Annalena Baerbock, the German foreign minister, spoke for much of the European diplomatic community when she reacted to news of Donald Trump’s phone chat with Vladimir Putin: “This is the way the Trump administration operates,” she declared. “This is not how others do foreign policy, but this is now the reality.”
The resigned tone of Baerbock’s words was not matched by her colleague, defence minister Boris Pistorius, whose criticism that “the Trump administration has already made public concessions to Putin before negotiations have even begun” was rather more direct.
Their sentiments were echoed, not only by European leaders, but in the US itself: “Putin Scores a Big Victory, and Not on the Battlefield” read a headline in the New York Times. The newspaper opined that Trump’s call had succeeded in bringing Putin back in from the cold after three years in which Russia had become increasingly isolated both politically and economically.
This was not lost on the Russian media, where commentators boasted that the phone call “broke the west’s blockade”. The stock market gained 5% and the rouble strengthened against the dollar as a result.
Reflecting on the call, Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, continued with operation flatter Donald Trump by comparing his attitude favourably with that of his predecessor in the White House, Joe Biden. “The previous US administration held the view that everything needed to be done to keep the war going. The current administration, as far as we understand, adheres to the point of view that everything must be done to stop the war and for peace to prevail.
“We are more impressed with the position of the current administration, and we are open to dialogue.”
Trump’s conversation with Putin roughly coincided with a meeting of senior European defence officials in Brussels which heard the new US secretary of defense, Pete Hegseth, outline America’s radical new outlook when it comes to European security. Namely that it’s not really America’s problem any more.
Hegseth also told the meeting in Brussels yesterday that the Trump administration’s position is that Nato membership for Ukraine has been taken off the table, that the idea it would get its 2014 borders back was unrealistic and that if Europe wanted to guarantee Ukraine’s security as part of any peace deal, that would be its business. Any peacekeeping force would not involve American troops and would not be a Nato operation, so it would not involve collective defence.
Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.
International security expert David Dunn believes that the fact that Trump considers himself a consummate deal maker makes the fact that his administration is willing to concede so much ground before negotiations proper have even got underway is remarkable. And not in a good way.
Dunn, who specialises in US foreign and security policy at the University of Birmingham, finds it significant that Trump spoke with Putin first and then called Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelensky to fill him in on the call. This order of priority, says Dunn, is a sign of the subordination of Ukraine’s role in the talks.
He concludes that “for the present at least, it appears that negotiations will be less about pressuring Putin to bring a just end to the war he started than forcing Ukraine to give in to the Russian leader’s demands”.
Hegseth’s briefing to European defence officials, meanwhile, came as little surprise to David Galbreath. Writing here, Galbreath – who specialises in defence and security at the University of Bath – says the US pivot away from a focus on Europe has been years in the making – “since the very end of the cold war”.
There has long been a feeling in Washington that the US has borne too much of the financial burden for European security. This is not just a Donald Trump thing, he believes, but an attitude percolating in US security circles for some decades. Once the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Union disintegrated, the focus for Nato become not so much collective defence as collective security, where “conflict would be managed on Nato’s borders”.
But it was then the US which invoked article 5 of the Nato treaty, which establishes that “an armed attack against one or more [member states] in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all”. The Bush government invoked Article 5 the day after the 9/11 attacks and Nato responded by patrolling US skies to provide security.
Pete Hegseth dashes Ukraine’s hopes of a future guaranteed by Nato.
Galbreath notes that many European countries, particularly the newer ones such as Estonia and Latvia, sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. “The persistent justification I heard in the Baltic states was “we need to be there when the US needs us so that they will be there when we need them”.
The prospect of a profound shift in the world order are daunting after 80 years in which security – in Europe certainly – was guaranteed by successive US administrations and underpinned, not just by Nato but by a whole set of international agreements.
Now, instead of the US acting as the “world’s policeman”, we have a president talking seriously about taking control of Greenland, one way or another, who won’t rule out using force to seize the Panama Canal and who dreams of turning Gaza into a coastal “riviera” development.
Meanwhile Russia is engaged in a brutal war of conquest in Ukraine and is actively meddling in the affairs of several other countries. And in China, Xi Jinping regularly talks up the idea of reunifying with Taiwan, by force if necessary, and is fortifying islands in the South China Sea with a view to aggressively pursuing territorial claims there as well.
And we thought the age of empires was in the rear view mirror, writes historian Eric Storm of Leiden University. Storm, whose speciality is the rise of nation states, has discerned a resurgence of imperial tendencies around the world and fears that the rules-based order that has dominated the decades since the second world war now appears increasingly tenuous.
In any given week, you’d expect the imminent prospect of the collapse of the Gaza ceasefire to be the big international story. And certainly, while Trump and Putin were “flooding the zone” (see last week’s round-up for the origins of this phrase) the prospects of the deal lasting beyond its first phase have become more and more uncertain.
Hamas has recently pulled back from its threat not to release any more hostages. Earlier in the week it threatened to call a halt to the hostage-prisoner exchange, claiming that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) had breached the terms of the ceasefire deal. Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, responded – with Trump’s backing – saying that unless all hostages were released on Saturday, all bets were off and the IDF would resume its military operations in the Gaza Strip. Trump added that “all hell is going to break out”.
The US president has also doubled down on his idea for a redeveloped Gaza and has continued to pressure Jordan and Egypt to accept millions of Palestinian refugees. This, as you would expect, has not made the population of Gaza feel any more secure.
Nils Mallock and Jeremy Ginges, behavioural psychologists at the London School of Economics, were in the region last month and conducted a survey of Israelis and Palestinians in Gaza to get a feel for how the two populations regard each other. It makes for depressing reading.
The number of Israelis who reject the idea of a two-state solution has risen sharply since the October 7 2023 attacks by Hamas, from 46% to 62%. And roughly the same proportion of people in Gaza can now no longer envisage living side by side with Israelis. Both sides think that the other side is motivated by hatred, something which is known to make any diplomatic solution less feasible.
We also asked Scott Lucas, a Middle East specialist at University College Dublin, to assess the likelihood of the ceasefire lasting into phase two, which is when the IDF is supposed to pull out of Gaza, allowing the people there room to being to rebuild, both physically and in terms of governance.
He responded with a hollow laugh and a shake of the head, before sending us this digest of the key developments in the Middle East crisis this week.
We’ve become very used to seeing apocalyptic photos of the devastation of Gaza: the pulverised streets, choked with rubble, that make the idea of rebuilding seem so remote. But the people of Gaza also cultivated a huge amount of crops – about half the food they ate was grown there. Gazan farmers grew tomatoes, peppers, cucumbers and strawberries in open fields as well as cultivating olive and citrus trees.
Geographers Lina Eklund, He Yin and Jamon Van Den Hoek have analysed satellite images across the Gaza Strip over the past 17 months to work out the scale of agricultural destruction. It makes for terrifying reading.
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime Alerts (c)
With Valentine’s Day a few days away, FBI Cleveland reminds the public to remain aware when engaging in online relationships and warns about the hidden dangers when striking up a relationship with someone they have not met in real life.
Romance scams continue to rise, and typically begin when a criminal creates a fake profile on a dating site or social media platform. The scammer tricks victims into believing they’re in a loving and trusting relationship with that online persona. Fraudsters then leverage that relationship and concoct stories of financial hardships, persuading victims to send money, gift cards, cryptocurrency, or other items of value. Confidence scams also include leading an individual to believe they are in a relationship as a “friend” or family member, and are tricked into sending money, personal and financial information, or items of value to the perpetrator or, to launder money or items to assist the perpetrator. This includes the Grandparent’s Scheme and any scheme in which the perpetrator preys on the targeted individual’s “heartstrings,” purporting someone is in trouble, ill, or in an urgent situation.
“While the ability to connect online has never been easier, so too is the risk of becoming victim to a scammer. At any given moment, we can log in to meet new “friends” with shared interests, play a virtual game with someone on the other side of the world, engage in a conversation with a person who may tell us they are a distant relative, or strike up a romance through a dating app,” said FBI Cleveland Special Agent in Charge Greg Nelsen. “Sadly, if you are on a device, you are vulnerable, no matter your age, gender, or technological savviness. The FBI wants to remind the public about these schemes and educate people about the stories these fraudsters will use.”
According to data from the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), Ohioans lost over $15.3 million in 2023 to confidence fraud and romance scams and over $652 million nationwide.
Most commonly, the perpetrators are men targeting women over 40 who are divorced, widowed, elderly, or disabled. The scam usually starts with an “innocent” contact online and builds from there. Romance scammers often use well-rehearsed scripts which have been previously used successfully.
These criminals actively search dating websites, apps, chat rooms, and social networking sites in their efforts to build a relationship with the goal of accessing financial assets or personally identifiable information. Romance scammers often spend hours honing their skills and sometimes maintain detailed journals, describing their targeted victims, to better understand how to manipulate and exploit them.
FBI Cleveland encourages people to do their due diligence about the person they are communicating with, just as you would when meeting in person. Ask a lot of questions and don’t take everything at face value. Even if the person sends casual ‘at-home’ images that appear normal, oftentimes, scammers will steal the identity of another person and use those photos as bait. To avoid meeting in person, scammers often claim to live or work in other parts of the country or world. Eventually, when they feel they have gained the trust of their victims, these criminals will request money, oftentimes for a medical emergency for themselves, a child, or family member, an unexpected legal fee, or some other false purpose, including a church, charity, or natural disaster. They may send a courier, “friend,” or ride share to your home or suggest someplace public to meet to hand over the asset. They may even say that it must be done privately for your safety.
These scams are borderless and anyone of any age can be targeted. The scammers goal is to financially exploit the victim. If someone you meet online needs your bank account information to deposit money, they are most likely using your account to carry out other theft and fraud schemes.
If you find yourself beginning to develop a relationship with someone you meet online, remember these tips to help protect yourself:
Be careful with sharing too much personal information online across all social media sites. Scammers can and often use those details to target you and build commonalities.
If you’re on dating sites, only use platforms with a well-known reputation, and research photos and profiles online to see if anyone has used that name or image elsewhere. It may take a little time on your part but will be well worth the effort in the long run.
Beware of online suitors who try to isolate you from your family or friends, or those who ask you to send inappropriate photos or financial information that could be later used to extort you.
Don’t send money to someone you’ve never met in person. Scammers often use emotional pleas and stories of despair to trick you into believing their story of need.
“The best advice I can give is to encourage friends and family members to have open, honest discussions with one another about these dangers, and be wary about people you meet online who begin to ask or pressure you into sharing personal identifying information, ask you to send money, bitcoin, or gold; or threaten you or someone you love with physical, financial, or emotional harm,” Nelsen added. If you suspect your online relationship is a scam, whether you are involved or someone you know may be falling victim to the scam, call 1-800-CALL-FBI to file a report, or visit ic3.gov to submit a tip. No amount is too large or small to report to the FBI whether it’s a request to wire money, send gift cards, or transfer other items of value. You are the victim and reporting is the only way the FBI can connect the dots and stop these criminals from targeting other people or further exploiting you and your network. You should also contact your financial institution if you’ve already sent money.
Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:
MUSCAT, Oman, February 13, 2025/APO Group/ —
Saudi Export-Import Bank (Saudi EXIM) and The International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation (ITFC) (www.ITFC-IDB.org) have signed an Implementation Agreement for $5 million line of financing in favor of Alizz Islamic Bank in the Sultanate of Oman, under the “KSA SMEs Export Empowerment Program”.
The agreement aims to enhance the access of Saudi non-oil exports to Omani markets, promote export opportunities for the SMEs sector in the Kingdom, and attract Omani importers.
The agreement was signed by the Director of the Financial Institutions Department at Saudi EXIM Bank Mr. Mohammed Alabdulmuhsen, and the General Manager of the Treasury Department Mr. Ahmed M. Yousef Jan from The International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation. The signing ceremony took place at Alizz Islamic Bank’s headquarters in the Sultanate of Oman.
“KSA SMEs Export Empowerment Program” is committed to elevate the competitiveness of the Saudi non-oil exports globally, as Saudi EXIM and ITFC continues to provide credit facilities to targeted financial institutions in targeted countries.
This collaboration marks a significant step towards enhancing international trade and increasing the contribution of SMEs to the Gross Domestic Product, aligning with the objectives of the Kingdom’s Vision 2030, which represents one of the objectives of the “KSA SMEs Export Empowerment Program”. It also represents a crucial milestone in enabling Saudi exports and expand their global reach.
Based on the results of the qualifying stage competition The members of the competition committee selected 12 subjects of the Russian Federation that will continue the competition for the title of “Capital of Financial Culture”. They are Altai Krai, Bryansk Oblast, Kaliningrad Oblast, Kemerovo Oblast – Kuzbass, Krasnoyarsk Krai, Nizhny Novgorod Oblast, Primorsky Krai, the Republic of Bashkortostan, the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), Stavropol Krai, Ulyanovsk Oblast, and the Chuvash Republic.
The finalists will present projects to improve financial literacy and form a financial culture, which they plan to implement in the region. The results of the competition will be announced in March 2025 at the site of the National Center “Russia”.
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.
Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect
[. However, many of these technologies don’t yet exist, are still early in development or are not yet commercially available. Given our energy leadership, Alberta will continue to lead the way.
Alberta’s government is investing $55 million from the industry-funded TIER program to help industries, big and small, test and implement the technologies they need to keep leading the world. Delivered through Emissions Reduction Alberta, this funding will help 15 projects develop cutting-edge technologies that could one day be used across Canada and around the world.
“When it comes to innovation, Alberta’s track record is second to none. This funding will help empower our industry and businesses to develop the new technologies that are in demand around the world. This funding is a win-win: creating jobs, reducing emissions, and strengthening our economy for the benefit of all Albertans.”
This funding will support projects across the economy, including the energy, newsprint, cement, water treatment, dairy and forestry sectors. In total, $46 million will go to 12 projects through Emissions Reduction Alberta’s Industrial Transformation Challenge, with an additional $8.7 million invested in three projects approved through the Partnership Intake Program.
“By investing in these technologies today, we are helping to maintain Alberta as a global leader in industrial innovation and paving the way for a more sustainable and competitive future across our industries.”
Funding ranges from $500,000 to $10 million for each project, including:
$10 million to help Alberta Newsprint Company make best-in-class energy efficiency upgrades that will reduce costs and improve the mill’s competitiveness.
$8.4 million to help Dairy Innovation West advance a new approach for developing concentrated milk products that can be transported with less energy and further processed into other dairy products, increasing the province’s milk-processing capacity.
$7.45 million to help the City of Calgary install a first-in-Alberta and second-in-Canada technology to use thermal energy at the Fish Creek wastewater treatment plant.
$4 million to help Lafarge Canada explore using calcined clay in cement products, lowering the overall emission intensity of cement while maintaining strength.
$3.7 million to help Flash Forest Inc. advance a proof-of-concept that uses drones, AI-based site selection software and ecological science to speed up and improve tree planting and reforestation.
$2 million to help Merlin Plastics develop a commercial-scale operation that will divert hard-to-recycle plastics from landfills or incineration.
$700,000 to help TS-Nano Canada test a new product that will more effectively seal oil and gas wells, reducing potential methane leaks and reducing operational costs.
“With support from the Government of Alberta and Emissions Reduction Alberta, Alberta Newsprint Company will adopt state-of-the-art technologies that significantly reduce its carbon footprint, demonstrating Alberta’s leadership in sustainable manufacturing.”
“This funding support enables the City of Calgary to employ innovative low-carbon technology to heat the new infrastructure for the Fish Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade project. By using heat pumps to recover thermal energy from wastewater effluent as a heat source, the project significantly reduces the plant’s greenhouse gas emissions.”
“The support from the Government of Alberta and Emissions Reduction Alberta has been instrumental in driving the development and deployment of innovative technologies for the Dairy Innovation West facility. This funding not only accelerates our progress but also underscores Alberta’s commitment to advancing clean technology and sustainable solutions that have a lasting impact both locally and globally.”
