.4 million compared to $375.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The decrease was primarily driven by lower favorable prior year loss reserve development as the year ended December 31, 2023 included $127.8 million driven by reserving analyses performed in connection with the loss portfolio transfer transaction with Pallas Reinsurance Company Ltd that closed on June 30, 2023 (“2023 LPT”). Excluding the favorable development linked to the 2023 LPT, underwriting income increased by $15.8 million primarily driven by favorable development in Reinsurance, as well as lower attritional losses in both Reinsurance and Insurance & Services, partially offset by higher acquisition costs from business mix changes, including the growth of Insurance & Services, and higher catastrophe losses. Catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance and reinstatement premiums, were $54.8 million, or 2.3 percentage points on the combined ratio, for the year ended December 31, 2024, primarily driven by Hurricanes Milton and Helene, compared to $24.8 million, or 1.0 percentage points on the combined ratio, for the year ended December 31, 2023, primarily driven by the Turkey Earthquake and Chile Wildfire.

    Reportable Segments

    The determination of our reportable segments is based on the manner in which management monitors the performance of our operations, which consist of two reportable segments – Reinsurance and Insurance & Services.

    Collectively, the sum of our two segments, Reinsurance and Insurance & Services, constitute our “Core” results. Core underwriting income, Core net services income, Core income and Core combined ratio are non-GAAP financial measures. See reconciliations in “Segment Reporting”. We believe it is useful to review Core results as it better reflects how management views the business and reflects our decision to exit the runoff business. The sum of Core results and Corporate results are equal to the consolidated results of operations.

    Three months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Core Premium Volume

    Gross premiums written increased by $42.7 million, or 5.9%, to $762.5 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024 compared to $719.8 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Net premiums earned increased by $23.2 million, or 4.2%, to $581.6 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024 compared to $558.4 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023. The increases in premium volume were primarily driven by increases in Insurance & Services from strategic organic and new program growth, as well higher A&H premiums, and in Reinsurance in Specialty and Property from new business and renewal growth. These increases were partially offset by the movement of certain lines from Insurance & Services to Corporate, including the non-renewal of a Workers’ Compensation program and the planned transition of a Cyber program to another carrier, representing $89.9 million of gross premiums written for the three months ended December 31, 2023.

    Core Results

    Core results for the three months ended December 31, 2024 included income of $66.7 million compared to $46.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Income for the three months ended December 31, 2024 consists of underwriting income of $56.3 million (90.2% combined ratio) and net services income of $10.4 million, compared to underwriting income of $37.0 million (93.4% combined ratio) and net services income of $9.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023. The improvement in net underwriting results was primarily driven by increased favorable prior year loss reserve development and lower attritional losses, partially offset by higher catastrophe losses.

    Losses incurred included $58.1 million of favorable prior year loss reserve development for the three months ended December 31, 2024 mainly in Property and Specialty from reserve releases relating to prior year’s catastrophe events, compared to $37.7 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023 driven by management reflecting the continued favorable reported loss emergence through December 31, 2023 in its best estimate of reserves.

    Catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance and reinstatement premiums, for the three months ended December 31, 2024, were $38.6 million, or 6.6 percentage points on the combined ratio, mainly from Hurricane Milton, compared to minimal losses for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Despite increased catastrophe losses for the three months ended December 31, 2024, catastrophe losses for the year ended December 31, 2024 were in line with our expectations evidencing our actions to reduce our catastrophe exposed business during the last two years.

    Year ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Core Premium Volume

    Gross premiums written decreased by $134.3 million, or 4.1%, to $3,176.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared to $3,310.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Net premiums earned decreased by $81.5 million, or 3.6%, to $2,199.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared to $2,280.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The decreases in premium volume were primarily due to the movement of certain lines from Insurance & Services to Corporate, including the non-renewal of a Workers’ Compensation program and the planned transition of a Cyber program to another carrier, representing $421.8 million of gross premiums written for the year ended December 31, 2023, with the most significant offset being strategic organic and new program growth within Insurance & Services.

    Core Results

    Core results for the year ended December 31, 2024 included income of $244.6 million compared to $291.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Income for the year ended December 31, 2024 consists of underwriting income of $200.0 million (91.0% combined ratio) and net services income of $44.6 million, compared to underwriting income of $250.2 million (89.1% combined ratio) and net services income of $41.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The decrease in net underwriting results was primarily driven by lower favorable prior year loss reserve development as the year ended December 31, 2023 included $104.8 million driven by reserving analyses performed in connection with the 2023 LPT.

    Excluding the favorable development linked to the 2023 LPT, net underwriting income increased by $49.0 million primarily driven by favorable development in Reinsurance, mainly in Property and Specialty from reserve releases relating to prior year’s catastrophe events, as well as lower attritional losses in both Reinsurance and Insurance & Services, partially offset by higher acquisition costs from business mix changes, including the growth of Insurance & Services, and higher catastrophe losses.

    For the year ended December 31, 2024 catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance and reinstatement premiums, were $54.8 million, or 2.5 percentage points on the combined ratio, which includes losses from Hurricanes Milton and Helene compared to $13.5 million, or 0.6 percentage points on the combined ratio, including losses from the Turkey Earthquake, Hawaii wildfires and Hurricane Idalia, for the year ended December 31, 2023.

    Reinsurance Segment

    Three months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Reinsurance gross premiums written were $312.2 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024, an increase of $60.5 million, or 24.0%, compared to the three months ended December 31, 2023, primarily driven by new business and renewal growth across Specialty and Property, partially offset by reduced premiums written in Casualty reflecting underwriting actions to improve profitability.

    Reinsurance generated underwriting income of $18.3 million (93.2% combined ratio) for the three months ended December 31, 2024, compared to underwriting income of $27.8 million (88.6% combined ratio) for the three months ended December 31, 2023. The decrease in net underwriting results was primarily due to higher catastrophe losses, partially offset by increased favorable development. Catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance and reinstatement premiums, for the three months ended December 31, 2024, were $35.2 million, or 13.2 percentage points on the combined ratio, mainly from Hurricane Milton, compared to minimal losses for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Losses incurred included $41.8 million of favorable prior year loss reserve development for the three months ended December 31, 2024 mainly in Property and Specialty from reserve releases relating to prior year’s catastrophe events, compared to $21.1 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023 driven by management reflecting the continued favorable reported loss emergence through December 31, 2023 in its best estimate of reserves.

    Year ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Reinsurance gross premiums written were $1,335.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, an increase of $64.6 million, or 5.1%, compared to the year ended December 31, 2023, primarily driven by new business and renewal growth across Specialty and Property, partially offset by reduced premiums written in Casualty reflecting underwriting actions to improve profitability.

    Reinsurance generated underwriting income of $124.8 million (88.0% combined ratio) for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to underwriting income of $206.2 million (80.0% combined ratio) for the year ended December 31, 2023. The decrease in net underwriting results was primarily due to decreased favorable prior year loss reserve development and higher catastrophe losses, partially offset by lower attritional losses. Net favorable prior year loss reserve development was $75.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 primarily driven by favorable development in Property and Specialty from reserve releases relating to prior year’s catastrophe events, compared to $140.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2023, which included $93.0 million driven by reserving analyses performed in connection with the 2023 LPT.

    For the year ended December 31, 2024, catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance and reinstatement premiums, were $49.5 million, or 4.7 percentage points on the combined ratio, which includes losses from Hurricanes Milton and Helene compared to $12.2 million, or 1.2 percentage points on the combined ratio, including losses from the Turkey Earthquake, Hawaii wildfires and Hurricane Idalia for the year ended December 31, 2023.

    Insurance & Services Segment

    Three months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Insurance & Services gross premiums written were $450.3 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024, a decrease of $17.8 million, or 3.8%, compared to the three months ended December 31, 2023, primarily driven by the movement of certain lines from Insurance & Services to Corporate, including the non-renewal of a Workers’ Compensation program and the planned transition of a Cyber program to another carrier, representing $89.9 million of gross premiums written for the three months ended December 31, 2023, partially offset by strategic organic and new program growth, as well higher A&H premiums.

    Insurance & Services generated segment income of $48.4 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024, compared to $16.8 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Segment income for the three months ended December 31, 2024 consists of underwriting income of $38.0 million (87.9% combined ratio) and net services income of $10.4 million, compared to underwriting income of $9.2 million (97.0% combined ratio) and net services income of $7.6 million for the three months ended December 31, 2023. The improvement in underwriting results was primarily driven by our decreased loss ratio mainly from lower attritional losses, partially offset by higher acquisition costs from business mix changes as we grow our Insurance & Services segment.

    Year ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Insurance & Services gross premiums written were $1,840.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, a decrease of $198.9 million, or 9.8%, compared to the year ended December 31, 2023, primarily driven by the movement of certain lines from Insurance & Services to Corporate, including the non-renewal of a Workers’ Compensation program and the planned transition of a Cyber program to another carrier, representing $421.8 million of gross premiums written for the year ended December 31, 2023, as well as lower A&H premiums, partially offset by strategic organic and new program growth.

    Insurance & Services generated segment income of $119.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2024, compared to income of $86.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. Segment income for the year ended December 31, 2024 consists of underwriting income of $75.2 million (93.5% combined ratio) and net services income of $44.6 million, compared to underwriting income of $44.0 million (96.5% combined ratio) and net services income of $42.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2023. The improvement in underwriting income of $31.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2024 compared to the year ended December 31, 2023 was primarily driven by our decreased loss ratio mainly from lower attritional losses, partially offset by higher acquisition costs from business mix changes as we grow our Insurance & Services segment.

    As of December 31, 2024, we have equity stakes in 20 entities (managing general agents (“MGAs”), Insurtech and Other) compared to 36 at the start of 2023. We continue to rationalize our MGA equity stakes and realize the significant off-balance sheet value of our consolidated MGAs, with 6 of these rationalized in 2024. Book value for our three consolidated MGAs was $90.1 million as of December 31, 2024, compared to $76.3 million at December 31, 2023, when adjusted to exclude Arcadian Risk Capital Ltd. which we deconsolidated on June 30, 2024.

    Investments

    Three months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Total net investment income and realized and unrealized investment gains (losses) for the three months ended December 31, 2024 was primarily attributable to net investment income related to interest income from our debt portfolio of $61.2 million, partially offset by unrealized losses resulting from fair value analyses on our strategic investment portfolio.

    Total net investment income and realized and unrealized investment gains (losses) for the three months ended December 31, 2023 was primarily attributable to investment results from our debt and short-term investment portfolio of $68.5 million. This result was driven by interest income primarily on securitized assets and corporate debt positions, which made up 65.6% of our total investments as of December 31, 2023.

    Year ended December 31, 2024 and 2023

    Total net investment income and realized and unrealized investment gains (losses) for the year ended December 31, 2024 was primarily attributable to net investment income related to interest income from our debt and short-term investment portfolio of $289.7 million, partially offset by unrealized losses on other long-term investments of $70.0 million. Increased investment income is primarily due to the rotation of the portfolio from cash and cash equivalents and U.S. government and government agency positions to high-grade corporate debt and other securitized assets, in an effort to better diversify our portfolio. Losses on private other long-term investments were the result of updated fair value analyses consistent with the current insurtech market trends and disposals of positions as we execute our strategy to focus on underwriting relationships with MGAs.

    Total net investment income and realized and unrealized investment gains (losses) for the year ended December 31, 2023 was primarily attributable to net investment income related to interest income from our debt and short-term investment portfolio of $277.0 million.

    Webcast Details

    The Company will hold a webcast to discuss its fourth quarter 2024 results at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time on February 19, 2025. The webcast of the conference call will be available over the Internet from the Company’s website at www.siriuspt.com under the “Investor Relations” section. Participants should follow the instructions provided on the website to download and install any necessary audio applications. The conference call will be available by dialing 1-877-451-6152 (domestic) or 1-201-389-0879 (international). Participants should ask for the SiriusPoint Ltd. fourth quarter 2024 earnings call.

    The online replay will be available on the Company’s website immediately following the call at www.siriuspt.com under the “Investor Relations” section.

    Safe Harbor Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
    This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which may be beyond the Company’s control. The Company cautions you that the forward-looking information presented in this press release is not a guarantee of future events, and that actual events may differ materially from those made in or suggested by the forward-looking information contained in this press release. In addition, forward-looking statements generally can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “believes,” “intends,” “seeks,” “anticipates,” “aims,” “plans,” “targets,” “estimates,” “expects,” “assumes,” “continues,” “guidance,” “should,” “could,” “will,” “may” and the negative of these or similar terms and phrases. Specific forward-looking statements in this press release include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the trend of our performance as compared to the previous guidance, the success of our strategic transaction with CMIG International Holding Pte. Ltd., the current insurtech market trends, our ability to generate shareholder value and whether we will continue to have momentum in our business in the future. Actual events, results and outcomes may differ materially from the Company’s expectations due to a variety of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors. Among the risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those described in the forward-looking statements are the following: our ability to execute on our strategic transformation, including re-underwriting to reduce volatility and improve underwriting performance, de-risking our investment portfolio, and transforming our business; the impact of unpredictable catastrophic events, including uncertainties with respect to current and future COVID-19 losses across many classes of insurance business and the amount of insurance losses that may ultimately be ceded to the reinsurance market, supply chain issues, labor shortages and related increased costs, changing interest rates and equity market volatility; inadequacy of loss and loss adjustment expense reserves, the lack of available capital, and periods characterized by excess underwriting capacity and unfavorable premium rates; the performance of financial markets, impact of inflation and interest rates, and foreign currency fluctuations; our ability to compete successfully in the insurance and reinsurance market and the effect of consolidation in the insurance and reinsurance industry; technology breaches or failures, including those resulting from a malicious cyber-attack on us, our business partners or service providers; the effects of global climate change, including increased severity and frequency of weather-related natural disasters and catastrophes, including wildfires, and increased coastal flooding in many geographic areas; geopolitical uncertainty, including the ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East and the new presidential administration in the U.S.; our ability to retain key senior management and key employees; a downgrade or withdrawal of our financial ratings; fluctuations in our results of operations; legal restrictions on certain of SiriusPoint’s insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries’ ability to pay dividends and other distributions to SiriusPoint; the outcome of legal and regulatory proceedings and regulatory constraints on our business; reduced returns or losses in SiriusPoint’s investment portfolio; our exposure or potential exposure to corporate income tax in Bermuda and the E.U., U.S. federal income and withholding taxes and our significant deferred tax assets, which could become devalued if we do not generate future taxable income or applicable corporate tax rates are reduced; risks associated with delegating authority to third party managing general agents; future strategic transactions such as acquisitions, dispositions, investments, mergers or joint ventures; SiriusPoint’s response to any acquisition proposal that may be received from any party, including any actions that may be considered by the Company’s Board of Directors or any committee thereof; and other risks and factors listed under “Risk Factors” in the Company’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and other subsequent periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made and the Company undertakes no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Other Financial Metrics