A full list of funding and project details can be found at https://www.eralberta.ca.
Quick facts
These projects are estimated to reduce 119,000 tonnes of emissions each year, 394,000 tonnes of emissions by 2030, and more than 2.2 million tonnes of emissions by 2050.
These projects are estimated to create almost 1,600 jobs and inject $237 million into Alberta’s GDP by 2027.
Emissions Reduction Alberta’s Partnership Intake Program acts as a catalyst to de-risk and deploy novel technology solutions by giving applicants the opportunity to leverage funding from both Emissions Reduction Alberta and trusted partner organizations.
Industrial Transformation Challenge applicants and their technologies can originate from anywhere in the world, but projects must be piloted, demonstrated or deployed in Alberta and show significant emissions reduction and economic benefits within the province.
Successful applicants are eligible for up to $10 million per project, with a minimum request of $500,000. Funding received through the Industrial Transformation Challenge will match private contributions on a one-to-one basis.
Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman
WASHINGTON––U.S. Senators John Boozman (R-AR), John Kennedy (R-LA) and Senate Committee on Veterans’ Affairs Chairman Jerry Moran (R-KS) introduced the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act to ensure veterans do not lose their Second Amendment right to purchase or own firearms when they receive help managing their Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits.
Because of the VA’s interpretation of current law, the VA sends a beneficiary’s name to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) whenever a fiduciary is appointed to help a beneficiary manage his or her VA benefit payments. The Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act would prohibit the Secretary of Veterans Affairs from transmitting a veteran’s personal information to NICS unless a relevant judicial authority rules that the beneficiary is a danger to himself or others.
“Veterans must not be required to forfeit the Second Amendment without a careful, constitutional process. Attempting to deprive former servicemembers of firearms for protection or recreation simply because they require assistance managing the benefits they have earned is bureaucracy at its worst. Our legislation would correct this injustice and preserve these law-abiding patriots’ rights,” said Boozman.
“Our veterans should not receive less due process rights than other Americans just because they served our country and asked the federal government for a helping hand. Under the VA’s interpretation of the law, however, unelected bureaucrats punish Louisiana and America’s veterans by forcing them to choose between their Second Amendment rights and getting the help they need as they manage their financial affairs. I’m proud to introduce the Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act to stand up for veterans’ constitutional rights by ending this unfair practice,” said Kennedy.
“Veterans should never be forced to choose between receiving assistance from VA to manage their benefits and their fundamental Second Amendment rights. Our nation should be encouraging veterans to utilize VA services, not discouraging them by denying them due process. The Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act makes certain that the rights of those who have served are protected, and that veterans are not penalized for receiving support that they have earned and deserve,” said Moran.
The legislation is also cosponsored by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Steve Daines (R-MT), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Pete Ricketts (R-NE), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Jim Banks (R-IN), Thom Tillis (R-NC), Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), Rick Scott (R-FL), Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Tim Sheehy (R-MT).
Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL-12), Chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, introduced companion legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The Veterans 2nd Amendment Protection Act is endorsed by the Vietnam Veterans of America, National Association of County Veterans Service Officers, Veterans of Foreign Wars, The American Legion, Black Veterans Empowerment Council, Military Order of the Purple Heart, National Shooting Sports Foundation, National Rifle Association, Gun Owners of America, AMAC Action, Turning Point Action, Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition, National Disability Rights Network and the National Association for Gun Rights.
Following is UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ message, delivered by Li Junhua, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, to the high-level dialogue on “Tax Justice and Solidarity: Towards an Inclusive and Sustainable Common Home”, in Vatican City today:
The promise to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is slipping away — in large part due to lack of finance.
Taxation is vital to closing not only the finance gap, but also the justice and solidarity gap.
Yet, countries struggle to mobilize resources. The situation requires a global response. And we are seeing progress — from G20 commitments to negotiations on a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation.
These efforts are a vital chance to create a framework anchored in inclusivity — essential for legitimacy and efficacy — that supports sustainable development.
The Pact for the Future also includes a commitment to continue constructive engagement in the process and to explore options for international cooperation on the taxation of the super-rich.
I urge all countries to keep driving this work forward. Together, let’s build tax systems with justice, solidarity and inclusivity at their heart.
Governor Kathy Hochul today announced that the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) has initiated a comprehensive review of utility management compensation following her direction on Tuesday for the Department of Public Service (DPS) to move forward with the audit. This audit follows years of work by DPS to examine utility management structures and seeks to align utility priorities with State objectives, including affordability, reliability, safety, and a cleaner environment. This is part of a comprehensive effort by the Governor to combat rising utility costs and protect consumers, and it builds upon her direction for DPS to reject Con Edison’s rate proposal and her demand that the New York Power Authority suspend its proposed rate increase.
“New Yorkers deserve fair and transparent utility rates,” Governor Hochul said. “This audit will ensure that utility compensation structures are working for New Yorkers, not rewarding expected behavior. We will hold utilities accountable and ensure their focus is where it should be: delivering reliable, affordable, and high-quality service. At a time when families are facing rising costs, we are taking decisive action to ensure every dollar that customers pay is justified and that utility companies are prioritizing the needs of the people they serve.”
The audit will focus on compensation for non-union utility management employees statewide and the results will inform future rate cases to protect New Yorkers from unfair rate hikes. Numerous recent management and operations audits of large, investor-owned electric and gas utilities have highlighted meaningful concerns with how utilities administer their programs.
In a recent audit of Central Hudson, the auditor concluded their bonus structure rewarded financial performance, but only set reliability and service quality metrics at the bare minimum. In the case of NYSEG and RG&E, auditors had to recommend that the companies set performance standards that encourage service improvements. And in other recent audits, including of Con Edison, O&R, and National Grid, auditors found that companies should update their compensation structures to focus on ratepayer-centric goals.
Commission Chair Rory M. Christian said, “This audit is about accountability. Management compensation is a reflection of a company’s values, and we expect utility values to mirror our own and be focused on providing quality, affordable service to ratepayers.”
The audit will examine compensation practices at 13 major utilities, including Con Edison, National Grid, Central Hudson, NYSEG, RG&E, and Veolia Water New York. Investor-owned electric and gas utilities have a total of 12.4 million customers in New York State. Findings from the audit will influence future rate cases, providing the PSC with insights into best practices and potential cost-saving measures.
Over the last four years, Governor Hochul has prioritized energy affordability by:
Affordability policy enhancements to expand eligibility in the Energy Affordability Program and creating the Energy Affordability Guarantee, the first-in-the nation pilot program that ensures low-income New Yorkers participating in the EmPower Plus program never pay more than 6 percent of their incomes on electricity and incentivizes them to fully electrify their homes.
Budget appropriations to reduce ratepayer costs of EAP that provides critical utility bill relief to low-income New Yorkers.
Providing arrears forgiveness of more than $1 billion.
State procurements of renewable generation to offset ratepayer costs of developing new clean generation resources
$300 million to create power-ready sites for attracting new businesses through the Promote Opportunity with Electric Readiness for Underdeveloped Properties (POWER UP) Fund.
Assemblymember Didi Barrett said, “As utility rates continue to soar it is imperative that we take a close look at utility company salaries to ensure our constituents across the state are not shouldering the burden of inflated salaries. I thank Governor Hochul for her focus on energy affordability and the Public Service Commission for their support of this audit.”
Danielle Sassoon, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and James E. Dennehy, the Assistant Director in Charge of the New York Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), announced today the arrest of KEVIN FENG GAO. The Indictment unsealed today charges GAO with committing bank fraud as part of a scheme to steal $30 million intended as an investment in Manhattan real estate. GAO will be presented today before U.S. Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron.
U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon said: “As alleged, Kevin Gao orchestrated a complex scheme to create a fraudulent, unauthorized bank account and use the account to steal $30 million from a real estate investor. Bank fraud schemes undermine the integrity of our financial system by corrupting it for criminal purposes, and I commend the FBI and our dedicated team of prosecutors for their outstanding work in uncovering this massive fraud.”
FBI Assistant Director in Charge James E. Dennehy said: “Kevin Gao allegedly opened an unauthorized corporate bank account to intercept and steal a $30 million investment. This alleged establishment of an illicit bank account wrongfully diverted a significant sum from its intended use. The FBI remains dedicated to apprehending all individuals who implement deceitful measures to steal what is not owed to them.”
GAO carried out a fraudulent scheme to open and use an unauthorized bank account in the name of a company (the “Management Company”) that managed a real estate development project in Manhattan (the “Real Estate Project”). GAO was an executive at another company that participated in a joint venture to develop the Real Estate Project, but GAO had no authorization from the Management Company to open the account in its name (the “Fraudulent Account”).
When GAO applied to open the Fraudulent Account, GAO made false representations to employees of an FDIC-insured bank (the “Bank”), including falsely representing that GAO was opening the Fraudulent Account with the Management Company’s permission. Additionally, when a representative of the Bank asked GAO to provide a copy of the Management Company’s operating agreement, GAO provided a fraudulent document rather than the actual operating agreement.
After GAO created the Fraudulent Account, an investment company agreed to invest $30 million in the Real Estate Development managed by the Management Company. But the investment company transferred its $30 million into the Fraudulent Account created by GAO rather than a legitimate account actually held and controlled by the Management Company. GAO then dispersed the $30 million to several accounts under the control of GAO and his co-conspirators.
* * *
GAO, 37, of Queens, New York is charged with one count of bank fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in prison.
The maximum potential sentence in this case is prescribed by Congress and provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant will be determined by a judge.
Ms. Sassoon praised the outstanding work of the FBI.
The case is being handled by the Office’s Illicit Finance and Money Laundering Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Christopher Brumwell and Maggie Lynaugh are in charge of the prosecution.
The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the texts of the Indictment and the description of the Indictment set forth herein constitute only allegations and every fact described should be treated as an allegation.
Washington, DC – A Baton Rouge, Louisiana, man added to the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) 15 Most Wanted fugitive List in December 2023 remains at large, and the agency is offering up to $25,000 as a reward for information that leads investigators to his location.
Leethel White aka “Lee Lee,” 47, is wanted by the East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff’s Office for first-degree murder and attempted murder.
White is alleged to have shot two female associates at close range, killing one and severely injuring the other in a January 2016 incident in the Gardere area of Baton Rouge.
White is 5 feet 10 inches tall, weighs approximately 215 pounds, and has black hair and brown eyes. He has tattoos on both arms, his chest and his back. He should be considered armed and dangerous.
“I urge anyone with information that can help us find Mr. White or his remains and close this investigation to come forward and help us bring closure to the victims and their families,” said William Travis Brown Jr., U.S. Marshal for the Middle District of Louisiana.
While the USMS does not not usually offer rewards in cases in which the fugitive is deceased, in rare situations, if there is uncertainty about a fugitive’s status, the agency may offer a reward for information to confirm a death to close the case. Anyone with information regarding White’s whereabouts or the location of his remains is urged to contact the U.S. Marshals 24-hour tip line at 1-877-WANTED2 or send information via the USMS Tips App.
Created in 1983, the USMS 15 Most Wanted fugitive program draws attention to some of the country’s most dangerous and high-profile fugitives. These fugitives tend to be career criminals with histories of violence who pose a significant threat to public safety. Generally, 15MW fugitives are considered the “worst of the worst” and can include murderers, sex offenders, major drug kingpins, organized crime figures and individuals wanted for high-profile financial crimes. Since the program began in 1983, more than 250 15MW fugitive cases have been closed.
The USMS has a long history of providing assistance and expertise to other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies in support of their fugitive investigations. Working with authorities at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels, USMS-led fugitive task forces arrested more than 74,000 fugitives and cleared nearly 89,000 warrants in FY 2024.
RYE, N.Y., Feb. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Board of Directors of The Gabelli Multimedia Trust Inc. (NYSE:GGT) (the “Fund”) reaffirmed and satisfied its 10% distribution policy by declaring a $0.22 per share cash distribution payable on March 24, 2025 to common stock shareholders of record on March 17, 2025.
The Fund intends to pay a minimum annual distribution of 10% of the average net asset value of the Fund within a calendar year or an amount sufficient to satisfy the minimum distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code for regulated investment companies. The average net asset value of the Fund is based on the average net asset values as of the last day of the four preceding calendar quarters during the year. The net asset value per share fluctuates daily.
Each quarter, the Board of Directors reviews the amount of any potential distribution from the income, realized capital gain, or capital available. The Board of Directors will continue to monitor the Fund’s distribution level, taking into consideration the Fund’s net asset value and the current financial market environment. The Fund’s distribution policy is subject to modification by the Board of Directors at any time, and there can be no guarantee that the policy will continue. The distribution rate should not be considered the dividend yield or total return on an investment in the Fund.
All or part of the distribution may be treated as long-term capital gain or qualified dividend income (or a combination of both) for individuals, each subject to the maximum federal income tax rate for long term capital gains, which is currently 20% in taxable accounts for individuals (or less depending on an individual’s tax bracket). In addition, certain U.S. shareholders who are individuals, estates or trusts and whose income exceeds certain thresholds will be required to pay a 3.8% Medicare surcharge on their “net investment income”, which includes dividends received from the Fund and capital gains from the sale or other disposition of shares of the Fund.
If the Fund does not generate sufficient earnings (dividends and interest income, less expenses, and realized net capital gain) equal to or in excess of the aggregate distributions paid by the Fund in a given year, then the amount distributed in excess of the Fund’s earnings would be deemed a return of capital. Since this would be considered a return of a portion of a shareholder’s original investment, it is generally not taxable and would be treated as a reduction in the shareholder’s cost basis.
Long-term capital gains, qualified dividend income, investment company taxable income, and return of capital, if any, will be allocated on a pro-rata basis to all distributions to common shareholders for the year. Based on the accounting records of the Fund currently available, the current distribution paid to common shareholders in 2025 would be deemed 100% from paid-in capital on a book basis. This does not represent information for tax reporting purposes. The estimated components of each distribution are updated and provided to shareholders of record in a notice accompanying the distribution and are available on our website (www.gabelli.com). The final determination of the sources of all distributions in 2025 will be made after year end and can vary from the quarterly estimates. Shareholders should not draw any conclusions about the Fund’s investment performance from the amount of the current distribution. All individual shareholders with taxable accounts will receive written notification regarding the components and tax treatment for all 2025 distributions in early 2026 via Form 1099-DIV.
Investors should carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses of the Fund before investing. For more information regarding the Fund’s distribution policy and other information about the Fund, call:
Carter Austin (914) 921-5475
About The Gabelli Multimedia Trust The Gabelli Multimedia Trust Inc. is a non-diversified, closed-end management investment company with $198 million in total net assets whose primary investment objective is long-term growth of capital. The Fund is managed by Gabelli Funds, LLC, a subsidiary of GAMCO Investors, Inc. (OTCQX: GAMI).
NYSE: GGT CUSIP – 36239Q109
Investor Relations Contact: Carter Austin (914) 921-5475 caustin@gabelli.com
Source: United States Senator for Colorado John Hickenlooper
Legislation will cut reliance on China for critical materials essential to our national security, energy, and emerging tech
WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senator John Hickenlooper, Lindsey Graham, Chris Coons, and Todd Young reintroduced the bipartisan Critical Materials Future Act to establish a pilot program for the Department of Energy to financially support domestic critical material processing projects.
“American energy independence is a bipartisan goal,” said Hickenlooper. “The U.S. could be a global leader in critical materials, but we need to shore up our domestic supply chains to strengthen our national security. Let’s get to work.”
“China maintains dominant control over critical mineral processing, which poses significant risks to our national security. It’s important for us to build better and more resilient processing capabilities here at home,” said Graham.
“Critical minerals are essential to manufacturing the most advanced energy and defense technologies, but the production, processing, and recycling of these materials is dominated by China,” said Coons. “This bipartisan bill will spur the investment we need to regain American control of our critical mineral supply chains.”