    In presenting SiriusPoint’s results, management has included financial measures that are not calculated under standards or rules that comprise accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”). SiriusPoint’s management uses this information in its internal analysis of results and believes that this information may be informative to investors in gauging the quality of SiriusPoint’s financial performance, identifying trends in our results and providing meaningful period-to-period comparisons. Core underwriting income, Core net services income, Core income, and Core combined ratio are non-GAAP financial measures. Management believes it is useful to review Core results as it better reflects how management views the business and reflects the Company’s decision to exit the runoff business. Book value per diluted common share excluding accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (“AOCI”) and tangible book value per diluted common share, as presented, are non-GAAP financial measures and the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP measure is book value per common share. Management believes it is useful to exclude AOCI because it may fluctuate significantly between periods based on movements in interest and currency rates. Management believes the effects of intangible assets are not indicative of underlying underwriting results or trends and make book value comparisons to less acquisitive peer companies less meaningful. Underlying net income is a non-GAAP financial measure and the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP measure is net income. Underlying net income excludes items which we believe are not indicative of the operations of our underlying businesses. Management believes it is useful to review underlying net income as it better reflects how we view the business, as well as provides investors with an alternative metric that can assist in predicting future earnings and profitability that are complementary to GAAP metrics. Underlying return on average common shareholders’ equity is calculated by dividing underlying net income available to SiriusPoint common shareholders for the period by the average common shareholders’ equity, excluding AOCI. Reconciliations of such non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP figures are included in the attached financial information in accordance with Regulation G and Item 10(e) of Regulation S-K, as applicable.

    About the Company

    SiriusPoint is a global underwriter of insurance and reinsurance providing solutions to clients and brokers around the world. Bermuda-headquartered with offices in New York, London, Stockholm and other locations, we are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (SPNT). We have licenses to write Property & Casualty and Accident & Health insurance and reinsurance globally. Our offering and distribution capabilities are strengthened by a portfolio of strategic partnerships with Managing General Agents and Program Administrators. With approximately $2.6 billion total capital, SiriusPoint’s operating companies have a financial strength rating of A- (Stable) from AM Best, S&P and Fitch, and A3 (Stable) from Moody’s. For more information please visit www.siriuspt.com.

    Contacts

    Investor Relations
    Liam Blackledge – Investor Relations and Strategy Manager
    Liam.Blackledge@siriuspt.com
    + 44 203 772 3082

    Media
    Natalie King – Global Head of Marketing and External Communications
    Natalie.King@siriuspt.com
    + 44 20 3772 3102

           
    SIRIUSPOINT LTD.
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (UNAUDITED)
    As of December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023
    (expressed in millions of U.S. dollars, except per share and share amounts)
           
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
    Assets      
    Debt securities, available for sale, at fair value, net of allowance for credit losses of $1.1 (2023 – $0.0) (cost – $5,143.8; 2023 – $4,754.6) $ 5,131.0     $ 4,755.4  
    Debt securities, trading, at fair value (cost – $187.3; 2023 – $568.1)   162.2       534.9  
    Short-term investments, at fair value (cost – $95.3; 2023 – $370.8)   95.8       371.6  
    Investments in related party investment funds, at fair value   116.5       105.6  
    Other long-term investments, at fair value (cost – $317.8; 2023 – $358.1) (includes related party investments at fair value of $100.7 (2023 – $173.7))   200.0       310.1  
    Total investments   5,705.5       6,077.6  
    Cash and cash equivalents   682.0       969.2  
    Restricted cash and cash equivalents   212.6       132.1  
    Redemption receivable from related party investment fund   —       3.0  
    Due from brokers   11.2       5.6  
    Interest and dividends receivable   44.0       42.3  
    Insurance and reinsurance balances receivable, net   2,054.4       1,966.3  
    Deferred acquisition costs, net   327.5       308.9  
    Unearned premiums ceded   463.9       449.2  
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses recoverable, net   2,315.3       2,295.1  
    Deferred tax asset   297.0       293.6  
    Intangible assets   140.8       152.7  
    Other assets   270.7       175.9  
    Total assets $ 12,524.9     $ 12,871.5  
    Liabilities      
    Loss and loss adjustment expense reserves $ 5,653.9     $ 5,608.1  
    Unearned premium reserves   1,639.2       1,627.3  
    Reinsurance balances payable   1,781.6       1,736.7  
    Deposit liabilities   17.4       134.4  
    Deferred gain on retroactive reinsurance   8.5       27.9  
    Debt   639.1       786.2  
    Due to brokers   18.0       6.2  
    Deferred tax liability   76.2       68.7  
    Liability-classified capital instruments   —       67.3  
    Share repurchase liability   483.0       —  
    Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities   269.2       278.1  
    Total liabilities   10,586.1       10,340.9  
    Commitments and contingent liabilities      
    Shareholders’ equity      
    Series B preference shares (par value $0.10; authorized and issued: 8,000,000)   200.0       200.0  
    Common shares (issued and outstanding: 116,429,057; 2023 – 168,120,022)   11.6       16.8  
    Additional paid-in capital   945.0       1,693.0  
    Retained earnings   784.9       601.0  
    Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax   (4.1 )     3.1  
    Shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint shareholders   1,937.4       2,513.9  
    Noncontrolling interests   1.4       16.7  
    Total shareholders’ equity   1,938.8       2,530.6  
    Total liabilities, noncontrolling interests and shareholders’ equity $ 12,524.9     $ 12,871.5  
                   
    SIRIUSPOINT LTD.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (LOSS) (UNAUDITED)
    For the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023
    (expressed in millions of U.S. dollars, except per share and share amounts)
           
      Three months ended   Twelve months ended
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
    Revenues              
    Net premiums earned $ 590.3     $ 578.0     $ 2,343.5     $ 2,426.2  
    Net investment income   68.9       78.4       303.6       283.7  
    Net realized and unrealized investment losses   (40.7 )     (12.4 )     (88.7 )     (10.0 )
    Net realized and unrealized investment gains (losses) from related party investment funds   0.8       (1.0 )     9.7       (1.0 )
    Net investment income and net realized and unrealized investment gains (losses)   29.0       65.0       224.6       272.7  
    Other revenues   19.4       17.8       184.2       97.8  
    Loss on settlement and change in fair value of liability-classified capital instruments   (25.9 )     (15.0 )     (148.5 )     (59.4 )
    Total revenues   612.8       645.8       2,603.8       2,737.3  
    Expenses              
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net   369.1       365.4       1,368.5       1,381.3  
    Acquisition costs, net   134.6       111.7       516.9       472.7  
    Other underwriting expenses   53.9       64.2       181.7       196.3  
    Net corporate and other expenses   58.1       64.5       232.1       258.2  
    Intangible asset amortization   3.0       2.9       11.9       11.1  
    Interest expense   19.6       19.8       69.6       64.1  
    Foreign exchange (gains) losses   (12.9 )     19.2       (10.0 )     34.9  
    Total expenses   625.4       647.7       2,370.7       2,418.6  
    Income (loss) before income tax (expense) benefit   (12.6 )     (1.9 )     233.1       318.7  
    Income tax (expense) benefit   (4.4 )     101.6       (30.7 )     45.0  
    Net income (loss)   (17.0 )     99.7       202.4       363.7  
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests   (0.3 )     (2.2 )     (2.5 )     (8.9 )
    Net income (loss) available to SiriusPoint   (17.3 )     97.5       199.9       354.8  
    Dividends on Series B preference shares   (4.0 )     (4.0 )     (16.0 )     (16.0 )
    Net income (loss) available to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ (21.3 )   $ 93.5     $ 183.9     $ 338.8  
    Earnings (loss) per share available to SiriusPoint common shareholders              
    Basic earnings (loss) per share available to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ (0.13 )   $ 0.52     $ 1.06     $ 1.93  
    Diluted earnings (loss) per share available to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ (0.13 )   $ 0.50     $ 1.04     $ 1.85  
    Weighted average number of common shares used in the determination of earnings (loss) per share              
    Basic   161,378,360       166,640,624       166,537,394       163,341,448  
    Diluted   161,378,360       173,609,940       169,470,681       169,607,348  
                                   
    SIRIUSPOINT LTD.
    SEGMENT REPORTING
       
      Three months ended December 31, 2024
      Reinsurance   Insurance &
    Services
      Core   Eliminations
    (2)
      Corporate   Segment
    Measure
    Reclass
      Total
    Gross premiums written $ 312.2     $ 450.3     $ 762.5     $ —     $ (3.0 )   $ —     $ 759.5  
    Net premiums written   237.5       322.7       560.2       —       4.8       —       565.0  
    Net premiums earned   265.9       315.7       581.6       —       8.7       —       590.3  
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net   148.3       175.3       323.6       (1.4 )     46.9       —       369.1  
    Acquisition costs, net   73.1       77.8       150.9       (27.6 )     11.3       —       134.6  
    Other underwriting expenses   26.2       24.6       50.8       —       3.1       —       53.9  
    Underwriting income (loss)   18.3       38.0       56.3       29.0       (52.6 )     —       32.7  
    Services revenues   —       51.6       51.6       (31.4 )     —       (20.2 )     —  
    Services expenses   —       41.2       41.2       —       —       (41.2 )     —  
    Net services income   —       10.4       10.4       (31.4 )     —       21.0       —  
    Segment income (loss)   18.3       48.4       66.7       (2.4 )     (52.6 )     21.0       32.7  
    Net investment income                   68.9       —       68.9  
    Net realized and unrealized investment losses     (40.7 )     —       (40.7 )
    Net realized and unrealized investment gains from related party investment funds     0.8       —       0.8  
    Other revenues                   (0.8 )     20.2       19.4  
    Loss on settlement and change in fair value of liability-classified capital instruments     (25.9 )     —       (25.9 )
    Net corporate and other expenses                   (16.9 )     (41.2 )     (58.1 )
    Intangible asset amortization                   (3.0 )     —       (3.0 )
    Interest expense                   (19.6 )     —       (19.6 )
    Foreign exchange gains                   12.9       —       12.9  
    Income (loss) before income tax expense $ 18.3     $ 48.4       66.7       (2.4 )     (76.9 )     —       (12.6 )
    Income tax expense           —       —       (4.4 )     —       (4.4 )
    Net income (loss)           66.7       (2.4 )     (81.3 )     —       (17.0 )
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest     —       —       (0.3 )     —       (0.3 )
    Net income (loss) available to SiriusPoint   $ 66.7     $ (2.4 )   $ (81.6 )   $ —     $ (17.3 )
                               
    Attritional losses $ 154.9     $ 188.2     $ 343.1     $ (1.4 )   $ 26.1     $ —     $ 367.8  
    Catastrophe losses   35.2       3.4       38.6       —       —       —       38.6  
    Prior year loss reserve development   (41.8 )     (16.3 )     (58.1 )     —       20.8       —       (37.3 )
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net $ 148.3     $ 175.3     $ 323.6     $ (1.4 )   $ 46.9     $ —     $ 369.1  
                               
    Underwriting Ratios: (1)                          
    Attritional loss ratio   58.3 %     59.6 %     59.0 %                 62.3 %
    Catastrophe loss ratio   13.2 %     1.1 %     6.6 %                 6.5 %
    Prior year loss development ratio (15.7 )%   (5.2 )%   (10.0 )%               (6.3 )%
    Loss ratio   55.8 %     55.5 %     55.6 %                 62.5 %
    Acquisition cost ratio   27.5 %     24.6 %     25.9 %                 22.8 %
    Other underwriting expenses ratio   9.9 %     7.8 %     8.7 %                 9.1 %
    Combined ratio   93.2 %     87.9 %     90.2 %                 94.4 %
    (1) Underwriting ratios are calculated by dividing the related expense by net premiums earned.
    (2) Insurance & Services MGAs recognize fees for service using revenue from contracts with customers accounting standards, whereas insurance companies recognize acquisition expenses using insurance contract accounting standards. While ultimate revenues and expenses recognized will match, there will be recognition timing differences based on the different accounting standards.
       
      Three months ended December 31, 2023
      Reinsurance   Insurance &
    Services
      Core   Eliminations
    (2)
      Corporate   Segment
    Measure
    Reclass
      Total
    Gross premiums written $ 251.7     $ 468.1     $ 719.8     $ —     $ (4.2 )   $ —     $ 715.6  
    Net premiums written   194.9       263.3       458.2       —       (3.6 )     —       454.6  
    Net premiums earned   243.2       315.2       558.4       —       19.6       —       578.0  
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net   121.8       206.6       328.4       (1.4 )     38.4       —       365.4  
    Acquisition costs, net   65.5       66.8       132.3       (31.6 )     11.0       —       111.7  
    Other underwriting expenses   28.1       32.6       60.7       —       3.5       —       64.2  
    Underwriting income (loss)   27.8       9.2       37.0       33.0       (33.3 )     —       36.7  
    Services revenues   1.7       54.0       55.7       (40.0 )     —       (15.7 )     —  
    Services expenses   —       43.6       43.6       —       —       (43.6 )     —  
    Net services fee income   1.7       10.4       12.1       (40.0 )     —       27.9       —  
    Services noncontrolling income   —       (2.8 )     (2.8 )     —       —       2.8       —  
    Net services income   1.7       7.6       9.3       (40.0 )     —       30.7       —  
    Segment income (loss)   29.5       16.8       46.3       (7.0 )     (33.3 )     30.7       36.7  
    Net investment income                   78.4       —       78.4  
    Net realized and unrealized investment losses     (12.4 )     —       (12.4 )
    Net realized and unrealized investment losses from related party investment funds     (1.0 )     —       (1.0 )
    Other revenues                   2.1       15.7       17.8  
    Loss on settlement and change in fair value of liability-classified capital instruments     (15.0 )     —       (15.0 )
    Net corporate and other expenses                   (20.9 )     (43.6 )     (64.5 )
    Intangible asset amortization                   (2.9 )     —       (2.9 )
    Interest expense                   (19.8 )     —       (19.8 )
    Foreign exchange losses                   (19.2 )     —       (19.2 )
    Income (loss) before income tax benefit $ 29.5     $ 16.8       46.3       (7.0 )     (44.0 )     2.8       (1.9 )
    Income tax benefit           —       —       101.6       —       101.6  
    Net income           46.3       (7.0 )     57.6       2.8       99.7  
    Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interest     —       —       0.6       (2.8 )     (2.2 )
    Net income available to SiriusPoint   $ 46.3     $ (7.0 )   $ 58.2     $ —     $ 97.5  
                               