“Our reliance on global supply chains for critical materials poses a significant national security threat, especially as the Chinese Communist Party continues to manipulate this market,” said Young. “Our bill will take innovative steps to identify opportunities for American leadership and investment in critical material projects, strengthen domestic supply chains, and boost our economic and global competitiveness.”
The U.S. critical minerals list contains 50 minerals – including graphite, nickel, and cobalt – that are essential to our economy, infrastructure, and military capability. Critical minerals are used in smartphones, electric vehicle batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, and more.
This December, China announced that they would immediately block the export of three critical minerals: gallium, germanium, and antimony to the U.S. China currently controls 90% of the global processing capacity for rare earth elements and over 80% of the processing for other critical minerals like cobalt, gallium, and graphite. Experts have become increasingly concerned with U.S. dependence on China for critical materials, arguing it poses a significant risk to national security.
The Critical Materials Future Act supports critical material processing projects in the United States by granting the Secretary of Energy the authority and funding to deploy innovative financial mechanisms, such as contracts for differences and advanced market commitments, within this sector.
The bill also requires the Secretary of Energy to conduct a comprehensive study on the impact of these financial tools on market dynamics and processing projects within the critical materials sector, and to provide recommendations for expanding their use to strengthen America’s processing capabilities.
In the 119th Congress, Hickenlooper has reintroduced his bipartisan STRATEGIC Minerals Act to foster critical minerals trade with our international allies, and the bipartisan Unearth Innovation Act to establish a DOE program for critical minerals innovation.
The Critical Materials Future Act is supported by the Colorado School of Mines, the Bipartisan Policy Center, the National Wildlife Federation, the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, the Key Minerals Forum, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, Employ America, MineTech Ventures, Alta Resource Technologies, the Chamber of Progress, U.S. Critical Minerals, Nyrstar, the Alabama Mobility and Power Center (University of Alabama), South32 Hermosa, Alliance for Mineral Security, South Star Battery Metals Corp, the American Critical Minerals Association, and the Federation of American Scientists. For their statements of support, click HERE.
Full text of the Critical Materials Future Act is available HERE. A one-pager explanation on this bill is available HERE.
Source: United States Senator for Colorado John Hickenlooper
Unearth Innovation Act would create a Department of Energy program to drive responsible domestic critical mineral production, develop our energy workforce
WASHINGTON – Today, U.S. Senators John Hickenlooper and Thom Tillis reintroduced their bipartisan Unearth Innovation Act to spur American innovation and drive responsible production of domestic critical minerals with less environmental impact.
“We need critical minerals for our clean energy future and national security, but we can’t rely on China or others for them,” said Hickenlooper. “U.S. research and innovation will set a global example for critical minerals sourcing and help develop our energy workforce of tomorrow.”
“This legislation promotes innovative technologies that will make mining safer, cleaner, and more efficient,” said Tillis. “By collaborating with agencies and experts, we can create high-quality jobs, enhance safety, and equip the next generation with the skills and training needed to strengthen our critical minerals supply chains.”
The legislation would establish a Mining and Mineral Innovation Program within the Department of Energy (DOE) to increase research, development, and commercialization of advanced mining, recycling, and processing technologies that would reduce environmental and human impacts.
The U.S. critical minerals list contains 50 minerals – including graphite, nickel, and cobalt – that are essential to our economy, infrastructure, and military capability. Critical minerals are used in smartphones, electric vehicle batteries, solar panels, wind turbines, and more. Currently, the U.S. is largely dependent on China for importing these minerals, which creates supply chain instability and threats to national security.
Specifically, the Unearth Innovation Act would:
Support research and development of technologies for identifying, mining, recycling, and processing minerals and to reclaim, remediate, and reuse existing mines
Promote responsible mining practices that minimize human and environmental impact
Engage with communities and consult with tribal nations to support strategies to increase the prosperity of mining communities
Allow DOE to coordinate with federal agencies on mining safety innovations
Partner with academic institutions and the mining industry to accelerate new mining technologies and create a pipeline into the critical minerals workforce
In the 119th Congress, Hickenlooper has reintroduced his bipartisan STRATEGIC Minerals Act to foster critical minerals trade with our international allies and the bipartisan Critical Materials Future Act to establish a pilot program to finance domestic critical minerals production.
The Unearth Innovation Act is supported by the Colorado School of Mines, the Bipartisan Policy Center, the National Wildlife Federation, the Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, SAFE’s Center for Critical Minerals Strategy, the Key Minerals Forum, the Zero Emission Transportation Association, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, Employ America, MineTech Ventures, Alta Resource Technologies, the Chamber of Progress, U.S. Critical Minerals, Nyrstar, the Alabama Mobility and Power Center (University of Alabama), South32 Hermosa, Alliance for Mineral Security, South Star Battery Metals Corp, the American Critical Minerals Association, and the Federation of American Scientists. For their statements of support, click HERE.
A one-pager explanation of the bill can be found HERE.
Full text of the bill is available HERE.
RYE, N.Y., Feb. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Board of Trustees of The Gabelli Dividend & Income Trust (NYSE:GDV) (the “Fund”) approved the continuation of its policy of paying fixed monthly cash distributions. The Board of Trustees declared cash distributions of $0.14 per share for each of April, May, and June 2025.
The Board of Trustees increased the annual distribution 27% to $1.68 per share, which will be paid $0.14 per share monthly, commencing with the January 2025 monthly distribution.
Distribution Month
Record Date
Payable Date
Distribution Per Share
April
April 15, 2025
April 23, 2025
$0.14
May
May 15, 2025
May 22, 2025
$0.14
June
June 13, 2025
June 23, 2025
$0.14
Additionally, the Board of Trustees continues to evaluate potential strategic opportunities for the Fund in what we believe to be an attractive environment to invest in the broader equity markets.
Each quarter, the Board of Trustees reviews the amount of any potential distribution from the income, realized capital gain, or capital available. The Board of Trustees will continue to monitor the Fund’s distribution level, taking into consideration the Fund’s net asset value and the financial market environment. If necessary, the Fund will pay an adjusting distribution in December which includes any additional income and net realized capital gains in excess of the monthly distributions for that year to satisfy the minimum distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code for regulated investment companies. The Fund’s distribution policy is subject to modification by the Board of Trustees at any time, and there can be no guarantee that the policy will continue. The distribution rate should not be considered the dividend yield or total return on an investment in the Fund.
All or part of the distribution may be treated as long-term capital gain or qualified dividend income (or a combination of both) for individuals, each subject to the maximum federal income tax rate for long term capital gains, which is currently 20% in taxable accounts for individuals (or less depending on an individual’s tax bracket). In addition, certain U.S. shareholders who are individuals, estates or trusts and whose income exceeds certain thresholds will be required to pay a 3.8% Medicare surcharge on their “net investment income”, which includes dividends received from the Fund and capital gains from the sale or other disposition of shares of the Fund.
If the Fund does not generate sufficient earnings (dividends and interest income, less expenses, and realized net capital gain) equal to or in excess of the aggregate distributions paid by the Fund in a given year, then the amount distributed in excess of the Fund’s earnings would be deemed a return of capital. Since this would be considered a return of a portion of a shareholder’s original investment, it is generally not taxable and would be treated as a reduction in the shareholder’s cost basis.
Long-term capital gains, qualified dividend income, investment company taxable income, and return of capital, if any, will be allocated on a pro-rata basis to all distributions to common shareholders for the year. Based on the accounting records of the Fund currently available, each of the distributions paid to common shareholders in 2025 would include approximately 3% from net investment income, 4% from net capital gains and 93% would be deemed a return of capital on a book basis. This does not represent information for tax reporting purposes. The estimated components of each distribution are updated and provided to shareholders of record in a notice accompanying the distribution and are available on our website (www.gabelli.com). The final determination of the sources of all distributions in 2025 will be made after year end and can vary from the monthly estimates. Shareholders should not draw any conclusions about the Fund’s investment performance from the amount of the current distribution. All individual shareholders with taxable accounts will receive written notification regarding the components and tax treatment for all 2025 distributions in early 2026 via Form 1099-DIV.
Investors should carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses of the Fund before investing. For more information regarding the Fund’s distribution policy and other information about the Fund, call:
Carter Austin (914) 921-5475
About The Gabelli Dividend & Income Trust The Gabelli Dividend & Income Trust is a diversified, closed-end management investment company with $3.0 billion in total net assets whose primary investment objective is to provide a high level of total return with an emphasis on dividends and income. The Fund is managed by Gabelli Funds, LLC, a subsidiary of GAMCO Investors, Inc. (OTCQX: GAMI).
NYSE – GDV CUSIP – 36242H104
THE GABELLI DIVIDEND & INCOME TRUST
Investor Relations Contact: Carter Austin (914) 921-5475 caustin@gabelli.com
RYE, N.Y., Feb. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Board of Trustees of The Gabelli Global Small and Mid Cap Value Trust (NYSE:GGZ) (the “Fund”) declared a $0.16 per share cash distribution payable on March 24, 2025 to common shareholders of record on March 17, 2025.
The Fund intends to pay a quarterly distribution of an amount determined each quarter by the Board of Trustees. In addition to the quarterly distributions, and in accordance with the minimum distribution requirements of the Internal Revenue Code for regulated investment companies, the Fund may pay an adjusting distribution in December which includes any additional income and net realized capital gains in excess of the quarterly distributions for that year.
Each quarter, the Board of Directors reviews the amount of any potential distribution from the income, realized capital gain, or capital available. The Board of Directors will continue to monitor the Fund’s distribution level, taking into consideration the Fund’s net asset value and the current financial market environment. The Fund’s distribution policy is subject to modification by the Board of Directors at any time, and there can be no guarantee that the policy will continue. The distribution rate should not be considered the dividend yield or total return on an investment in the Fund.
All or part of the distribution may be treated as long-term capital gain or qualified dividend income (or a combination of both) for individuals, each subject to the maximum federal income tax rate for long term capital gains, which is currently 20% in taxable accounts for individuals (or less depending on an individual’s tax bracket). In addition, certain U.S. shareholders who are individuals, estates or trusts and whose income exceeds certain thresholds will be required to pay a 3.8% Medicare surcharge on their “net investment income”, which includes dividends received from the Fund and capital gains from the sale or other disposition of shares of the Fund.
If the Fund does not generate sufficient earnings (dividends and interest income, less expenses, and realized net capital gain) equal to or in excess of the aggregate distributions paid by the Fund in a given year, then the amount distributed in excess of the Fund’s earnings would be deemed a return of capital. Since this would be considered a return of a portion of a shareholder’s original investment, it is generally not taxable and would be treated as a reduction in the shareholder’s cost basis.
Long-term capital gains, qualified dividend income, investment company taxable income, and return of capital, if any, will be allocated on a pro-rata basis to all distributions to common shareholders for the year. Based on the accounting records of the Fund currently available, the current distribution paid to common shareholders in 2025 would be deemed 100% from paid-in capital on a book basis. This does not represent information for tax reporting purposes. The estimated components of each distribution are updated and provided to shareholders of record in a notice accompanying the distribution and are available on our website (www.gabelli.com). The final determination of the sources of all distributions in 2025 will be made after year end and can vary from the quarterly estimates. Shareholders should not draw any conclusions about the Fund’s investment performance from the amount of the current distribution. All individual shareholders with taxable accounts will receive written notification regarding the components and tax treatment for all 2025 distributions in early 2026 via Form 1099-DIV.
Investors should carefully consider the investment objectives, risks, charges, and expenses of the Fund before investing. For more information regarding the Fund’s distribution policy and other information about the Fund, call:
Bethany Uhlein (914) 921-5546
About The Gabelli Global Small and Mid Cap Value Trust The Gabelli Global Small and Mid Cap Value Trust is a diversified, closed-end management investment company with $136 million in total net assets whose primary investment objective is to achieve long-term capital growth of capital. Under normal market conditions, the Fund will invest at least 80% of its total assets in equity securities (such as common stock and preferred stock) of companies with small or medium sized market capitalizations. The Fund is managed by Gabelli Funds, LLC, a subsidiary of GAMCO Investors, Inc. (OTCQX: GAMI).
Headline: Progress and lessons learned on the road to 2030 climate goals
2025 is a notable year in the world’s continued efforts toward a more sustainable future. It marks the five-year countdown to 2030, the end of the timeline for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). 2025 will also be the 30thconvening of the UN Climate Change Conference—also known as COP30—and it is taking place in Brazil, both a symbolically and strategically important nation in the world’s fight against climate change and environmental degradation.
It is also a notable year for Microsoft. In addition to celebrating the 50thanniversary of our company’s founding, it is the midpoint of our own sustainability journey. In 2020 we announced our ambitions to be carbon negative, water positive, and zero waste by 2030, all while protecting ecosystems. We have made tremendous progress over the past five years, and we are proud of what we’ve accomplished. We’ve also learned lessons along the way, lessons that constantly inform and shape our path toward 2030 and beyond.
The goals that we set in 2020 reflected what we believed we needed to do in order to help push the world toward a net-zero economy. I joined Microsoft on this journey two years ago—becoming our Chief Sustainability Officer in January 2023—and I continue to be impressed by the work of employees across the company in their relentless pursuit of these goals.
In June 2020, we announced our largest power PPA to date at the time—a 500MW PPA with Sol Systems. Today, we are one of the largest carbon-free energy buyers in the world, with a 34-gigawatt (GW) contracted renewable energy portfolio across 24 countries to date. We are bringing more carbon-free electricity onto the grids where we operate, and we continue to advocate for the expansion of clean energy solutions around the world.
A key component of our water positive goal is to replenish more water than we consume across our global operations. We’ve grown our replenishment portfolio to 90 projects in over 40 locations around the world.
On our journey to become zero waste, we’re finding opportunities to keep electronics in circulation. The repairability of our current portfolio of Surface devices has evolved significantly from our first field-repairable product in 2019. This is also true of Xbox,which recently announcedhow they’re working to expand the number of ways players can get support to repair their consoles and accessories.
We exceeded our land protection goal, with 15,849 acres of protected land and surpassed our initial target of 11,000 acres by more than 40%.
This is only a snapshot of the real progress we’ve made over the last 5 years. We have a longstanding commitment to sustainability, and our experience shows us that the investments and innovations we’ve focused on are good for our company, our customers, the economy, and our planet. Every investment has also been a learning opportunity, a chance to test our assumptions and adjust as needed.
While we are proud of these achievements, we know that our work is far from over, and that the path ahead has gotten harder. The world is not on track to meet critical climate goals and we see many of these challenges reflected in our own journey.
In 2020, Microsoft leaders referred to our sustainability goals as a “moonshot,” and nearly five years later, we have had to acknowledge that the moon has gotten further away. However, the force creating this distance from our goals in the short term is the same one that will help us build a bigger, faster, and more powerful rocket to reach them in the long term: artificial intelligence (AI). This is not hyperbole. Already, we are seeing AI make a positive impact on the planet, and in the coming years, this technology will begin to rapidly accelerate climate solutions at a scale we’ve not yet seen. In November 2023, we introduced ourAI and Sustainability Playbook, which highlights five foundational enabling conditions needed to unlock AI’s full transformative potential for accelerating sustainability progress. In January, weshared a reportthat highlights our progress and the innovations that have advanced each of those five pillars.
Building the AI economy of the future is a top priority for our business, but we are also in the business of sustainability. As CSO, it is my job to ensure that these dual mandates are working together.
To achieve this, we need to run our sustainability initiatives like we run the rest of our business: ensuring that our focus is on the highest-impact interventions that truly move the needle when it comes to planetary impact.
Carbon Neutrality
Microsoft announced that it was carbon neutral in 2012, several years ahead of our ambitious goal to be carbon negative by 2030. Microsoft’s prior years achieving carbon neutrality were based on a common combination of environmental attributes purchased with funds from our corporate-wide carbon fee and our overall carbon emissions reduction efforts. This is a prime example of where we have learned and adjusted along our journey. While we continue to apply the carbon fee to investments in emissions reductions, we have ceased purchasing non-additional, unbundled renewable energy certificates. We are refocusing the use of these funds on more long-term, higher-impact investments across carbon reduction, carbon removal, and clean electricity procurement. These interventions are expected to more effectively help us achieve our goal of becoming carbon negative by 2030 and may take us out of carbon-neutral position.
We will also continue to invest in innovative climate solutions through our $1BClimate Innovation Fund (CIF). Since launching the CIF in 2020, Microsoft has committed nearly $800M to solutions ranging from sustainable fuels and low-carbon building materials to carbon dioxide removal, water innovation, and circular economy technologies. We now have a portfolio of 63 investees that we’re helping to scale. Going forward, we will extend this strategy and continue to invest our capital to build new markets and increase the market supply of emerging sustainable technologies to address carbon, water, and waste.
We are proud to continue making decisions that drive positive environmental impact in the market and deliver high-integrity investments. We remain resolute in our commitment to our climate goals and to empowering others with the technology needed to build a more sustainable future.
In my first year with Microsoft, I wrote a piece on LinkedIn:Removing Roadblocks in the Race to Net Zero, where I compared reaching our sustainability goals to training for a marathon, noting that “it will take focus, planning, and perseverance to reach the finish line.” Today—and now two years into my role—I would like to add another comparison, to an African proverb that says the following: “If you want to travel fast, travel alone; if you want to travel far, travel together.”
In 2025, the moon is further away, so we all must travel together and do more if we are going to reach it. We will continue to work in close collaboration with our employees, customers, suppliers, industry peers, partners, and with policymakers to maximize our impact in pursuit of our shared goals.
Tags: COP30, net zero, sustainability, Sustainable Development Goals, UN Climate Change Conference
We may never know if St Valentine, a martyr beheaded for officiating the forbidden weddings of persecuted Christians, was keen on chocolate and flowers. But we do know that millions of people around the world will be using those very items to celebrate his name on February 14.
In the UK, it is estimated that 60% of the population will celebrate Valentine’s Day this year, each spending around £52 on gifts and other romantic gestures. The total spend in the US will be about US$27 billion (£22 bilion), including roughly $US500 million on roses.
So the tradition of spending money on your romantic partner on February 14 seems fairly well established. But it is hard to know exactly when the link began.
Up until the late 14th century, Valentine’s Day was solely a commemoration of his martyrdom. The shift toward an association with romantic love emerged in the Middle Ages, and is often attributed to the poet Geoffrey Chaucer, who linked Valentine’s Day to romance in his poem Parliament of Fowls.
But it was the 19th century industrial revolution which brought about the mass production of romantic gifts. Cadbury was the first chocolate maker to commercialise the association between romance and confectionery by producing heart-shaped boxes of chocolates for Valentine’s Day in 1868. These boxes were decorated with images of Cupid, roses and hearts, and would sometimes be kept to store romantic letters and mementos.
And while Hallmark did not invent the occasion, it played a big part in bolstering its popularity by selling Valentine’s Day postcards in 1910, and then printing its own greetings cards from 1916.
Now in the US, around 145 million Valentine’s Day cards are exchanged each year, making it the second largest annual occasion for card giving (after Christmas).
But it’s not just car sellers, florists and chocolate-makers who seek to benefit from the commercial opportunities Valentine’s Day provides. This year for example, IKEA has partnered with a dating app to give nine British couples a “once-in-a-lifetime” first date in an Ikea store, where they will share a meatball dinner for two in bed.
Lego has launched a travelling campaign in major cities around the world to show off its floral designs, and Coca-Cola has teamed up with a fast-food brand to create a Valentine-themed drive-thru experience.
Chocolate and marshmallows
These kinds of one-off marketing campaigns are only possible thanks to a long history of Valentine’s traditions, which vary around the world.
In Japan for example, it is a two-part celebration. On February 14, women often give “Giri-choco” (“obligation chocolate”) to friends and colleagues, while “home-choco” (“true-feeling chocolate”) is reserved for romantic partners. On March 14, known as White Day, men reciprocate by giving jewellery and less-expensive gifts that are white (marshmallows are a popular choice).
Celebrations in South Korea are similar to those in Japan, but with the addition of Black Day on April 14 when single people gather at restaurants to eat black noodles (jajangmyeon). In the Philippines, Valentine’s Day is marked by mass weddings organised by the government.
In Finland and Estonia, Valentine’s Day is known as “Friend’s Day” with the focus on celebrating non-romantic love and friendship. A similar idea, “Galentine’s Day”, which featured in a 2010 episode of the US sitcom Parks and Recreation, has become a popular way of celebrating female friendship.
Love for sale
Of course, not all consumers enjoy Valentine’s Day rituals. For many, there is pressure attached to romantic shopping, while for others it is just an unwelcome reminder of their single status.
But there is a market for that too. Anti-Valentine’s day sentiment has inspired other ways to (not) celebrate, including a box of chocolates aimed at single people.
And it can be a very valuable day for businesses, large and small. With high levels of participation and spending, Valentine’s Day brings a major surge in revenue for sectors including retail, hospitality and entertainment.
So although it might not sound very romantic, it’s worth remembering that while money can’t buy you love, love can provide a significant boost to the economy.
Sameer Hosany 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.
SPOKANE VALLEY, Wash., Feb. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Key Tronic Corporation, a provider of electronic manufacturing services (EMS), is expanding its clean-tech manufacturing operations in Arkansas, establishing its flagship manufacturing and research and development location in Springdale. The company anticipates investing more than $28 million in the new facility and expects to create over 400 new jobs in the next five years.
“We are pleased to announce the expansion of our U.S. manufacturing operations in Northwest Arkansas. Our new center of excellence in Springdale will provide both our employees and customers with cutting-edge technology and the increased capacity necessary to accommodate expected growth,” said Brett Larsen, CEO of Key Tronic. “We are committed to continuously investing in our capabilities and attracting innovative talent. Our people are our most valuable asset, and we are delighted to enhance our operations in a region where we have maintained a longstanding presence and a strong team and can benefit from a business-friendly environment.”
“When we invest in education and our workforce, we can attract companies like Key Tronic and ensure they have the skilled workforce they need. Arkansas LEARNS and ACCESS are laser-focused on that issue and help attract announcements like this one, which mean $28 million and nearly 400 jobs for Springdale,” said Governor Sanders.
Key Tronic will be shifting its existing Arkansas operations to a new larger facility in Springdale, located at 601 W Apple Blossom Avenue later in 2025, increasing its total U.S. production capacity by approximately 40 percent.
“Crossland purchased the land in 2021 with a vision to build a modern, best-in-class facility, and we are grateful that Key Tronic has chosen this location to call home. This building is part of a larger business park, representing an investment of over $100 million in the Springdale community,” said Director of Real Estate Mattie Crossland. “Our goal is to provide spaces that allow our tenants to run their businesses efficiently while also contributing to the growth and future of the community.”
Crossland Realty Group developed the 300,000-square-foot building shell in late 2023, with Crossland Construction completing Key Tronic’s tenant improvements, slated for completion in Q3 2025.
“Key Tronic has a long history of manufacturing electronics in Arkansas, and we are proud that the company has decided to expand their presence and increase production capacity in our state,” said Clint O’Neal, Executive Director of the Arkansas Economic Development Commission. “Congratulations to the Key Tronic team and to the City of Springdale on this major economic development win.”
“Key Tronic’s decision to relocate to Springdale is a strong endorsement of our city’s talented workforce, thriving economy, and commitment to fostering business success,” said Springdale Mayor Doug Sprouse. “This investment brings significant job opportunities to our community, further strengthening Springdale’s reputation as a prime destination for industry and innovation. We proudly welcome Key Tronic and look forward to their future growth here.”
“This exciting announcement would not have been possible without the leadership of Governor Sanders and the unwavering support of the Arkansas Economic Development Commission,” said Bill Rogers, president and CEO of the Springdale Chamber of Commerce. “Thanks to our regional partners and the proactive efforts of Mayor Sprouse’s administration, we were able to roll out the red carpet for Key Tronic. We are thrilled to welcome them to Springdale and look forward to supporting their success in our community.”
“Key Tronic’s reinvestment in Northwest Arkansas highlights our region’s strong workforce and pro-growth environment,” said Nelson Peacock, president and CEO of the Northwest Arkansas Council. “As a leader in electronics manufacturing, their expansion strengthens our economy, retains quality jobs and creates new opportunities—reinforcing our position as a top destination for business and innovation.”
About Key Tronic Founded in 1969, Key Tronic is a leading contract manufacturer offering value-added design and manufacturing services from its facilities in the United States, Mexico, China and Vietnam. The Company provides its customers with full engineering services, materials management, worldwide manufacturing facilities, assembly services, in-house testing, and worldwide distribution. Its customers include some of the world’s leading original equipment manufacturers. Key Tronic has operated in Arkansas since 1985.
About Crossland Construction Company Crossland is a top-ranked construction firm offering a wide range of services through its family of companies. Crossland Construction provides general contracting, construction management, and much more. Crossland Realty, a division of Crossland Construction, offers complete real estate services, guiding clients through location scouting, planning, development, construction, and leasing. Crossland is dedicated to Building So Much More for its clients and the communities they serve. Learn more: www.crossland.com
About the Arkansas Economic Development Commission At AEDC, we know economic advancement doesn’t happen by accident. We work strategically with businesses and communities to create strong economic opportunities, making Arkansas the natural choice for success. AEDC is a division of the Arkansas Department of Commerce. To learn more, visit ArkansasEDC.com.
Forward-Looking Statements Some of the statements in this press release are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including Key Tronic’s opportunities and its partnership, the potential success of Key Tronic and the customer, and related revenues. Forward-looking statements include all passages containing verbs such as aims, anticipates, believes, estimates, expects, hopes, intends, plans, predicts, projects or targets or nouns corresponding to such verbs. Forward-looking statements also include other passages that are primarily relevant to expected future events or revenue or that can only be fully evaluated by events that will occur in the future. There are many factors, risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted or projected in forward-looking statements, including but not limited to: the success and timing of our expansion plans; the success and timing of ramping; availability and timing and receipt of critical parts or components; demand from customers and sales channels; the future of the global economic environment and its impact on our customers and suppliers; the availability of a healthy workforce; the accuracy of suppliers’ and customers’ forecasts; development and success of customers’ programs and products; success of new-product introductions; the risk of legal proceedings or governmental investigations relating to the previously reported financial statement restatements and related material weaknesses, the May 2024 cybersecurity incident and the subject of the internal investigation by the Company’s Audit Committee and related or other unrelated matters; acquisitions or divestitures of operations or facilities; technology advances; changes in pricing policies by the Company, its competitors, customers or suppliers; impact of new governmental legislation and regulation, including tax reform, tariffs and related activities, such trade negotiations and other risks; and other factors, risks, and uncertainties detailed from time to time in the Company’s SEC filings.
Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)
February 13, 2025
Washington, D.C. – Oregon’s U.S. Senators Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden joined an effort led by California’s U.S. Senator Alex Padilla to demand President Trump rescind his unprecedented and illegal firing of Federal Election Commission (FEC) Chair Ellen Weintraub. The Senators also advised Trump to pursue the lawful process of consulting with the Senate on nominating a replacement for both Weintraub and future vacancies.
The FEC is an independent, bipartisan agency tasked with enforcing U.S. campaign finance laws. In the 50 years since it was created — in the wake of the Watergate scandal — a commissioner has never been fired by the President. Typical procedure, as outlined in the Federal Election Campaign Act, is to have a Commissioner depart upon confirmation of their replacement. The illegal, unprecedented firing of Chair Weintraub took effect immediately on February 6.
“Chair Weintraub must be able continue to serve in her role unless and until you use the lawful process of nominating a commissioner for the Senate’s consideration and that nominee is confirmed,” wrote the Senators. “Your letter seeking to remove a commissioner ignores the legal requirements that commissioners may not be removed without cause. This effort violates the procedure set in statute for replacing commissioners in the Federal Election Campaign Act and appears to be a bad faith effort to dismantle the only federal agency that protects the American people’s right to transparency in campaigns and elections.”
“Record spending in our elections, including from ultra-wealthy individuals who now serve at the highest levels of power, has placed the FEC’s responsibilities at the heart of maintaining a healthy democracy,” continued the Senators. “While years of deadlock at the Commission have hindered its ability to serve as an effective regulator, removing commissioners without cause moves beyond dysfunction to outright destruction.”
In addition to Merkley, Wyden, and Padilla, the letter was signed by Senators Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
Full text of the letter is available here and below:
Dear President Trump:
We write to strongly urge you to rescind your illegal attempt to remove Chair Ellen Weintraub from the Federal Election Commission (FEC), the independent and bipartisan agency charged with enforcing our campaign finance laws. Chair Weintraub must be able continue to serve in her role unless and until you use the lawful process of nominating a commissioner for the Senate’s consideration and that nominee is confirmed.
Your letter seeking to remove a commissioner ignores the legal requirements that commissioners may not be removed without cause. This effort violates the procedure set in statute for replacing commissioners in the Federal Election Campaign Act and appears to be a bad faith effort to dismantle the only federal agency that protects the American people’s right to transparency in campaigns and elections.
Removing an FEC commissioner without nominating a replacement is without precedent. With Republican Commissioner Sean Cooksey’s recent resignation to join your administration, regular order would be to consult with the Senate on a bipartisan basis and nominate a pair of Republican and Democratic commissioners for the Senate’s consideration. Unlawfully removing a commissioner with an existing vacancy, without consultation with the Senate on nominations to replace them, demonstrates an intent to ignore the Senate’s constitutional role and diminish the Commission’s ability to hold accountable potential violations of campaign finance law.
Chair Weintraub, a Democratic commissioner, has a strong record of seeking to enforce the law that regulates money in politics on a nonpartisan basis, including holding presidential campaigns accountable. Congress created the FEC over 50 years ago, in the wake of the Watergate scandal that eroded trust in our government. The FEC was designed to be free from the interference of those it might be regulating and to ensure the American people had insight into how money was being spent to influence its elected officials. The role of money in our elections has changed since the FEC was first created, particularly as the Supreme Court has issued decisions permitting dark money to infiltrate our elections. However, the need for balanced and dedicated commissioners who work on behalf of the country has remained unchanged.
Further, record spending in our elections, including from ultra-wealthy individuals who now serve at the highest levels of power, has placed the FEC’s responsibilities at the heart of maintaining a healthy democracy. While years of deadlock at the Commission have hindered its ability to serve as an effective regulator, removing commissioners without cause moves beyond dysfunction to outright destruction.
We call on you to rescind your unlawful letter and pursue the legal process for replacing commissioners in bipartisan consultation with the Senate.
Source: United States Senator for Rhode Island Jack Reed
WASHINGTON, DC – There are many ways to show one’s love on Valentine’s Day, but unfortunately, due to President Donald Trump’s tariff threats and refusal to help lower food prices, Americans will likely shell out record amounts this year for things like flowers, chocolate, or a dinner date at their favorite local restaurant.
U.S. Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) says it’s time President Trump follow through on his campaign promise to actually do something to help lower prices instead of making moves to increase costs on consumers and American businesses.
“Donald Trump pledged to fix the economy, but so far he’s made things worse. He’s fixated on tax cuts for the wealthy and tariffs that economic experts say will only drive up prices for American consumers. Since Trump took office, inflation is accelerating and groceries, gas, and rents rose over the last month. His chaotic, destabilizing approach is sending prices in the wrong direction for families,” said Senator Reed.
During Trump’s second term in office, the consumer price index rose 3 percent in January from a year ago, according to the U.S. Department of Labor. It has increased from a 3-and-a-half year low of 2.4 percent in September.
Those planning to wine and dine their sweetheart this Valentine’s Day will likely face higher costs than last year for everything from flowers to food to fuel. In fact, Trump’s focus on everything but the economy might leave Americans a little lighter in their wallet for things like:
Flowers: A majority of florists import their bouquet flowers from countries like Colombia and Mexico. Recent tariff threats by President Trump are already creating supply chain pressures and impacting prices on products coming into the U.S. In order to stay afloat, some mom and pop flower shops are estimating they could have to raise prices as much as 10 percent on bouquets compared to last year’s Valentine’s Day.