    Attritional losses $ 143.5     $ 222.8     $ 366.3     $ (1.4 )   $ 11.7     $ —     $ 376.6  
    Catastrophe losses   (0.6 )     0.4       (0.2 )     —       0.1       —       (0.1 )
    Prior year loss reserve development   (21.1 )     (16.6 )     (37.7 )     —       26.6       —       (11.1 )
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net $ 121.8     $ 206.6     $ 328.4     $ (1.4 )   $ 38.4     $ —     $ 365.4  
                               
    Underwriting Ratios: (1)                          
    Attritional loss ratio   59.0 %     70.7 %     65.6 %                 65.2 %
    Catastrophe loss ratio (0.2 )%     0.1 %     — %                 — %
    Prior year loss development ratio (8.7 )%   (5.3 )%   (6.8 )%               (1.9 )%
    Loss ratio   50.1 %     65.5 %     58.8 %                 63.2 %
    Acquisition cost ratio   26.9 %     21.2 %     23.7 %                 19.3 %
    Other underwriting expenses ratio   11.6 %     10.3 %     10.9 %                 11.1 %
    Combined ratio   88.6 %     97.0 %     93.4 %                 93.6 %
    (1) Underwriting ratios are calculated by dividing the related expense by net premiums earned.
    (2) Insurance & Services MGAs recognize fees for service using revenue from contracts with customers accounting standards, whereas insurance companies recognize acquisition expenses using insurance contract accounting standards. While ultimate revenues and expenses recognized will match, there will be recognition timing differences based on the different accounting standards.
       
      Twelve months ended December 31, 2024
      Reinsurance   Insurance &
    Services
      Core   Eliminations
    (2)
      Corporate   Segment
    Measure
    Reclass
      Total
    Gross premiums written $ 1,335.6     $ 1,840.8     $ 3,176.4     $ —     $ 68.2     $ —     $ 3,244.6  
    Net premiums written   1,104.7       1,236.2       2,340.9       —       11.2       —       2,352.1  
    Net premiums earned   1,045.1       1,154.0       2,199.1       —       144.4       —       2,343.5  
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net   554.3       714.1       1,268.4       (5.5 )     105.6       —       1,368.5  
    Acquisition costs, net   279.9       284.7       564.6       (121.4 )     73.7       —       516.9  
    Other underwriting expenses   86.1       80.0       166.1       —       15.6       —       181.7  
    Underwriting income (loss)   124.8       75.2       200.0       126.9       (50.5 )     —       276.4  
    Services revenues   —       222.9       222.9       (132.8 )     —       (90.1 )     —  
    Services expenses   —       176.2       176.2       —       —       (176.2 )     —  
    Net services fee income   —       46.7       46.7       (132.8 )     —       86.1       —  
    Services noncontrolling income   —       (2.1 )     (2.1 )     —       —       2.1       —  
    Net services income   —       44.6       44.6       (132.8 )     —       88.2       —  
    Segment income (loss)   124.8       119.8       244.6       (5.9 )     (50.5 )     88.2       276.4  
    Net investment income                   303.6       —       303.6  
    Net realized and unrealized investment losses     (88.7 )     —       (88.7 )
    Net realized and unrealized investment gains from related party investment funds     9.7       —       9.7  
    Other revenues                   94.1       90.1       184.2  
    Loss on settlement and change in fair value of liability-classified capital instruments     (148.5 )     —       (148.5 )
    Net corporate and other expenses                   (55.9 )     (176.2 )     (232.1 )
    Intangible asset amortization                   (11.9 )     —       (11.9 )
    Interest expense                   (69.6 )     —       (69.6 )
    Foreign exchange gains                   10.0       —       10.0  
    Income (loss) before income tax expense $ 124.8     $ 119.8       244.6       (5.9 )     (7.7 )     2.1       233.1  
    Income tax expense           —       —       (30.7 )     —       (30.7 )
    Net income (loss)           244.6       (5.9 )     (38.4 )     2.1       202.4  
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest     —       —       (0.4 )     (2.1 )     (2.5 )
    Net income (loss) available to SiriusPoint   $ 244.6     $ (5.9 )   $ (38.8 )   $ —     $ 199.9  
                               
    Attritional losses $ 579.8     $ 734.5     $ 1,314.3     $ (5.5 )   $ 112.8     $ —     $ 1,421.6  
    Catastrophe losses   49.5       5.3       54.8       —       —       —       54.8  
    Prior year loss reserve development   (75.0 )     (25.7 )     (100.7 )     —       (7.2 )     —       (107.9 )
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net $ 554.3     $ 714.1     $ 1,268.4     $ (5.5 )   $ 105.6     $ —     $ 1,368.5  
                               
    Underwriting Ratios: (1)                          
    Attritional loss ratio   55.5 %     63.6 %     59.8 %                 60.7 %
    Catastrophe loss ratio   4.7 %     0.5 %     2.5 %                 2.3 %
    Prior year loss development ratio (7.2 )%   (2.2 )%   (4.6 )%               (4.6 )%
    Loss ratio   53.0 %     61.9 %     57.7 %                 58.4 %
    Acquisition cost ratio   26.8 %     24.7 %     25.7 %                 22.1 %
    Other underwriting expenses ratio   8.2 %     6.9 %     7.6 %                 7.8 %
    Combined ratio   88.0 %     93.5 %     91.0 %                 88.3 %
    (1) Underwriting ratios are calculated by dividing the related expense by net premiums earned.
    (2) Insurance & Services MGAs recognize fees for service using revenue from contracts with customers accounting standards, whereas insurance companies recognize acquisition expenses using insurance contract accounting standards. While ultimate revenues and expenses recognized will match, there will be recognition timing differences based on the different accounting standards.
       