Chocolate: It will be harder to find a sweet deal on chocolate this Valentine’s Day because chocolate prices are up about twenty percent as cocoa prices hit new heights. Several factors contribute to the price hike, and not all are within Trump’s direct control. For instance, key cocoa-producing regions of West Africa have been impacted by severe weather, exacerbated by climate change. But Trump’s inaction and climate denial only exacerbates environmental and health hazards that don’t respect borders. The chocolate industry in the U.S. is also impacted by consolidation. Trump has allowed anti-competitive industry consolidation in the past which leads to higher prices in the long run and allows huge companies to stomp out upstarts.
Restaurant Dining: Not only are menu prices rising under the Trump Administration, but due to Trump ignoring his pledge to take action on day one to address food prices, staples like eggs and entrée items like steak have shot up in the last month.
“Americans want the federal government to work effectively and they want action to lower prices and strengthen the economy. Donald Trump needs to stop with the culture war sideshows and focus on the things he pledged to do — like lowering food, housing, and health costs. Giving away massive tax windfalls for the wealthy and slashing Medicaid doesn’t lower prices. So far, Trump’s policies have made things worse for many Americans. He needs to change course,” concluded Reed.
Source: United States Senator for Illinois Dick Durbin
February 12, 2025
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) today met with Illinois members of the National Rural Health Association (NRHA) to speak about the challenges of providing health care in rural communities. During their meeting, Durbin and the health care leaders discussed the importance of preserving Medicaid funding from Republican proposals to cut health insurance benefits and coverage from millions of Americans. They also discussed workforce initiatives to recruit and retain health care providers to serve in rural areas. To help address the shortage of health care professionals, Durbin secured $1 billion in the American Rescue Plan for scholarship and loan repayment awards through the National Health Service Corps and Nurse Corps to build a more diverse pipeline of clinicians and recruit more health providers to serve in shortage areas.
Durbin also spoke about his Rural Hospital Closure Relief Act, which he introduced earlier this week. The bipartisan legislation would update Medicare’s “Critical Access Hospital” (CAH) designation so more rural hospitals can qualify for this financial lifeline and continue to serve their communities with quality, affordable health care services. Small and rural hospitals are the backbone of their communities, and often the largest employers, contributing nearly $5 billion in direct spending on payroll, goods, and services in Illinois. Yet more than 135 rural hospitals have closed nationwide in the past dozen years, an estimated 50 percent of rural hospitals ran operating losses last year, and more than 400 hospitals are facing closure risk.
“Across rural Illinois, hospitals and clinics are the backbone of the local economy. I am committed to helping recruit more doctors, nurses, dentists, and behavioral health providers, and ensure sustainable federal funding for these critical anchors of the community,” said Durbin.
Today, new Statistics Canada data shows that Saskatchewan’s building construction investment increased by 30.0 per cent in December 2024 compared to December 2023 (seasonally-adjusted). The province also saw a 9.4 per cent increase in month-over-month growth from November 2024 to December 2024.
This ranks Saskatchewan first in year-over-year and second in month-over-month growth in this category among the provinces.
“The increased activity we are seeing across our construction sector is a testament to the confidence individuals and businesses have in our province’s strong and stable economy,” said Trade and Export Development Minister Warren Kaeding. “Every new project contributes not only to job growth and infrastructure development, but further bolsters Saskatchewan’s economy. These investments lead to direct benefits for Saskatchewan’s communities, now and into the future.”
Investment in building construction is calculated based on the total spending value on building construction within the province.
Statistics Canada’s latest GDP numbers indicate that Saskatchewan’s 2023 real GDP reached an all-time high of $77.9 billion, increasing by $1.77 billion, or 2.3 per cent from 2022. This places Saskatchewan second in the nation for real GDP growth, and above the national average of 1.6 per cent.
Private capital investment is projected to reach $14.2 billion in 2024, an increase of 14.4 per cent over 2023. This is the highest anticipated percentage increase in Canada.
Last year, the Government of Saskatchewan unveiled its new Securing the Next Decade of Growth – Saskatchewan’s Investment Attraction Strategy. This strategy, combined with Saskatchewan’s trade and investment website, InvestSK.ca, contains helpful information for potential markets and solidifies the province as the best place to do business in Canada.
WASHINGTON – On Wednesday, February 12, parents, educators, community leaders and elected officials from across the country rallied outside the U.S. Capitol – in the rain and snow – to take a stand for students and public schools. The rally took place ahead of U.S. Secretary of Education nominee Linda McMahon’s confirmation hearing and amidst threats of a looming executive order to dismantle the Department of Education.
If confirmed, McMahon will oversee attempts to gut public education and push vouchers that take critical funding from public schools. This will lead to significant cuts to programs that support and protect our most vulnerable and underserved students. Such actions could lead to larger class sizes, a reduction in resources for at-risk students, the loss of vital services for students with disabilities, cuts to job-training programs, increased costs for higher education, and a rollback of essential civil rights protections.
“Americans all across this nation share our belief that every student—no matter their race or place, or the language they speak—deserves to attend public schools that are high-quality, safe, welcoming, and inclusive,” said NEA President Becky Pringle. “As I travel around the country, I have heard from parents and educators that they want more resources, more opportunities that will help students live into their brilliance. They do not want to dismantle public schools and privatize them. Quite the opposite. Instead of sending money to private schools, they want us to strengthen public schools, where 90% of all children attend, not take money away from them. They want to partner with us—at the local, state, and federal levels—to make sure our schools have what they need so we can reduce class sizes, recruit qualified staff, and keep students safe.”
In the early weeks of the Trump administration, a series of executive orders have undermined students’ protections, effectively reversing progress and moving our country backward, stripping students of their rights and opportunities. Now, before Secretary of Education nominee McMahon’s confirmation hearing, parents, educators, community leaders, and elected officials rallied to protect students and public schools.
“President Trump’s education plan puts our children at risk and has grave implications for our workforce and our economy,” said MomsRising Executive Director and CEO Kristin Rowe-Finkbeiner. “Trump is threatening to dramatically reduce public education funding and end critical programs that students, parents and educators desperately need. Dismantling the U.S. Department of Education would divert funds from public education and bring overcrowded classrooms, gutted services for students with disabilities, an end to job training programs, and even higher costs for college. America’s moms want a qualified leader at the U.S. Department of Education who will reject rightwing attacks on our schools and ensure they teach accurate history, welcome and support students of all abilities, and help all students succeed. Linda McMahon is wholly unqualified for that position.”
Speaker after speaker shined a spotlight on the negative impact that shutting down the U.S. Department of Education would have on students, educators and public schools across the country. They raised the alarm bells about what would happen to our most vulnerable students if McMahon were confirmed as Secretary and urged elected officials to reject her nomination.
“I’m 18 years old and I’ve attended public schools my whole life- my teachers and classmates made me who I am today. I’m fighting for the millions of students and teachers across the country who deserve better than a billionaire-run government,” said student and organizer Adah Crandall. “McMahon doesn’t care about any of us, she only cares about lining her own pockets. We’re calling on leaders to stand up for young people everywhere and reject McMahon so that we can have the education and futures we deserve.”
“Congress must reject Linda McMahon as Secretary of Education. She promises to gut public education, and she has spent years pushing policies that would defund and destroy public schools. Whether here on Capitol Hill, with legal actions and lawsuits we will file to protect students from harm, or through grassroots actions in communities across the country, we will make our voices heard. For as long as it takes, we will fight to protect our nation’s public schools and our democracy!” concluded Pringle.
For select photos of the Rally to Protect Students and Public Schools, please click here.
###
Follow us on Bluesky athttps://bsky.app/profile/neapresident.bsky.socialandhttps://bsky.app/profile/neatoday.bsky.social
The National Education Association is the nation’s largest professional employee organization, representing more than 3 million elementary and secondary teachers, higher education faculty, education support professionals, school administrators, retired educators, students preparing to become teachers, healthcare workers, and public employees. Learn more at www.nea.org
PROVIDENCE, RI– Governor Dan McKee, Providence Mayor Brett Smiley, RIDE Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green, Providence Public School District (PPSD) Superintendent Dr. Javier Montañez, Principal Cassandra Henderson, and 2023 Presidential Awards for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching (PAEMST) recipient Kerry Johnson joined state, municipal, school and community leaders today at Asa Messer Elementary School to launch the statewide Math Matters RI campaign, which aims to promote the importance of mathematics.
As part of the launch, Governor McKee and Commissioner Infante-Green awarded the latest round of Learn365RI grants, which will provide 38 communities with $2,125,000 in grant funding aimed at improving math skills. Additionally, $725,000 has been allocated as a State set-aside for statewide intervention and support. Asa Messer Elementary was chosen to host the event because the school saw one of the highest increases in math proficiency, with a more than 12 percentage point improvement in students meeting or exceeding expectations in the 2024 RICAS results.
“In every home, every day, learning matters and we are launching our statewide Math Matters RI campaign to place an extra emphasis on math instruction and learning,” said Governor Dan McKee. “We’re underscoring that math is important for the future success of students and state with an investment of $2.85 million in Learn365RI funding that will support out-of-school math-focused programming statewide. Our intention is to build on the success of our nationally recognized Attendance Matters RI campaign and continue our work to improve academic achievement across the Ocean State.”
“Providing our students with the tools and support they need to excel in math is an investment in both their future and the future of Providence,” saidMayor Brett P. Smiley.“Strong math skills create pathways to higher education and careers in high-demand industries, strengthening our local workforce and economy. We are pleased to partner with the State to expand access to high-quality learning opportunities. By working together, we can ensure that every student has the foundation to reach their full potential and succeed for years to come.”
“While some of our students are seeing positive momentum in math and have rebounded past pre-pandemic levels of achievement, we have to double down on our efforts to promote math to help all students get back on track,” said Commissioner Angélica Infante-Green. “RIDE is working diligently to expand access to high-quality math instruction for students and math-focused professional learning for teachers, and we know that the funds made available to communities through the Governor’s Learn365RI initiative will complement and strengthen our efforts to improve math understanding and skills. RIDE is excited to kick off the Math Matters RI campaign alongside math teachers, coaches, champions, and representatives from cities and towns throughout Rhode Island.”
Funding for the third round of Learn365RI Municipal Learning Project grants has been aligned to the Math Matters RI campaign and will support out-of-school time learning programs with an explicit focus on math programs for students currently enrolled in kindergarten through grade 8. The program’s grant recipients may offer April break math camps, intensive afterschool and/or weekend math programming, and/or a four (or more)-week summer program.
State leaders emphasized the need to focus on improving math instruction and learning, citing positive trends in math RICAS results that have rebounded past pre-pandemic levels of achievement with 30.1% of students meeting or exceeding expectations in 2023-2024 results compared to 29.8% in 2018-2019. However, math SAT results remain below pre-pandemic levels, with 21.7% of secondary students meeting and exceeding expectations compared to 31.2% in 2018-2019. At the national level, NAEP, known as the “Nation’s Report Card,” underscored a need to focus on math with 2024 national math scores declining by 5 percentage points in grade 4 and 8 percentage points in grade 8 compared to 2019.
“When our future leaders succeed, Rhode Island succeeds, and I am proud that representatives from across our state are joining to support students reach their highest potential,” said Chair of the Council on Elementary and Secondary Education Patti DiCenso. “A comprehensive, high-quality education opens doors for all students, but we’ve seen that math can serve as a gatekeeper for many. By focusing joint efforts to promote math, we can help expand college and career options for students of all backgrounds.”
As part of the $725,000 State set-aside, $500,000 will help provide math-focused and enrichment courses through EnrollRI.org. The All Course Network (ACN), accessible through EnrollRI, helps students get a head start on postsecondary success, master the skills required of a lifelong learner, and be prepared for jobs in sectors critical to Rhode Island’s future prosperity. ACN courses offer students the opportunity to earn both high school and college credit, offsetting the cost of college tuition, and preparing students for a life without limits. With the goal of supporting college and career readiness, last December state leaders announced a new partnership with Khan Academy, offering a no-cost opportunity to all local education agencies (LEAs) to enhance SAT preparation and student success through the integration of Khan Academy Districts and Khanmigo tools.
Providence Public Schools will receive $225,000 of the State set-aside to set up spring recess math programming. PPSD’s math RICAS results show positive trends with 14.7% of students meeting or exceeding expectations in 2023-2024 compared to 11.9% in 2018-2019, prior to the pandemic. PPSD has seen steady increases in math RICAS annually since levels reached their lowest point during the pandemic.
“PPSD is committed to promoting the message that math matters, and we are working hard to expand access to learning opportunities that will boost math outcomes in the capital city,” said Superintendent Montañez. “Since the height of the pandemic, PPSD has made gains in math RICAS every year, and are now above where we were prior to the disruption of COVID-19. We know work remains and we are thankful for the State’s support in helping ensure our students continue to learn and develop their math skills beyond the classroom.”
The new campaign is in alignment with Governor McKee’s goal to meet or beat Massachusetts’ achievement levels by 2030 improving school attendance, boosting FAFSA completion rates, and improving RICAS English Language Arts (ELA) and math scores. To promote greater outcomes, state leaders have made a series of investments to support students and teachers. Notably, last year, the State announced the investment of $5 million in funding for instructional coaching in mathematics and ELA for more than 20 schools and districts across the state, with $4 million going towards staffing and the remaining $1 million going towards accompanying professional development.
“We are all math people, and as a math educator it brings me great joy to see statewide support towards elevating and strengthening math skills across the Ocean State,” said 2023 PAEMST recipient Kerry Johnson. “We can all learn and thrive in math if given the right support and I join the chorus of Rhode Island officials, teachers, parents, and business and community partners proudly saying that math matters!”
A spontaneous memorial of flowers in St Petersburg, Russia, on the day of Alexei Navalny’s death, February 16 2024.Aleksey Dushutin/Shutterstock
This is the best day of the past five months for me … This is my home … I am not afraid of anything and I urge you not to be afraid of anything either.
These were Alexei Navalny’s words after landing at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport on January 17 2021. Russia’s leading opposition figure had spent the past months recovering in Germany from an attempt on his life by the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB). Minutes after making his comments, Navalny was detained at border control. And he would remain behind bars until his death on February 16 2024, in the remote “Polar Wolf” penal colony within the Arctic Circle.
“Why did he return to Russia?” That’s the question I’m asked about Navalny most frequently. Wasn’t it a mistake to return to certain imprisonment, when he could have maintained his opposition to Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, from abroad?
But Navalny’s decision to return didn’t surprise me. I’ve researched and written about him extensively, including co-authoring Navalny: Putin’s Nemesis, Russia’s Future?, the first English-language, book-length account of his life and political activities. Defying the Kremlin by returning was a signature move, reflecting both his obstinacy and bravery. He wanted to make sure his supporters and activists in Russia did not feel abandoned, risking their lives while he lived a cushy life in exile.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Besides, Navalny wasn’t returning to certain imprisonment. A close ally of his, Vladimir Ashurkov, told me in May 2022 that his “incarceration in Russia was not a certainty. It was a probability, a scenario – but it wasn’t like he was walking into a certain long-term prison term.”
Also, Navalny hadn’t chosen to leave Russia in the first place. He was unconscious when taken by plane from Omsk to Berlin for treatment following his poisoning with the nerve agent Novichok in August 2020. Navalny had been consistent in saying he was a Russian politician who needed to remain in Russia to be effective.
In a subsequent interview, conducted in a forest on the outskirts of the German capital as he slowly recovered, Navalny said: “In people’s minds, if you leave the country, that means you’ve surrendered.”
Video: ACF.
Outrage, detention and death
Two days after Navalny’s final return to Russia, the Anti-Corruption Foundation (ACF) – the organisation he established in 2011 – published its biggest ever investigation. The YouTube video exploring “Putin’s palace” on the Black Sea coast achieved an extraordinary 100 million views within ten days. By the start of February 2021, polling suggested it had been watched by more than a quarter of all adults in Russia.
Outrage at Navalny’s detention, combined with this Putin investigation, got people on to the streets. On January 23 2021, 160,000 people turned out across Russia in events that did not have prior approval from the authorities. More than 40% of the participants said they were taking part in a protest for the first time.
But the Russian authorities were determined to also make it their last time. Law enforcement mounted an awesome display of strength, detaining protesters and sometimes beating them. The number of participants at protests on January 31 and February 2 declined sharply as a result.
Between Navalny’s return to Russia in January 2021 and his death in February 2024, aged 47, he faced criminal case after criminal case, adding years and years to his time in prison and increasing the severity of his detention. By the time of his death, he was in the harshest type of prison in the Russian penitentiary system – a “special regime” colony – and was frequently sent to a punishment cell.
The obvious intent was to demoralise Navalny, his team and supporters – making an example of him to spread fear among anyone else who might consider mounting a challenge to the Kremlin. But Navalny fought back, as described in his posthumously published memoir, Patriot. He made legal challenges against his jailers. He went on hunger strike. And he formed a union for his fellow prisoners.
He also used his court appearances to make clear his political views, including following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, declaring: “I am against this war. I consider it immoral, fratricidal, and criminal.”
Navalny’s final public appearance was via video link. He was in good spirits, with his trademark optimism and humour still on display. Tongue firmly in cheek, he asked the judge for financial help:
Your Honour, I will send you my personal account number so that you can use your huge salary as a federal judge to ‘warm up’ my personal account, because I am running out of money.
Navalny died the following day. According to the prison authorities, he collapsed after a short walk and lost consciousness. Although the Russian authorities claimed he had died of natural causes, documents published in September 2024 by The Insider – a Russia-focused, Latvia-based independent investigative website – suggest Navalny may have been poisoned.
A mourner adds her tribute to Alexei Navalny’s grave in Moscow after his burial on March 1 2024. Aleksey Dushutin/Shutterstock
Whether or not Putin directly ordered his death, Russia’s president bears responsibility – for leading a system that tried to assassinate Navalny in August 2020, and for allowing his imprisonment following Navalny’s return to Russia in conditions designed to crush him.
Commenting in March 2024, Putin stated that, just days before Navalny’s death, he had agreed for his most vocal opponent to be included in a prisoner swap – on condition the opposition figure never returned to Russia. “But, unfortunately,” Putin added, “what happened, happened.”
‘No one will forget’
Putin is afraid of Alexei, even after he killed him.
Yulia Navalnaya, Navalny’s wife, wrote these words on January 10 2025 after reading a curious letter. His mother, Lyudmila Navalnaya, had written to Rosfinmonitoring – a Russian state body – with a request for her son’s name to be removed from their list of “extremists and terrorists” now he was no longer alive.
The official response was straight from Kafka. Navalny’s name could not be removed as it had been added following the initiation of a criminal case against him. Even though he was dead, Rosfinmonitoring had not been informed about a termination of the case “in accordance with the procedure established by law”, so his name would have to remain.
This appears to be yet another instance of the Russian state exercising cruelty behind the veil of bureaucratic legality – such as when the prison authorities initially refused to release Navalny’s body to his mother after his death.
“Putin is doing this to scare you,” Yulia continued. “He wants you to be afraid to even mention Alexei, and gradually to forget his name. But no one will forget.”
Alexei Navalny and his wife, Yulia Navalnaya, at a protest rally in Moscow, May 2012. Dmitry Laudin/Shutterstock
Today, Navalny’s family and team continue his work outside of Russia – and are fighting to keep his name alive back home. But the odds are against them. Polling suggests the share of Russians who say they know nothing about Navalny or his activities roughly doubled to 30% between his return in January 2021 and his death three years later.
Navalny fought against an autocratic system – and paid the price with his life. Given the very real fears Russians may have of voicing support for a man still labelled an extremist by the Putin regime, it’s not easy to assess what people there really think of him and his legacy. But we will also never know how popular Navalny would have been in the “normal” political system he fought for.
What made Navalny the force he was?
Navalny didn’t mean for the humble yellow rubber duck to become such a potent symbol of resistance.
In March 2017, the ACF published its latest investigation into elite corruption, this time focusing on then-prime minister (and former president), Dmitry Medvedev. Navalny’s team members had become masters of producing slick videos that enabled their message to reach a broad audience. A week after posting, the film had racked up over 7 million views on YouTube – an extraordinary number at that time.
The film included shocking details of Medvedev’s alleged avarice, including yachts and luxury properties. In the centre of a large pond in one of these properties was a duck house, footage of which was captured by the ACF using a drone.
Video: ACF.
Such luxuries jarred with many people’s view of Medvedev as being a bit different to Putin and his cronies. As Navalny wrote in his memoir, Medvedev had previously seemed “harmless and incongruous”. (At the time, Medvedev’s spokeswoman said it was “pointless” to comment on the ACF investigation, suggesting the report was a “propaganda attack from an opposition figure and a convict”.)
But people were angry, and the report triggered mass street protests across Russia. They carried yellow ducks and trainers, a second unintended symbol from the film given Medvedev’s penchant for them.
Another reason why so many people came out to protest on March 26 2017 was the organising work carried out by Navalny’s movement.
The previous December, Navalny had announced his intention to run in the 2018 presidential election. As part of the campaign, he and his team created a network of regional headquarters to bring together supporters and train activists across Russia. Although the authorities had rejected Navalny’s efforts to register an official political party, this regional network functioned in much the same way, gathering like-minded people in support of an electoral candidate. And this infrastructure helped get people out on the streets.
The Kremlin saw this as a clear threat. According to a December 2020 investigation by Bellingcat, CNN, Der Spiegel and The Insider, the FSB assassination squad implicated in the Novichok poisoning of Navalny had started trailing him in January 2017 – one month after he announced his run for the presidency.
At the protests against Medvedev, the authorities’ growing intolerance of Navalny was also on display – he was detained, fined and sentenced to 15 days’ imprisonment.
The Medvedev investigation was far from the beginning of Navalny’s story as a thorn in the Kremlin’s side. But this episode brings together all of the elements that made Navalny the force he was: anti-corruption activism, protest mobilisation, attempts to run as a “normal” politician in a system rigged against him, and savvy use of social media to raise his profile in all of these domains.
Courting controversy
In Patriot, Navalny writes that he always “felt sure a broad coalition was needed to fight Putin”. Yet over the years, his attempts to form that coalition led to some of the most controversial points of his political career.
In a 2007 video, Navalny referred to himself as a “certified nationalist”, advocating for the deportation of illegal immigrants, albeit without using violence and distancing himself from neo-Nazism. In the video, he says: “We have the right to be Russians in Russia, and we’ll defend that right.”
Although alienating some, Navalny was attempting to present a more acceptable face of nationalism, and he hoped to build a bridge between nationalists and liberals in taking on the Kremlin’s burgeoning authoritarianism.
But the prominence of nationalism in Navalny’s political identity varied markedly over time, probably reflecting his shifting estimations of which platform could attract the largest support within Russia. By the time of his thwarted run in the 2018 presidential election, nationalist talking points were all but absent from his rhetoric.
However, some of these former comments and positions continue to influence how people view him. For example, following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, Navalny tried to take a pragmatic stance. While acknowledging Russia’s flouting of international law, he said that Crimea was “now part of the Russian Federation” and would “never become part of Ukraine in the foreseeable future”.
Many Ukrainians take this as clear evidence that Navalny was a Russian imperialist. Though he later revised his position, saying Crimea should be returned to Ukraine, some saw this as too little, too late. But others were willing to look past the more controversial parts of his biography, recognising that Navalny represented the most effective domestic challenge to Putin.
Another key attempt to build a broad political coalition was Navalny’s Smart Voting initiative. This was a tactical voting project in which Navalny’s team encouraged voters to back the individual thought best-placed to defeat the ruling United Russia candidate, regardless of the challenger’s ideological position.
The project wasn’t met with universal approval. Some opposition figures and voters baulked at, or flatly refused to consider, the idea of voting for people whose ideological positions they found repugnant – or whom they viewed as being “fake” opposition figures, entirely in bed with the authorities. (This makes clear that Navalny was never the leader of the political opposition in Russia; he was, rather, the leading figure of a fractious constellation of individuals and groups.)
But others relished the opportunity to make rigged elections work in their favour. And there is evidence that Smart Voting did sometimes work, including in the September 2020 regional and local elections, for which Navalny had been campaigning when he was poisoned with Novichok.
In an astonishing moment captured on film during his recovery in Germany, Navalny speaks to an alleged member of the FSB squad sent to kill him. Pretending to be the aide to a senior FSB official, Navalny finds out that the nerve agent had been placed in his underpants.
How do Russians feel about Navalny now?
It’s like a member of the family has died.
This is what one Russian friend told me after hearing of Navalny’s death a year ago. Soon afterwards, the Levada Center – an independent Russian polling organisation – conducted a nationally representative survey to gauge the public’s reaction to the news.
The poll found that Navalny’s death was the second-most mentioned event by Russian people that month, after the capture of the Ukrainian city of Avdiivka by Russian troops. But when asked how they felt about his death, 69% of respondents said they had “no particular feelings” either way – while only 17% said they felt “sympathy” or “pity”.
And that broadly fits with Navalny’s approval ratings in Russia. After his poisoning in 2020, 20% of Russians said they approved of his activities – but this was down to 11% by February 2024.
Video: BBC.
Of course, these numbers must be taken for what they are: polling in an authoritarian state regarding a figure vilified and imprisoned by the regime, during a time of war and amid draconian restrictions on free speech. To what extent the drop in support for Navalny was real, rather than reflecting the increased fear people had in voicing their approval for an anti-regime figure, is hard to say with certainty.
When asked why they liked Navalny, 31% of those who approved of his activities said he spoke “the truth”, “honestly” or “directly”. For those who did not approve of his activities, 22% said he was “paid by the west”, “represented” the west’s interests, that he was a “foreign agent”, a “traitor” or a “puppet”.
The Kremlin had long tried to discredit Navalny as a western-backed traitor. After Navalny’s 2020 poisoning, Putin’s spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, said that “experts from the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency are working with him”. The Russian state claimed that, rather than a patriot exposing official malfeasance with a view to strengthening his country, Navalny was a CIA stooge intent on destroying Russia.
Peskov provided no evidence to back up this claim – and the official propaganda wasn’t believed by all. Thousands of Russians defied the authorities by coming out to pay their respects at Navalny’s funeral on March 1 2024. Many, if not all, knew this was a significant risk. Police employed video footage to track down members of the funeral crowd, including by using facial recognition technology.
The first person to be detained was a Muscovite the police claimed they heard shouting “Glory to the heroes!” – a traditional Ukrainian response to the declaration “Glory to Ukraine!”, but this time referencing Navalny. She spent a night in a police station before being fined for “displaying a banned symbol”.
Putin always avoided mentioning Navalny’s name in public while he was alive – instead referring to him as “this gentleman”, “the character you mentioned”, or the “Berlin patient”. (The only recorded instance of Putin using Navalny’s name in public when he was alive was in 2013.)
However, having been re-elected president in 2024 and with Navalny dead, Putin finally broke his long-held practice, saying: “As for Navalny, yes he passed away – this is always a sad event.” It was as if the death of his nemesis diminished the potency of his name – and the challenge that Navalny had long presented to Putin.
Nobody can become another Navalny
Someone else will rise up and take my place. I haven’t done anything unique or difficult. Anyone could do what I’ve done.
So wrote Navalny in the memoir published after his death. But that hasn’t happened: no Navalny 2.0 has yet emerged. And it’s no real surprise. The Kremlin has taken clear steps to ensure nobody can become another Navalny within Russia.
In 2021, the authorities made a clear decision to destroy Navalny’s organisations within Russia, including the ACF and his regional network. Without the organisational infrastructure and legal ability to function in Russia, no figure has been able to take his place directly.
More broadly, the fate of Navalny and his movement has had a chilling effect on the opposition landscape. So too have other steps taken by the authorities.
Russia has become markedly more repressive since the start of its war on Ukraine. The human rights NGO First Department looked into the number of cases relating to “treason”, “espionage” and “confidential cooperation with a foreign state” since Russia introduced the current version of its criminal code in 1997. Of the more than 1,000 cases, 792 – the vast majority – were initiated following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Russian law enforcement has also used nebulous anti-extremism and anti-terrorism legislation to crack down on dissenting voices. Three of Navalny’s lawyers were sentenced in January 2025 for participating in an “extremist organisation”, as the ACF was designated by a Moscow court in June 2021. The Russian legislature has also passed a barrage of legislation relating to so-called “foreign agents”, to tarnish the work of those the regime regards as foreign-backed “fifth columnists”.
Mass street protests are largely a thing of the past in Russia. Restrictions were placed on public gatherings during the COVID pandemic – but these rules were applied selectively, with opposition individuals and groups being targeted. And opportunities for collective action were further reduced following the full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Freedom of speech has also come under assault. Article 29, point five of the Russian constitution states: “Censorship shall be prohibited.” But in September 2024, Kremlin spokesperson Peskov said: “In the state of war that we are in, restrictions are justified, and censorship is justified.”
Legislation passed very soon after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine made it illegal to comment on the Russian military’s activities truthfully – and even to call the war a war.
YouTube – the platform so central to Navalny’s ability to spread his message – has been targeted. Without banning it outright – perhaps afraid of the public backlash this might cause – the Russian state media regulator, Roskomnadzor, has slowed down internet traffic to the site within Russia. The result has been a move of users to other websites supporting video content, including VKontakte – a Russian social media platform.
In short, conditions in Russia are very different now compared to when Navalny first emerged. The relative freedom of the 2000s and 2010s gave him the space to challenge the corruption and authoritarianism of an evolving system headed by Putin. But this space has shrunk over time, to the point where no room remains for a figure like him within Russia.
In 2019, Navalny told Ivan Zhdanov, who is now director of the ACF: “We changed the regime, but not in the way we wanted.” So, did Navalny and his team push the Kremlin to become more authoritarian – making it not only intolerant of him but also any possible successor?
There may be some truth in this. And yet, the drastic steps taken by the regime following the start of the war on Ukraine suggest there were other, even more significant factors that have laid bare the violent nature of Putin’s personal autocracy – and the president’s disdain for dissenters.
Plenty for Russians to be angry about
How can we win the war when dedushka [grandpa] is a moron?
In June 2023, Evgeny Prigozhin – a long-time associate of Putin and head of the private military Wagner Group – staged an armed rebellion, marching his forces on the Russian capital. This was not a full-blown political movement against Putin. But the target of Prigozhin’s invective against Russia’s military leadership had become increasingly blurry, testing the taboo of direct criticism of the president – who is sometimes referred to, disparagingly, as “grandpa” in Russia.
And Prigozhin paid the price. In August 2023, he was killed when the private jet he was flying in crashed after an explosion on board. Afterwards, Putin referred to Prigozhin as a “talented person” who “made serious mistakes in life”.
In the west, opposition to the Kremlin is often associated with more liberal figures like Navalny. Yet the most consequential domestic challenge to Putin’s rule came from a very different part of the ideological spectrum – a figure in Prigozhin leading a segment of Russian society that wanted the Kremlin to prosecute its war on Ukraine even more aggressively.
Video: BBC.
Today, there is plenty for Russians to be angry about, and Putin knows it. He recently acknowledged an “overheating of the economy”. This has resulted in high inflation, in part due to all the resources being channelled into supporting the war effort. Such cost-of-living concerns weigh more heavily than the war on the minds of most Russians.
A favourite talking point of the Kremlin is how Putin imposed order in Russia following the “wild 1990s” – characterised by economic turbulence and symbolised by then-president Boris Yeltsin’s public drunkenness. Many Russians attribute the stability and rise in living standards they experienced in the 2000s with Putin’s rule – and thank him for it by providing support for his continued leadership.