      Twelve months ended December 31, 2023
      Reinsurance   Insurance &
    Services
      Core   Eliminations
    (2)
      Corporate   Segment
    Measure
    Reclass
      Total
    Gross premiums written $ 1,271.0     $ 2,039.7     $ 3,310.7     $ —     $ 116.7     $ —     $ 3,427.4  
    Net premiums written   1,061.0       1,282.7       2,343.7       —       94.2       —       2,437.9  
    Net premiums earned   1,031.4       1,249.2       2,280.6       —       145.6       —       2,426.2  
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net   490.3       815.4       1,305.7       (5.4 )     81.0       —       1,381.3  
    Acquisition costs, net   252.2       295.5       547.7       (137.2 )     62.2       —       472.7  
    Other underwriting expenses   82.7       94.3       177.0       —       19.3       —       196.3  
    Underwriting income (loss)   206.2       44.0       250.2       142.6       (16.9 )     —       375.9  
    Services revenues   (1.1 )     238.6       237.5       (149.6 )     —       (87.9 )     —  
    Services expenses   —       187.8       187.8       —       —       (187.8 )     —  
    Net services fee income (loss)   (1.1 )     50.8       49.7       (149.6 )     —       99.9       —  
    Services noncontrolling income   —       (8.5 )     (8.5 )     —       —       8.5       —  
    Net services income (loss)   (1.1 )     42.3       41.2       (149.6 )     —       108.4       —  
    Segment income (loss)   205.1       86.3       291.4       (7.0 )     (16.9 )     108.4       375.9  
    Net investment income                   283.7       —       283.7  
    Net realized and unrealized investment losses     (10.0 )     —       (10.0 )
    Net realized and unrealized investment losses from related party investment funds     (1.0 )     —       (1.0 )
    Other revenues                   9.9       87.9       97.8  
    Loss on settlement and change in fair value of liability-classified capital instruments     (59.4 )     —       (59.4 )
    Net corporate and other expenses                   (70.4 )     (187.8 )     (258.2 )
    Intangible asset amortization                   (11.1 )     —       (11.1 )
    Interest expense                   (64.1 )     —       (64.1 )
    Foreign exchange losses                   (34.9 )     —       (34.9 )
    Income before income tax benefit $ 205.1     $ 86.3       291.4       (7.0 )     25.8       8.5       318.7  
    Income tax benefit           —       —       45.0       —       45.0  
    Net income           291.4       (7.0 )     70.8       8.5       363.7  
    Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest     —       —       (0.4 )     (8.5 )     (8.9 )
    Net income available to SiriusPoint   $ 291.4     $ (7.0 )   $ 70.4     $ —     $ 354.8  
                               
    Attritional losses $ 618.9     $ 840.7     $ 1,459.6     $ (5.4 )   $ 76.5     $ —     $ 1,530.7  
    Catastrophe losses   12.2       1.3       13.5       —       11.3       —       24.8  
    Prior year loss reserve development   (140.8 )     (26.6 )     (167.4 )     —       (6.8 )     —       (174.2 )
    Loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net $ 490.3     $ 815.4     $ 1,305.7     $ (5.4 )   $ 81.0     $ —     $ 1,381.3  
                               
    Underwriting Ratios: (1)                          
    Attritional loss ratio   60.0 %     67.3 %     64.0 %                 63.1 %
    Catastrophe loss ratio   1.2 %     0.1 %     0.6 %                 1.0 %
    Prior year loss development ratio (13.7 )%   (2.1 )%   (7.3 )%               (7.2 )%
    Loss ratio   47.5 %     65.3 %     57.3 %                 56.9 %
    Acquisition cost ratio   24.5 %     23.7 %     24.0 %                 19.5 %
    Other underwriting expenses ratio   8.0 %     7.5 %     7.8 %                 8.1 %
    Combined ratio   80.0 %     96.5 %     89.1 %                 84.5 %
    (1) Underwriting ratios are calculated by dividing the related expense by net premiums earned.
    (2) Insurance & Services MGAs recognize fees for service using revenue from contracts with customers accounting standards, whereas insurance companies recognize acquisition expenses using insurance contract accounting standards. While ultimate revenues and expenses recognized will match, there will be recognition timing differences based on the different accounting standards.
       

    SIRIUSPOINT LTD.
    NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RECONCILIATIONS & OTHER FINANCIAL MEASURES

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Core Results

    Collectively, the sum of the Company’s two segments, Reinsurance and Insurance & Services, constitute “Core” results. Core underwriting income, Core net services income, Core income and Core combined ratio are non-GAAP financial measures. We believe it is useful to review Core results as it better reflects how management views the business and reflects our decision to exit the runoff business. The sum of Core results and Corporate results are equal to the consolidated results of operations.

    Core underwriting income – calculated by subtracting loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net, acquisition costs, net, and other underwriting expenses from net premiums earned.

    Core net services income – consists of services revenues which include commissions, brokerage and fee income related to consolidated MGAs, and other revenues, and services expenses which include direct expenses related to consolidated MGAs, services noncontrolling income which represent minority ownership interests in consolidated MGAs. Net services income is a key indicator of the profitability of the Company’s services provided.

    Core income – consists of two components, core underwriting income and core net services income. Core income is a key measure of our segment performance.

    Core combined ratio – calculated by dividing the sum of Core loss and loss adjustment expenses incurred, net, acquisition costs, net and other underwriting expenses by Core net premiums earned. Accident year loss ratio and accident year combined ratio are calculated by excluding prior year loss reserve development to present the impact of current accident year net loss and loss adjustment expenses on the Core loss ratio and Core combined ratio, respectively. Attritional loss ratio excludes catastrophe losses from the accident year loss ratio as they are not predictable as to timing and amount. These ratios are useful indicators of our underwriting profitability.

    Book Value Per Diluted Common Share Metrics

    Book value per diluted common share excluding AOCI and tangible book value per diluted common share, as presented, are non-GAAP financial measures and the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP measure is book value per common share. Management believes it is useful to exclude AOCI because it may fluctuate significantly between periods based on movements in interest and currency rates. Tangible book value per diluted common share excludes intangible assets. Management believes that effects of intangible assets are not indicative of underlying underwriting results or trends and make book value comparisons to less acquisitive peer companies less meaningful. Tangible book value per diluted common share is useful because it provides a more accurate measure of the realizable value of shareholder returns, excluding intangible assets.

    The following table sets forth the computation of book value per common share, book value per diluted common share and tangible book value per diluted common share as of December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023:

           
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      ($ in millions, except share and per share amounts)
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ 1,737.4     $ 2,313.9  
           
    Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax   (4.1 )     3.1  
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders ex. AOCI   1,741.5       2,310.8  
           
    Intangible assets   140.8       152.7  
    Tangible common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ 1,596.6     $ 2,161.2  
           
    Common shares outstanding   116,429,057       168,120,022  
    Effect of dilutive stock options, restricted share units and warrants   2,559,359       5,193,920  
    Book value per diluted common share denominator   118,988,416       173,313,942  
           
    Book value per common share $ 14.92     $ 13.76  
    Book value per diluted common share $ 14.60     $ 13.35  
    Book value per diluted common share ex. AOCI $ 14.64     $ 13.33  
    Tangible book value per diluted common share $ 13.42     $ 12.47  
                   

    Underlying Net Income

    Underlying net income is a non-GAAP financial measure and the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP measure is net income. Underlying net income excludes items which we believe are not indicative of the operations of our underlying businesses, including realized and unrealized gains (losses) on strategic and other investments and liability-classified capital instruments, income (expense) related to loss portfolio transfers, deferred tax assets attributable to the enactment of the Bermuda corporate income tax, development on COVID-19 reserves resulting from the COVID-19 reserve study performed concurrently with the settlement of the Series A Preference shares in the third quarter of 2024, and foreign exchange gains (losses). We believe it is useful to review underlying net income as it better reflects how we view the business, as well as provides investors with an alternative metric that can assist in predicting future earnings and profitability that are complementary to GAAP metrics. Underlying return on average common shareholders’ equity is calculated by dividing underlying net income available to SiriusPoint common shareholders for the period by the average common shareholders’ equity, excluding AOCI. Management believes it is useful to exclude AOCI because it may fluctuate significantly between periods based on movements in interest and currency rates.