The current economic problems are an acute worry for the Kremlin because they jeopardise this basic social contract struck with the Russian people. In fact, one way the Kremlin tried to discredit Navalny was by comparing him with Yeltsin, suggesting he posed the same threats as a failed reformer. In his memoir, Navalny concedes that “few things get under my skin more”.
Although originally a fan of Yeltsin, Navalny became an ardent critic. His argument was that Yeltsin and those around him squandered the opportunity to make Russia a “normal” European country.
Navalny also wanted Russians to feel entitled to more. Rather than be content with their relative living standards compared with the early post-Soviet period, he encouraged them to imagine the level of wealth citizens could enjoy based on Russia’s extraordinary resources – but with the rule of law, less corruption, and real democratic processes.
‘Think of other possible Russias’
When looking at forms of criticism and dissent in Russia today, we need to distinguish between anti-war, anti-government, and anti-Putin activities.
Despite the risk of harsh consequences, there are daily forms of anti-war resistance, including arson attacks on military enlistment offices. Some are orchestrated from Ukraine, with Russians blackmailed into acting. But other cases are likely to be forms of domestic resistance.
Criticism of the government is still sometimes possible, largely because Russia has a “dual executive” system, consisting of a prime minister and presidency. This allows the much more powerful presidency to deflect blame to the government when things go wrong.
There are nominal opposition parties in Russia – sometimes referred to as the “systemic opposition”, because they are loyal to the Kremlin and therefore tolerated by the system. Within the State Duma, these parties often criticise particular government ministries for apparent failings. But they rarely, if ever, now dare criticise Putin directly.
Nothing anywhere close to the challenge presented by Navalny appears on the horizon in Russia – at either end of the political spectrum. But the presence of clear popular grievances, and the existence of organisations (albeit not Navalny’s) that could channel this anger should the Kremlin’s grip loosen, mean we cannot write off all opposition in Russia.
Navalny’s wife, Yulia, has vowed to continue her husband’s work. And his team in exile maintain focus on elite corruption in Russia, now from their base in Vilnius, Lithuania. The ACF’s most recent investigation is on Igor Sechin, CEO of the oil company Rosneft.
But some have argued this work is no longer as relevant as it was. Sam Greene, professor in Russian politics at King’s College London, captured this doubt in a recent Substack post:
[T]here is a palpable sense that these sorts of investigations may not be relevant to as many people as they used to be, given everything that has transpired since the mid-2010s, when they were the bread and butter of the Anti-Corruption Foundation. Some … have gone as far as to suggest that they have become effectively meaningless … and thus that Team Navalny should move on.
Navalny’s team are understandably irritated by suggestions they’re no longer as effective as they once were. But it’s important to note that this criticism has often been sharpest within Russia’s liberal opposition. The ACF has been rocked, for example, by recent accusations from Maxim Katz, one such liberal opposition figure, that the organisation helped “launder the reputations” of two former bank owners. In their response, posted on YouTube, the ACF referred to Katz’s accusations as “lies” – but this continued squabbling has left some Russians feeling “disillusioned and unrepresented”.
So, what will Navalny’s long-term legacy be? Patriot includes a revealing section on Mikhail Gorbachev – the last leader of the Soviet Union, whom Navalny describes as “unpopular in Russia, and also in our family”. He continues:
Usually, when you tell foreigners this, they are very surprised, because Gorbachev is thought of as the person who gave Eastern Europe back its freedom and thanks to whom Germany was reunited. Of course, that is true … but within Russia and the USSR he was not particularly liked.
At the moment, there is a similar split in perceptions of Navalny. Internationally, he was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, awarded the Sakharov Prize by the European Parliament, and a documentary about him won an Oscar.
But there are also those outside of Russia who remain critical: “Navalny’s life has brought no benefit to the Ukrainian victory; instead, he has caused considerable harm,” wrote one Ukrainian academic. “He fuelled the illusion in the west that democracy in Russia is possible.”
Trailer for the Oscar-winning documentary Navalny.
Inside Russia, according to Levada Center polling shortly after his death, 53% of Russians thought Navalny played “no special role” in the history of the country, while 19% said he played a “rather negative” role. Revealingly, when commenting on Navalny’s death, one man in Moscow told RFE/RL’s Russian Service: “I think that everyone who is against Russia is guilty, even if they are right.”
But, for a small minority in Russia, Navalny will go down as a messiah-like figure who miraculously cheated death in 2020, then made the ultimate sacrifice in his battle of good and evil with the Kremlin. This view may have been reinforced by Navalny’s increasing openness about his Christian faith.
Ultimately, Navalny’s long-term status in Russia will depend on the nature of the political system after Putin has gone. Since it seems likely that authoritarianism will outlast Putin, a more favourable official story about Navalny is unlikely to emerge any time soon. However, how any post-Putin regime tries to make sense of Navalny’s legacy will tell us a lot about that regime.
While he was alive, Navalny stood for the freer Russia in which he had emerged as a leading opposition figure – and also what he called the “Beautiful Russia of the Future”. Perhaps, after his death, his lasting legacy in Russia remains the ability for some to think – if only in private – of other possible Russias.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Ben Noble has previously received funding from the British Academy and the Leverhulme Trust. He is an Associate Fellow of Chatham House.
European defence ministers left their meeting in Brussels on February 12 in shock after the new US secretary of defence, Pete Hegseth, told them they could no longer rely on the US to guarantee their security.
Hegseth said he was there “to directly and unambiguously express that stark strategic realities prevent the United States of America from being primarily focused on the security of Europe”.
He also insisted that European countries provide the “overwhelming” share of funding for Ukraine in the future. The US has been the biggest source of military aid to Ukraine, with its weapons, equipment and financial assistance crucial in helping Kyiv resist the Russian invasion.
Hegseth’s comments are in keeping with the stance of the US president, Donald Trump, on the Nato transatlantic military alliance. Trump sees Nato as an excessive financial burden on the US and has repeatedly called on its members to increase their defence spending.
But Hegseth’s remarks could also be seen as a sign of America’s waning commitment to the terms of Nato’s founding treaty. Signed in 1949 by the US, Canada and several western European nations, Article 5 of the treaty requires member states to defend each other in the event of an armed attack.
The US has the largest military – and the biggest stockpile of nuclear weapons – in Nato. So, on the face of it, efforts to recast the alliance appear a drastic shift in Europe’s security landscape in the post-cold war era.
However, those familiar with the political sentiment around Nato and the defence of Europe in the US will see that this move follows in the footsteps of what others have sought to do – starting from the very end of the cold war.
Changing over time
In 1991, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Nato was under considerable pressure to change for the new world order. A rising China was not yet on the minds of many in Washington, but the feeling was that the financial commitments the US had made to defend western Europe during the cold war could not continue.
The so-called “peace dividend”, a slogan popularised by former US president George H.W. Bush and former UK prime minister Margaret Thatcher, allowed nearly all Nato states to reduce their military spending at this time.
In 1992, almost as soon as European Nato countries were shrinking their forces and moving away from mass armies to professional soldiering, the alliance became actively engaged in maintaining a no-fly zone over Yugoslavia.
A new Nato was becoming apparent. It was transitioning from being a collective defence organisation to one of collective security, where conflicts were managed on Nato’s borders.
This collective security arrangement worked well to keep the alliance together until 2001, when the administration of George W. Bush entered the White House and involved the US in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the US, Nato invoked Article 5 and returned to the principle of collective defence.
Many European countries, including the new, smaller Nato states like Estonia and Latvia, sent troops to Iraq and Afghanistan. The persistent justification I heard in the Baltic states was “we need to be there when the US needs us so that they will be there when we need them”.
Yet in 2011, before the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were over, the administration of Barack Obama introduced a foreign policy strategy known as the “pivot to Asia”. The implication was that the US would shift its attention from primarily the western hemisphere to China.
By this point, China had become the second-largest economy in the world and was rapidly developing its military. The reaction to this US policy shift in European capitals was one of shock and disappointment. They saw it as the US deciding that its own security did not sit in Europe like it had since 1945.
Then, in 2014, Russia invaded Crimea and the Donbas in eastern Ukraine. The pivot to Asia looked like it had stalled. But US interest and investment in European defence continued to decline, with American military bases across Europe closed down. The first Trump administration continued the pattern set by Obama.
President Joe Biden, who entered office in 2021, used Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 to show European leaders that the US still saw its own security in Europe and that it would stand beside Ukraine.
But the US continued to insist that European countries invest in their own defence. The UK, Poland and France have all committed to increase their defence spending over recent years – though spending by European Nato states as a whole continued to fall.
There has been a long-held belief in the US that Europe is “freeriding” on American power. While the US saw its own security in Europe, this freeriding was allowed to continue.
But as the perspective of the US has changed, with the focus now on countering China, it has been keen to suggest that European defence should increasingly become the job of Europe itself.
Nato will not go out with a bang. It is much more likely to gradually disappear with a whimper. After all, who did Trump meet on his second day in office? Not Nato but the Quad: an alliance between Australia, India, Japan and the US in the Indo-Pacific.
David J. Galbreath has received research funding from the UKRI.
Check against delivery.
1 Introduction
Ladies and gentlemen,
I am delighted to be here with you today. What better place than Glasgow to discuss the economic impacts of climate change and the green transition! And not just because it played host to the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference.
Glasgow is also where Adam Smith, the father of modern economics, studied and taught as a professor. Have you ever wondered what he would have thought of climate change? As a famed free-market economist, he might not be the first person you would think of. But even Adam Smith acknowledged that the invisible hand can sometimes lead to suboptimal outcomes.
Climate change is a prime example of this: market prices do not reflect the negative side effects of greenhouse gas emissions. Fortunately, it is now widely acknowledged that governments need to intervene and encourage individuals and companies to reduce their emissions.
Switching to a net-zero emissions economy is a major task. It requires changes in behaviour, innovation and significant investment to rebuild our capital stock. And this transition requires significant financing.
In my speech, I will explore what financing the transition to a greenhouse gas-neutral economy could look like. More specifically, I will focus on two key issues. First, how much investment is needed to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality, and how much of this investment is “additional”? Second, what could the financing mix to fund this investment look like?
I know that answering these questions seems like a tough challenge – a taughy fleece tae scoor. But I will do my best to illustrate my points with clear, practical examples. Along the way, I will discuss electric cars and heating systems to help us understand the issues.
My remarks will focus on the European Union (EU), borrowing some detailed insights from Germany. Unfortunately, these data do not cover the United Kingdom (UK). But I will do my best to infer some insights for the UK as well.
2 How much needs to be invested?
Let me start with the question of how much the EU needs to invest to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality. The EU’s Fit for 55 package aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55 per cent by 2030. These reductions are benchmarked against 1990 emission levels. This is an intermediate step towards full greenhouse gas neutrality, for which the EU still needs to pass legislation.
From 2021 to 2030, the European Commission estimates that EU countries need to invest over €1.2 trillion annually.[1] This amounts to nearly 8 per cent of the EU’s GDP. The private sector must take on the bulk of these investments. The investment needs are significantly more than the actual annual investment of €760 billion in the previous decade.
The European Commission defines the difference between the investment required and the actual investment as the “additional” investment need. This additional investment need amounts to €480 billion, or around 3 per cent of GDP.
This definition of “additional” investment is very useful from an accounting perspective. It gives a clear picture of how much more the EU needs to invest to meet its climate goals. However, from a financing perspective, it helps to define additional investment differently.
There are two types of investment needed to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality. The first type is investment that would not happen without the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. A prime example of this type of investment is technology to capture and store carbon dioxide. This technology will play a crucial role in sectors that are difficult to decarbonise. These investments need economic resources and financing beyond what an economy spends just to maintain its capital stock.
The second type is investment where a greenhouse gas-neutral alternative replaces a fossil fuel-based technology. To illustrate this point, imagine two households buying a new car. The Jones family spend €45,000 on a new combustion engine car. From a technical perspective, the Jones family are making a replacement investment. No additional financing is needed. Meanwhile, the Smith family decide to switch from a combustion engine car to an electric vehicle. Let us say a comparable electric car costs €50,000. Of this amount, €45,000 is a replacement investment. Only the remaining €5,000 requires additional financing.
Contrast this with how the European Commission defines additional investment: They subtract the annual average value of electric cars bought in the past from the value of electric vehicles needed to meet the EU’s intermediate greenhouse gas reduction goals. Past registrations of electric vehicles fell significantly short of what is needed. Accordingly, the additional investments, as defined by the European Commission’s accounting perspective, are presumably much higher than the additional financing needs.
How great could the additional financing needs be? While we do not yet have specific figures for the EU, there are some numbers for Germany. A recent study estimates that Germany needs to invest around €390 billion annually from 2021 to 2030 to reduce emissions by 65 per cent compared to 1990.[2] They measure this absolute sum in 2020 prices. Relative to GDP, the investment amounts to 11 per cent.
This is fairly close to the 8 per cent investment needs calculated by the European Commission for the EU.[3] However, only around 30 per cent of this investment requires additional financing. In absolute terms, this amounts to about €120 billion.
Let me pause for a moment to summarise the two key takeaways from my remarks so far. First, the transition to greenhouse gas neutrality calls for significant investment. However, in many cases, we are replacing fossil-based technologies with greenhouse gas-neutral alternatives. Accordingly, the additional financing needs are much smaller and seem manageable.
Second, we can minimise the additional financing needs by replacing already largely depreciated capital stock. By contrast, replacing relatively new capital stock that has barely depreciated would increase the economic and financial costs. Let me illustrate this point with a brief anecdote.
On 1 January 2024, the German government introduced a new law governing heating systems. In German, it is known by the beautiful name “Gebäudeenergiegesetz”. This law mandates that heating systems use around two-thirds renewable energy. In anticipation of this new law, many households replaced their old gas heating systems with new ones. These heating systems can run for around 25 years, so they depreciate over a long period.
Bad luck if you just installed a new gas heating system and live in the German city of Mannheim. Here, the local gas provider has said it intends to stop its services in 2035. This means that a long-term investment will become unviable when little more than half of it has depreciated: A waste of both financial and economic resources.
This anecdote highlights one key point: to avoid wasting money, we need a clear and reliable path to greenhouse gas neutrality. With a clear path mapped out, people can confidently invest in the transition.
3 What could the financing mix look like?
Now, let us explore what the potential financing mix could look like. To achieve a greenhouse gas-neutral economy, households, firms and the public sector all need to invest. They can fund these investments using both internal and external sources.
As the name would suggest, internal financing comes from within. Like the Smith family putting aside some of their income to pay for their new car. Or think of a firm that sells its products and saves some of the profits. That is internal financing, too. External financing, on the other hand, comes from outside sources such as banks or investors.
Regarding their financing mix, households, non-financial firms and the public sector differ considerably. Households tend to save significantly and mainly use bank loans as a source of external finance. The public sector, on the other hand, raises most of its funds from external sources by issuing debt securities. Only firms have a more diversified financing mix. Equity and bank loans play prominent roles here. Note that these observations hold for the EU, the UK and Germany alike.
So, what might the financing mix for the transition to a greenhouse gas-neutral economy look like? To estimate these figures, we need two key components: First, the respective shares of households, firms and the public sector in total investment. According to rough estimates by Bundesbank staff for Germany, households might have to cover about one-third of the investment, the public sector around 20 per cent, and firms just under half.[4]
Second, estimates for the future financing structure of the sectors. We assume that future financing structures will remain unchanged from today.[5] This implies that past financing structures are suitable for future climate investment. If this were not the case, perhaps due to the need for innovative financing instruments, the financing structure may differ.
What result do we get when we combine the two components? For Germany, we estimate that about 20 per cent of the financing mix could come from internal financing, primarily household savings. In terms of external financing, bank loans might play the largest role. They account for over one-quarter of the estimated financing mix. Households in particular obtain almost all their external financing from banks.