    The following table sets forth the computation of underlying net income for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023:

           
      Three months ended   Twelve months ended
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
    Net income (loss) available to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ (21.3 )   $ 93.5     $ 183.9     $ 338.8  
    Non-recurring adjustments:              
    Gains on sale or deconsolidation of consolidated MGAs   —       —       (96.0 )     —  
    Losses on strategic and other investments   34.3       15.4       90.5       40.2  
    MGA & Strategic Investment Rationalization   34.3       15.4       (5.5 )     40.2  
                   
    Losses on settlement and change in fair value of liability-classified capital instruments (“CMIG Merger Instruments”)   25.9       15.0       148.5       59.4  
    COVID-19 favorable reserve development (1)   —       —       (19.9 )     —  
    CMIG Instruments & Transactions   25.9       15.0       128.6       59.4  
                   
    (Income) expense related to loss portfolio transfers   28.9       2.1       44.6       (101.6 )
    Bermuda corporate income tax enactment   —       (100.8 )     —       (100.8 )
    Foreign exchange (gains) losses   (12.9 )     19.2       (10.0 )     34.9  
    Income tax expense on adjustments (2)   (11.4 )     (7.8 )     (38.1 )     (4.9 )
                   
    Underlying net income available to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ 43.5     $ 36.6     $ 303.5     $ 266.0  
                                   
    Return on average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders   (4.0 )%     17.1 %     9.1 %     16.2 %
                   
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders – beginning of period $ 2,494.9     $ 2,050.0     $ 2,313.9     $ 1,874.7  
    Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax   81.5       (135.4 )     3.1       (45.0 )
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders ex. AOCI – beginning of period   2,413.4       2,185.4       2,310.8       1,919.7  
                   
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders – end of period   1,737.4       2,313.9       1,737.4       2,313.9  
    Impact of adjustments from above   64.8       (56.9 )     119.6       (72.8 )
    Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax   (4.1 )     3.1       (4.1 )     3.1  
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders ex. AOCI – end of period   1,806.3       2,253.9       1,861.1       2,238.0  
                   
    Average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders ex. AOCI $ 2,109.9     $ 2,219.7     $ 2,086.0     $ 2,078.9  
                   
    Underlying return on average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders ex. AOCI   8.2 %     6.6 %     14.5 %     12.8 %
    (1) This development, which is primarily related to business written by legacy Third Point Reinsurance Ltd., is the result of the COVID-19 reserve study performed concurrently with the settlement of the Series A Preference shares in the third quarter of 2024.
    (2) An effective tax rate of 15% is applied to the adjustments to calculate the income tax expense, where applicable.
       

    Other Financial Measures

    Annualized Return on Average Common Shareholders’ Equity Attributable to SiriusPoint Common Shareholders

    Annualized return on average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders is calculated by dividing annualized net income (loss) available to SiriusPoint common shareholders for the period by the average common shareholders’ equity determined using the common shareholders’ equity balances at the beginning and end of the period.

    Annualized return on average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders for the three and twelve months ended December 31, 2024 and 2023 was calculated as follows:

           
      Three months ended   Twelve months ended
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      December 31,
    2024
      December 31,
    2023
      ($ in millions)
    Net income (loss) available to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ (21.3 )   $ 93.5     $ 183.9     $ 338.8  
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders – beginning of period   2,494.9       2,050.0       2,313.9       1,874.7  
    Common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders – end of period   1,737.4       2,313.9       1,737.4       2,313.9  
    Average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders $ 2,116.2     $ 2,182.0     $ 2,025.7     $ 2,094.3  
    Annualized return on average common shareholders’ equity attributable to SiriusPoint common shareholders (4.0 )%     17.1 %     9.1 %     16.2 %
                               

    The MIL Network –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Lexington Woman Sentenced for Production of Child Pornography

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    FRANKFORT, Ky. – A Lexington, woman, Amy Lynn Cook, 38, was sentenced on Tuesday, by U.S. District Judge Gregory VanTatenhove, to 276 months, for production of child pornography. 

    According to her plea agreement, on December 1, 2023, law enforcement received a tip that a Google user, later identified as Cook, had uploaded child sexual abuse material to the platform. Law enforcement also identified additional tips that indicated that Cook had uploaded child pornography images to various other social media platforms, including Facebook.  In an interview with law enforcement, Cook admitted that she would sell images, including sexually explicit images of minors, to others on the internet. Search warrants obtained for Cook’s social media accounts and electronic devices led to the discovery of child pornography images, including images of infant that had been produced by Cook. Cook stated that someone requested the image via the internet and that she had been paid to produce and send it.

    Under federal law, Cook must serve 85 percent of her prison sentence.  Upon Cook’s release from prison, she will be under the supervision of the U.S. Probation Office for life. 

    Paul McCaffrey, Acting United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky; Rana Saoud, Special Agent in Charge, Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Investigations (HSI); and Chief Lawrence Weathers, Lexington Police Department, jointly announced the sentence.

    The investigation was conducted by HSI and Lexington Police Department.  Assistant U.S. Attorney Erin Roth prosecuted the case on behalf of the United States.

    The U.S. Attorney’s Office prosecuted this case as part of Project Safe Childhood, a nationwide initiative launched in 2006 by the Department of Justice to combat the growing epidemic of child sexual exploitation and abuse.  Led by U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and the Criminal Division’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS), Project Safe Childhood marshals federal, state, and local resources to better locate, apprehend, and prosecute individuals who exploit children via the Internet as well as to identify and rescue victims. For more information about Project Safe Childhood, please visit www.projectsafechildhood.gov.

    — END —

    MIL Security OSI –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Preliminary Flood Maps for Madison County, Arkansas Ready for Public View

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: Preliminary Flood Maps for Madison County, Arkansas Ready for Public View

    Preliminary Flood Maps for Madison County, Arkansas Ready for Public View

    DENTON, Texas – Preliminary Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) are available for review by residents and business owners in all communities and incorporated areas of Madison County, Arkansas.Property owners are encouraged to review the latest information to learn about local flood risks and potential future flood insurance requirements. Community residents can identify any concerns or questions about the information provided and participate in the appeal and comment periods for the maps.This is Madison County’s first complete set of digital FIRMs. These maps serve multiple purposes, including defining Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). SFHAs are areas at high risk for flooding. Community leaders can use these maps to make informed decisions about building standards and development that will make the community more resilient and lessen the impacts of a flooding event.FEMA stresses that flooding can and does happen outside of the most vulnerable areas.Review the preliminary flood maps by visiting the local floodplain administrator (FPA). A FEMA Map Specialist can help identify community FPAs. Specialists are available by telephone at 877-FEMA-MAP (877-336-2627) or by email at FEMA-FMIX@fema.dhs.gov.The preliminary maps may also be viewed online:The Flood Map Changes Viewer at http://msc.fema.gov/fmcv FEMA Map Service Center at http://msc.fema.gov/portalThe Base Level Engineering-to-FIRM Viewer at https://webapps.usgs.gov/fema/ble_firmFor more information about the flood maps:Use a live chat service about flood maps at floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html (just click on the “Live Chat Open” icon).Contact a FEMA Map Specialist by telephone at 877-FEMA-MAP (877-336-2627) or by email at FEMA-FMIX@fema.dhs.gov.There are cost-saving options available for those newly mapped into a high-risk flood zone. Learn more about your flood insurance options by talking with your insurance agent or visiting floodsmart.gov.
    alexa.brown
    Tue, 02/18/2025 – 17:16