The second-largest external financing source could be debt securities, accounting for around 20 per cent. The public sector plays a prominent role here, with funding coming almost exclusively from bonds. Finally, the third-largest external financing source could be equity financing, comprising around one-sixth. Firms are the only users of this financing source, as households and the public sector do not issue equity. Different instruments, like loans from non-bank financial intermediaries, might cover the final sixth of the overall investment needs.
So, what does this mean for the EU and the UK? Can the findings for Germany be generalised? Fortunately, the financing structures of households, firms and governments are largely comparable across these regions.[6] Therefore, one of the two components in the calculations is roughly equal.
The second component – the sectoral investment needs – is less certain. I am not aware of any studies for the EU or the UK that divide the investment needs across households, firms and the public sector.[7] Without a better alternative, the findings for Germany may provide a reasonable initial estimate for both the EU and the UK.
4 Concluding remarks
Let me summarise and conclude. I have three main takeaways to share.
First, “additional” investment needs to become greenhouse gas-neutral can also be defined from a financing perspective. In many cases, we are replacing fossil fuel-based technologies with greenhouse gas-neutral alternatives. And this requires additional financing only if greenhouse gas-neutral technologies are more expensive or if the capital stock being replaced is not yet fully depreciated. The additional financing needs are significantly smaller than the total investment required. Accordingly, I am confident that our financial system can mobilise the necessary financing.
Second, banks may play a larger role in financing the climate transition than is commonly anticipated. The main reason for this conclusion is that a substantial portion of climate investments falls on households. They need to make their homes more energy-efficient and replace fossil-fuelled heating systems with greenhouse gas-neutral alternatives. And households simply do not have many viable alternatives to bank loans.
Accordingly, a robust banking system is essential for achieving greenhouse gas neutrality. That is why we at the Bundesbank are committed to completing the European banking union. However, we also need to improve access to alternative financing sources. Non-financial firms, in particular, would greatly benefit from better capital market financing. That is why we at the Bundesbank are dedicated to creating a European capital markets union.
Third, legislators can minimise the additional financing needs by ensuring that the path to greenhouse gas neutrality is planned stringently and for the long term. Why? Because it provides incentives to avoid investments in fossil fuel technologies that may not be fully depreciated before they become non-viable.
Footnotes:
See European Commission (2023), Investment needs assessment and funding availabilities to strengthen EU’s Net-Zero technology manufacturing capacity, SWD (2023) 68 final.
Kemmler et al. (2024), Klimaschutzinvestitionen für die Transformation des Energiesystems, Prognos. This study is only available in German.
One reason why Germany’s investment needs relative to GDP are higher than the EU’s is that Germany intends to achieve greenhouse gas neutrality sooner (in 2045 rather than 2050).
The estimates are based on the public sector shares provided in Brand and Römer (2022), Öffentliche Investitionsbedarfe zur Erreichung der Klimaneutralität in Deutschland, KfW Research – Fokus Volkswirtschaft, Nr. 395 and various plausibility assumptions. The analysis assumes that the public sector’s involvement in industry and the residential investment sector is minimal or non-existent. This is because the analysis looks at financing flows before any government support, such as subsidies.
More precisely, the financing structure is derived from the average internal and external financing flows over the period 2018 to 2022. This averaging smooths out short-term fluctuations and centres on the reference year of 2020 used in the Kemmler et al (2024) study. Internal financing enters the calculation on a net basis, assuming that the depreciation inflows finance the replacement investments.
In the EU and UK, households rely slightly less on bank loans than in Germany, but the share is still high. In the public sector, Germany has a significantly higher share of debt security financing, particularly compared to the EU. In the UK, non-financial firms have a significantly lower share of equity financing and a higher share of (bank) loans compared to Germany. In contrast, in the EU, non-financial firms have a slightly higher share of equity financing and a smaller share of (bank) loans compared to Germany. All figures are based on average financial flows from 2018 to 2022.
European Commission, op. cit., estimates that, in the EU, the public sector could account for 17 to 20 per cent of total investment. However, it does not clarify how this investment will be split between households and firms. For the UK, HM Government (2023), Mobilising Green Investment – 2023 Green Finance Strategy, mentions that most investment must come from the private sector. However, it likewise does not provide any details on how this investment will be split between households and firms.
London, UK, Feb. 13, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — XRP, the cryptocurrency created by Ripple Labs, has been experiencing a lot of growth lately. Rumors of ETF approval, endorsements from celebrities like Donald Trump, and attention from the U.S. government have made XRP an increasingly attractive asset for investors. As a result, many companies are actively adopting XRP, which is certainly impacting its growth and popularity.
Moonacy Protocol, a platform that allows you to invest in liquidity pools and earn from exchanges, has also added XRP to its ecosystem. Users of the platform can now deposit, withdraw and exchange XRP with maximum convenience. This decision opens up new horizons for Moonacy Protocol users, allowing them to work with an asset that is rapidly gaining popularity. The addition of XRP to the platform significantly increases the number of liquidity pools, thereby opening up many new trading pairs for exchange. This empowers investors and allows them to better capitalize on current market trends, increasing overall liquidity on the platform.
Moonacy Protocol continues to evolve and improve its ecosystem by adding new cryptocurrencies and expanding functionality for investors. With the launch of XRP, the platform opens up new opportunities for its users, making their experience even more profitable and convenient.
Disclaimer: The information provided in this press release is not a solicitation for investment, nor is it intended as investment advice, financial advice, or trading advice. It is strongly recommended you practice due diligence, including consultation with a professional financial advisor, before investing in or trading cryptocurrency and securities.
Lufthansa Technik Canada is establishing a state-of-the-art maintenance and repair facility at Calgary International Airport, specializing in Leading Edge Aviation Propulsion (LEAP) engines. As one of just five certified global operators for these next-generation engines, this $120-million investment positions Alberta at the heart of the global narrow-body aircraft market. This investment is a key catalyst for WestJet to enter into a 15-year, multi-billion-dollar maintenance contract with Lufthansa Technik, which will build and support Alberta’s aviation industry for years to come.
“Alberta’s government is proud to welcome this historic partnership between WestJet and Lufthansa Technik Canada right here in Calgary. This agreement will have a far-reaching impact on our economy and it serves as a testament to the strong levels of investor confidence in our province. Alberta is a place where you can grow your business and thrive into the future. With our low corporate tax rate and highly educated workforce, Alberta continues to be one of the most business-friendly jurisdictions in North America. Today’s investment is further proof of Alberta’s national and international reputation as a leading aerospace and aviation hub.”
“This new, state-of-the-art facility is a major step toward making Calgary and Alberta global leaders in aviation innovation. Our government is proud to partner with the Calgary Airport Authority, industry leaders, and all levels of government to strengthen Canada’s aviation sector. We beat out strong competition to secure this opportunity, showcasing our region’s innovative spirit and commitment to reducing emissions. Together, we’re developing and adopting cutting-edge technologies that will boost the competitiveness of small- and medium-sized businesses across the aviation supply chain.”
Lufthansa Technik Canada is the latest grant recipient of Alberta’s Investment and Growth Fund (IGF), receiving $3 million in provincial funding to build a new aerospace maintenance facility at the Calgary airport. The IGF is one of several investor support services and programs offered by Alberta’s government.
Alberta’s government is also providing $4.45 million through the Aerospace Workforce Development Grant to provide training and employment supports to ensure Lufthansa Technik Canada has the skilled workers it needs to expand into the province. This grant is administered through Calgary Economic Development as part of the Opportunity Calgary Investment Fund to attract investment, drive innovation and spur transformative economic development in the aerospace sector.
Lufthansa’s investment is helping to further diversify Alberta’s economy and create important jobs for hard-working Albertans. Lufthansa Technik Canada’s investment will create up to 160 permanent jobs and up to 170 temporary construction jobs, giving Albertans more access to stable, well-paying jobs in a growing sector. These jobs will span across various roles, from highly skilled technicians to engineers and support staff, catering to the demands of the next-generation LEAP engines. This surge in jobs is taking off at a time when Alberta is diversifying its economy and expanding key industries, making these roles a vital part of the province’s economic growth trajectory.
“Lufthansa Technik Canada’s investment is the latest addition to our growing aviation and aerospace sector. Alberta continues to attract world-class companies like Lufthansa Technik Canada because of its pro-business policies, low taxes and innovative talent. This investment will create hundreds of jobs for hard-working Albertans and further diversify our economy.”
Lufthansa Technik Canada will offer mobile engine maintenance and test cell services at Calgary International Airport, providing Canadian aviation operators with a more cost-effective, efficient alternative to overseas maintenance. This boosts operational efficiency while cutting costs. Its new Calgary facility will contribute to the growth of Alberta’s aerospace and aviation sector and create valuable jobs for Albertans.
“Our agreement with WestJet represents one of the largest awards ever granted to any maintenance, repair and overhaul provider for CFM LEAP engines worldwide. It’s a contract that underlines Lufthansa Technik’s leading position in the support of new generation engine types. At the same time, we are grateful for the strong support from our local allies in Canada, which is essential in advancing the creation of a new engine repair shop and test cell facility in Calgary.”
This investment builds on a memorandum of understanding signed in 2022 between WestJet and Alberta’s government. WestJet committed to make Calgary its global headquarters, with both parties agreeing to work together to grow Alberta’s aerospace and aviation industry – including through attracting important aviation infrastructure investments. The facility is expected to break ground in mid-2025, with completion expected in 2027. WestJet will be Lufthansa Technik Canada’s first customer at the newly created engine maintenance facility, underscoring the partnership’s confidence in local expertise and innovation. WestJet’s request for proposal award was the largest contract in WestJet’s history and the largest award granted to any premier maintenance and repair provider for such engines in the Americas.
“WestJet was founded on the idea of improving air travel and making it affordable for Canadians. This historic contract award will allow us to bring critical engine repair operations home to Canada and provide greater efficiency and cost certainty to a critical part of our operations, all while demonstrating our commitment to improving our competitiveness and supporting the Alberta economy. We are proud to partner with Lufthansa Technik. This is an extraordinary moment for WestJet, our guests, WestJetters, Western Canada’s communities and our suppliers.”
“After years of hard work and collaboration to showcase our city and build connections with industry partners, we are excited to see Lufthansa Technik land in the Blue Sky City. Calgary’s competitive business environment and deep talent pool position us for future growth, and the establishment of Lufthansa Technik’s Western Canada hub in our city proves what’s possible as we continue to establish ourselves as a global aerospace leader.”
“This project is a remarkable example of what can be achieved when our aviation ecosystem and all levels of government come together – Lufthansa Technik as the premier supplier, WestJet as a vital cornerstone customer, critical support from Calgary Economic Development and the Government of Alberta through the Ministry of Jobs, Economy and Trade along with funding from the Calgary Airport Authority, the Canada Infrastructure Bank, Prairies Economic Development Canada and Opportunity Calgary Investment Fund. By building this cutting-edge facility in Calgary, we ensure that WestJet and all Canadian airlines will have access to reliable, cost-effective and efficient maintenance services while building essential infrastructure in engineering, training and enterprise to make Calgary and Alberta a centre of aviation excellence within North America.”
“We are proud to commit $172 million in financing towards infrastructure that supports aviation services at the Calgary International Airport. Our collaboration with the Calgary Airport Authority moves its project from the planning stage into shovels in the ground. The world-class facilities will strengthen Canada’s aviation infrastructure, and bring long-term, high-quality jobs and economic growth to the region.”
Alberta’s government will continue to work with Lufthansa Technik Canada to expand its footprint in Alberta once this project is in operation. With strong government support and a strategic position in the international market, Alberta remains the best place to live, work and invest in the future.
Quick facts
The Investment and Growth Fund (IGF) is designed to be offered in select late-stage investment decisions, when Alberta may be competing with comparable jurisdictions that may offer other benefits or incentives to investors.
Since fall 2021, 12 IGF grants have been announced that will create more than 1,100 permanent full-time jobs and more than 1,100 temporary jobs, with a total capital investment of more than $765 million.
The IGF has helped to secure nearly $29 in private investments for every $1 in IGF funding.
The aviation and aerospace industry in Alberta is thriving with a growth in revenues of more than 17 per cent from 2021 to 2023.
Alberta’s Aerospace Workforce Development Grant supports attraction and training in the aviation and aerospace sector and aims to attract new investment while supporting the expansion of aerospace companies in Alberta.
NEW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today released a guide to help New Yorkers use the state’s Exempt Income Protection Act (EIPA) to protect their money from debt collectors. The EIPA is a state law that prevents debt collectors from draining consumers’ bank accounts, leaving them unable to cover the costs of basic needs. The law automatically protects a certain amount of money in people’s bank accounts from being frozen or seized, and also protects vital government benefits like Social Security, disability benefits, and veteran’s benefits. The Office of the Attorney General’s (OAG) guide comes after Attorney General James recently secured $1 million from Netspend, a financial services company that illegally turned over its customers’ funds to debt collectors when those funds should have been protected under EIPA. The OAG’s guide will help New Yorkers use their rights under EIPA to protect their money and report debt collectors who are breaking the law to OAG.
“When banks allow debt collectors to wipe out New Yorkers’ bank accounts, they’re not only throwing vulnerable people into financial chaos, they’re breaking the law,” said Attorney General James. “New Yorkers should know how to protect their money from debt collectors so they can continue to pay their bills while they manage their debt. My office’s helpful guide provides valuable tips for New Yorkers to protect their funds and hold banks and debt collectors accountable when they break the law. I encourage anyone who has had their hard-earned money illegally seized or frozen to report it to my office.”
The EIPA automatically exempts a certain amount of money in people’s bank accounts from being frozen or seized. This protected amount is based on the minimum wage and is $3,960 for those in New York City, Long Island, or Westchester, and $3,720 for those anywhere else in New York as of January 2025. The EIPA also protects 90% of wages or salary earned in the 60 days before a debt collector attempts to seize funds.
Crucially, EIPA also protects government benefits and retirement funds from being frozen or seized, ensuring New Yorkers have enough money to pay their bills. These funds include:
Social Security;
Supplemental security income;
Disability benefits;
Unemployment insurance;
Workers compensation;
Veterans benefits;
Spousal support, alimony, or child support; and
Payments from public or private pensions and retirement accounts, such as 401(k)s or individual retirement accounts (IRAs).
Attorney General James has successfully secured restitution for New Yorkers whose funds were illegally seized by debt collectors. In April 2024, Attorney General James secured more than $700,000 from Pathward Bank for unlawfully freezing customer accounts and illegally transferring money to debt collectors in violation of EIPA. In February 2024, Attorney General James secured more than $650,000 from a debt collection law firm for filing frivolous lawsuits against vulnerable New York City tenants. In May 2022, Attorney General James and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau shut down a predatory debt collection operation that used deceptive and abusive tactics to illegally collect millions of dollars from hundreds of thousands of consumers.
The OAG’s guide includes the steps New Yorkers must take to use EIPA to protect their funds from being seized, as well as instructions on how to report violations to OAG. Any consumer who has had their money frozen or seized in violation of the law should report the violation to OAG’s Consumer Frauds Bureau online or by calling 1-800-771-7755.
This matter was handled by Assistant Attorneys General Ben Fishman and Chris Filburn, under the supervision of Bureau Chief Jane M. Azia and Deputy Bureau Chief Laura J. Levine, all of the Consumer Frauds and Protection Bureau. Also assisting in this matter were Irene Kim of the Public Information and Correspondence Unit, under the supervision of Brandon Kennedy, Deputy Director of Public Information; Vanessa Ip, Deputy Chief Operating Officer, Lucas McCullough, of the Office of the Chief Operating Officer; Jodi Burick, Kiersten Burns, Michaela Simmons, and Lisa O’Hara of the Information Technology Bureau. The Consumer Frauds and Protection Bureau is a part of the Division for Economic Justice, which is led by Chief Deputy Attorney General Chris D’Angelo and is overseen by First Deputy Attorney General Jennifer Levy.