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Dr. Jitendra Singh Inaugurates India’s First “Open-Air Art Wall Museum” at Mausam Bhawan depicting and celebrating the 150 years of milestone journey of the India Meteorological Department (IMD)

    Source: Government of India (2)

    Dr. Jitendra Singh Inaugurates India’s First “Open-Air Art Wall Museum” at Mausam Bhawan depicting and celebrating the 150 years of milestone journey of the India Meteorological Department (IMD)

    Mausam Bhawan Art Showcase 38 Murals Depicting IMD’s Meteorological Legacy and Impact

    Union Minister Hails IMD’s 150-Year Legacy, Unveils Artistic Tribute to Weather Science

    Posted On: 18 FEB 2025 7:02PM by PIB Delhi

     Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Science and Technology; Earth Sciences and Minister of State for PMO, Department of Atomic Energy, Department of Space, Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Dr. Jitendra Singh  inaugurated India’s first “Open Air Art Wall Museum” a unique open-air art museum at “Mausam Bhawan” today, depicting and celebrating the 150 years of milestone journey of the India Meteorological Department (IMD).

    The initiative, developed in collaboration with “Delhi Street Art”, transforms the walls of IMD’s headquarters on Lodhi Road into a vibrant visual narrative of India’s meteorological advancements, history, and the impact of weather science on society.

    Speaking at the inauguration ceremony, Dr. Jitendra Singh lauded the IMD’s enduring contribution to India’s socio-economic development by providing timely and accurate weather forecasts. “For 150 years, the India Meteorological Department has stood at the forefront of meteorological research, leveraging cutting-edge technology to address the challenges of a dynamic climate. This artistic endeavor further extends IMD’s outreach by visually engaging the public with the story of weather science,” he said.

    Union Minister Dr. Jitendra Singh speaking after inaugurating India’s first “Open Air Art Museum” at Mausam Bhawan, New Delhi.

    The “Mausam Bhawan” special art showcase features 38 unique murals depicting India’s meteorological history, the evolution of weather forecasting, and its impact on agriculture, disaster management, and everyday life. The artwork illustrates crucial meteorological events, advancements in technology such as satellites and radars, and the role of IMD in safeguarding lives through early warnings for cyclones, monsoons, and extreme weather conditions.

    Dr. Jitendra Singh commended the creativity of Delhi Street Art and its founder Late Yogesh Saini, whose vision transformed public spaces into artistic expressions. “Art is a powerful medium, and this project beautifully bridges science and creativity to communicate complex meteorological phenomena in a way that resonates with people of all ages,” he added.

    Dr. Jitendra Singh emphasized that IMD’s pioneering efforts in meteorology have not only contributed to disaster risk reduction but have also played a crucial role in enhancing economic activities, particularly in sectors such as agriculture, aviation, and marine industries. “The accuracy and timeliness of IMD’s forecasts have empowered farmers, fishermen, and policymakers to make informed decisions, reinforcing India’s resilience against climate uncertainties,” he noted.

    Dr. M. Ravichandran, Secretary, Ministry of Earth Sciences, highlighted that the artistic initiative reflects IMD’s innovative approach to public engagement. “By presenting scientific knowledge through art, we can foster greater awareness about the significance of meteorology in daily life,” he said.

    The murals also pay tribute to India’s literary and cultural heritage by incorporating historical references such as Kalidasa’sMeghaduta and the legendary musical prowess of Tansen, who is believed to have influenced weather with his ragas. Other panels depict India’s diverse climatic zones, weather-related safety guidelines, and the scientific evolution of meteorology.

    Mayuri Saini, Director of Delhi Street Art, expressed gratitude for the opportunity to contribute to IMD’s legacy. “This project is more than just an art installation; it is a tribute to the journey of IMD and its impact on every citizen’s life. It also honors the memory of our founder, Mr. Yogesh Saini, whose passion for transforming urban landscapes through art continues to inspire us.”

    Dr. Jitendra Singh reiterated that the government remains committed to strengthening India’s meteorological capabilities with continued investments in research, technology, and infrastructure. He acknowledged the efforts of IMD’s scientists and the artistic team in creating an initiative that not only educates but also inspires.

    *******

    NKR/PSM

    (Release ID: 2104449) Visitor Counter : 5

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: FEMA to Host Housing Resource Fair Feb. 22 in Savannah

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: FEMA to Host Housing Resource Fair Feb. 22 in Savannah

    FEMA to Host Housing Resource Fair Feb. 22 in Savannah

    FEMA is hosting a Housing Resource Fair from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Saturday, Feb. 22, in Savannah at the following location:Carver Village Community Center905 Collat AveSavannah, GA 31415                                                                                                                    The Housing Resource Fair will bring together federal, state and local agencies in one place to offer services and resources to families recovering from Hurricane Helene.  The goal of this collaborative effort is to help connect eligible disaster survivors with affordable housing along with valuable information and resources on their road to recovery.Survivors will meet with local housing organizations, property owners and landlords, as well as gain information on the HEARTS Georgia Sheltering Program, and U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) loans.The Housing Resource Fair is an opportunity for survivors to: Explore affordable housing options and rental assistance programs.Meet with representatives from local housing organizations, landlords and property managers.Gain access to resources for displaced individuals and families.Learn about community partners that will provide educational funding resources to attendees. For FEMA Federal Coordinating Officer Kevin Wallace, the Housing Resource Fair will give survivors that needed one-on-one experience: “We want survivors to know we are here for them and want to see the best outcome, which is moving into safe, sanitary and functioning housing,” he said. “We will walk them through their options to ensure they are aware of the resources that are available to fit their need.”Anyone who was affected by Tropical Storm Debby or Hurricane Helene, whether they have applied for FEMA assistance or not, is welcome to attend.
    jakia.randolph
    Tue, 02/18/2025 – 13:27

    MIL OSI USA News –

    February 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – Cyprus’s climate action strategy – 18-02-2025

    Source: European Parliament

    In 2023, Cyprus accounted for around 0.3 % of the EU’s net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and achieved a net emissions reduction of 5.6 % compared with 2005. The country’s total emissions decreased by 4.7 % between 2005 and 2023, while its net carbon removals in the land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) sector increased by 36 %. Emissions from sectors covered by the effort-sharing legislation have increased by 7.9 % since 2005, and in 2023 were slightly higher than those from sectors under the EU emissions trading system (ETS), which were down 14.9 % over the same period. Although Cyprus intends to reach zero net emissions in 2050 (see trajectory in Figure 1), the level of progress towards the EU climate neutrality objective appears to be insufficient. The European Commission assessed Cyprus’s draft updated national energy and climate plan (NECP) and made recommendations. The final updated NECP was submitted in December 2024. Almost half of Cyprus’s national recovery and resilience plan, which includes a REPowerEU chapter, is dedicated to the green transition, with a focus on energy and transport. In a 2023 survey, 39 % of Cypriots, compared with a 46 % EU average, identified climate change as one of the four most serious problems facing the world. Most expect the national government (69 %), business and industry (67 %) and/or the EU (63 %) to tackle climate change, while 41 % think it is a personal responsibility.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    February 19, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 149 150 151 152 153 … 238
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress