Category: Environment

MIL-OSI Global: Amid a tropical paradise known as ‘Lizard Island,’ researchers are cracking open evolution’s black box – scientist at work

Source: The Conversation – USA – By James T. Stroud, Assistant Professor of Ecology and Evolution, Georgia Institute of Technology

After gathering data on the captured anole, the team releases it back to the wild. Neil Losin/Day’s Edge Prods.

Every morning in Miami, our fieldwork begins the same way. Fresh Cuban coffee and pastelitos – delicious Latin American pastries – fuel our team for another day of evolutionary detective work. Here we’re tracking evolution in real time, measuring natural selection as it happens in a community of Caribbean lizards.

As an assistant professor of ecology and evolution at Georgia Tech, my journey with these remarkable reptiles has taken me far from my London roots. The warm, humid air of Miami feels natural now, a far cry from the gray, drizzly and lizard-free streets of my British upbringing.

Our research takes place on a South Florida island roughly the size of an American football field – assuming we’re successful in sidestepping the American crocodiles that bask in the surrounding lake. We call it Lizard Island, and it’s a special place.

Here, since 2015, we’ve been conducting evolutionary research on five species of remarkable lizards called anoles. By studying the anoles, our team is working to understand one of biology’s most fundamental questions: How does natural selection drive evolution in real time?

Each May, coinciding with the start of the breeding season, we visit Lizard Island to capture, study and release all adult anoles – a population that fluctuates between 600 to 1,000. For the entire summer, female anoles lay a single egg every seven to 10 days. By October, a whole new generation has emerged.

The anoles of Lizard Island, clockwise from top left: Cuban knight anole, Hispaniolan bark anole, American green anole, Cuban brown anole, Puerto Rican crested anole.
Neil Losin/Day’s Edge Prods.

The secret lives of lizards

Anoles aren’t early risers, so we don’t expect much activity until the Sun strengthens around 9:30 a.m.; this gives us time to prepare our equipment. Our team catches anoles with telescopic fishing poles fitted with little lassos, which we use to gently pluck the lizards off branches and tree trunks. Ask any lizard biologist about their preferred lasso material and you’ll spark the age-old debate: fishing line or dental floss? For what it’s worth, we recently converted – we’re now on Team Fishing Line.

Picture yourself as an anole on Lizard Island. Your life is short – typically just one year – and filled with daily challenges. You need to warm up in the Sun, find enough food to survive, search for a mate, guard your favorite branch from other lizards and avoid being eaten by a predator.

Like human beings, each lizard is unique. Some have longer legs, others stronger jaws, and all behave slightly differently. These differences could determine who survives and who doesn’t; who has the most babies and who doesn’t.

These outcomes drive evolution by natural selection, the process where organisms with traits better suited to their environment tend to survive and reproduce more. These advantageous traits are then passed on to future generations, gradually changing the species over time. However, scientists still have an incomplete understanding of exactly how each of these features predicts life’s winners and losers in the wild.

To understand how species evolve, researchers need to crack open this black box of evolution and investigate natural selection in wild populations. My colleagues and I are doing this by studying the anoles in exquisite detail. Last year was especially exciting: We ran what we called the Lizard Olympics.

Catching an anole with a lizard lasso. Look closely – the anole blends in quite well with the tree.
Neil Losin/Day’s Edge Prods.

Tiny fishing poles

As the morning heat builds, we spot our first lizards: Cuban brown anoles near to the ground, and the mottled scales of Hispaniolan bark anoles just above them. Further up, in the leafy tree canopies, are American green anoles, and the largest species, the Cuban knight anole, about the size of a newborn kitten.

In 2018, a new challenger entered the arena – the Puerto Rican crested anole, a species already present in Miami but one that hadn’t yet made it to Lizard Island. Its arrival provided us with an unexpected opportunity to study how species may evolve in real time in response to a new neighbor.

Catching these agile athletes requires patience and precision. With our modified fishing poles, we carefully loop the dental floss over their heads. Each capture site is marked with bright pink tape and a unique ID number; all lizards are then transported to our field laboratory just a short walk away.

In the laboratory, Stroud weighs a green anole.
Neil Losin/Day’s Edge Prods.

The Lizard Olympics

Here, the real Olympic trials begin. Every athlete goes through a comprehensive evaluation. Our portable X-ray machine reveals their skeletal structure, and high-resolution scans capture the intricate details of their feet. This is particularly critical: Like their gecko cousins, anoles possess remarkable sticky toes that allow them to cling to smooth surfaces such as leaves and maybe even survive hurricanes.

We also measure the shape and sharpness of their claws, as both features are crucial for these tree climbers. DNA samples provide a genetic fingerprint for each individual, allowing us to map family relationships across the island and see which is the most reproductively successful.

A portable X-ray machine takes detailed measurements of a lizard’s skeleton.
James Stroud

The performance trials are where things get interesting. Imagine a tiny track meet for lizards. Using high-speed video cameras, we precisely test how fast each lizard runs, and using specialist equipment we measure how hard it bites and how strong it grips rough branches and smooth leaves.

These aren’t arbitrary measurements – each represents a potential evolutionary advantage. Fast lizards might better escape predators. Strong bites might determine winners in territorial disputes. Excellent grip is crucial for tree canopy acrobatics.

Each measurement helps us answer fundamental questions about evolution: Do faster lizards live longer? Do stronger biters produce more offspring? These are the essential metrics of evolution by natural selection.

The identification code lets researchers track the lizard’s growth and survival.
Neil Losin/Day’s Edge Prods.

As afternoon approaches, the team relocates each piece of bright pink tape and returns the corresponding lizard to the exact branch it was caught on. The anoles now sport two tiny 3-millimeter tags with a unique code that lets us identify it when we recapture it in future research trips, along with a small dot of white nail polish so we know not to catch it immediately after we let it go.

At 8:30 p.m., with the Lizard Olympics done for the day, we return to the island donning headlamps. Night brings a different perspective. Some of the most wily lizards are difficult to catch when fully charged by the midday Sun, so our nocturnal jaunts allow us to find them while they sleep. However, it’s often a race against time. Hungry lizard-eating corn snakes are also out hunting, trying to find the anoles before we do. As we wrap up another 16-hour day around 11:30 p.m., the team shares stories of the night.

Should a snake climb along a branch where a baby anole sleeps, the lizard will wake up and drop to the ground to escape.
James Stroud

Evolution on the island

Now spanning 10 years, 10 generations and five species, our Lizard Island dataset represents one of the longest-running active studies of its kind in evolutionary biology. By tracking which individuals survive and reproduce, and linking their success to specific physical traits and performance abilities, we’re documenting natural selection with unprecedented detail.

So far we have uncovered two fascinating patterns. Initially, it didn’t pay to be different on Lizard Island. Anoles with very average shapes and sizes lived longer compared with those that are slightly different. But when the crested anoles arrived, everything changed: Suddenly, brown anoles with longer legs had a survival advantage.

Anoles communicate with their dewlap, an expandable throat fan that signals other lizards.
Jon Suh

The Lizard Olympics is helping us understand why. The larger, more aggressive crested anoles are forcing brown anoles to spend more time on the ground, where those with longer legs might run faster to escape predators – allowing them to better survive and pass on their long-leg genes, while shorter-legged anoles might be eaten before they can reproduce.

By watching natural selection unfold in response to environmental changes, rather than inferring it from fossil records, we’re providing cutting-edge evidence for evolutionary processes that Charles Darwin could only theorize about.

These long days of observation are slowly revealing one of biology’s most fundamental processes. Every lizard we catch, every measurement we take adds another piece to our understanding of how species adapt and evolve in an ever-changing world.

James T. Stroud does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Amid a tropical paradise known as ‘Lizard Island,’ researchers are cracking open evolution’s black box – scientist at work – https://theconversation.com/amid-a-tropical-paradise-known-as-lizard-island-researchers-are-cracking-open-evolutions-black-box-scientist-at-work-246474

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI: VelocityEHS Revolutionizes Contractor Safety with AI-Driven Verification and Compliance Automation
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

CHICAGO, March 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — VelocityEHS, the global leader in EHS & ESG software solutions, is excited to unveil an advanced AI-powered feature designed to streamline contractor safety management. This new capability automates contractor verification processes, reduces compliance risks, and significantly improves operational efficiency for organizations that manage contractors onsite.

As part of its Contractor Safety Solution, Velocity deploys AI to generate guided workflows, flag risks, and make intelligent recommendations, making it easier for non- or less-experienced EHS managers to verify contractor credentials like Certificates of Insurance and OSHA Logs to facilitate compliance.

Contractor workers face significantly higher risks on the job, with injury and illness rates 36% to 72% higher than those of full-time employees. Additionally, 37% of all temporary workers are employed in high-risk industrial sectors, underscoring the critical need for more effective safety and compliance solutions.

“Our mission is to help create safer workplaces,” said Matt Airhart, CEO of VelocityEHS. “We are dedicated to developing AI-driven innovation that enables our customers to reach better outcomes faster. Even before this new feature, our Contractor Safety & Permit to Work solution helped organizations achieve 70%-time savings compared to traditional third-party management processes. Now their operational efficiency will reach new heights.”

As regulatory demands and safety concerns continue to escalate, organizations need reliable, scalable, and intelligent solutions to ensure contractor compliance—particularly in safety-critical industries such as manufacturing, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and food & beverage, where staying on top of complex requirements is a daily challenge.

Key Benefits of the AI-Powered Contractor Safety Feature
- Faster, More Accurate Compliance Assessments: AI-driven automation accelerates document reviews, eliminating manual errors and ensuring precise contractor verification.
- Reduced Compliance Risks: Quicker and easier access to crucial data to make informed decisions, ensuring contractors meet safety standards.
- Lower Administrative Burden: Saves time by streamlining manual contractor verification processes, giving workers time to focus on higher-value safety initiatives rather than repetitive compliance tasks.
“Many businesses face challenges with manual compliance workflows, resulting in costly delays in contractor verification and increased exposure to risks,” said Dr Julia Penfield, VP of Research & Machine Learning.

“Over time, this leads to reactive risk management, human error, productivity losses and potential fines for non-compliance. Our new AI-powered Contractor Safety Solution is changing the game, transforming the process with an intuitive, automated solution that simplifies compliance and drives better overall safety outcomes,” she added.

For more information about VelocityEHS, visit www.EHS.com

About VelocityEHS
Relied on by more than 10 million users worldwide to drive operational excellence and achieve outstanding outcomes, VelocityEHS is the global leader in true SaaS enterprise EHS & ESG technology. The VelocityEHS Accelerate^® Platform is the definitive gold standard, delivering best-in-class software solutions for managing Safety, Ergonomics, Chemical Management, and Operational Risk. In addition, Velocity offers world-class applications for Contractor Safety & Permit to Work, Environmental Compliance, and ESG.

The VelocityEHS team includes unparalleled industry expertise, with more certified experts in health, safety, industrial hygiene, ergonomics, sustainability, the environment, AI, and machine learning than any other EHS software provider. Recognized by the EHS industry’s top independent analysts as a Leader in the Verdantix 2025 Green Quadrant Analysis, VelocityEHS is committed to industry thought leadership and to accelerating the pace of innovation through its software solutions and vision. Its privacy and security protocols, which include SOC2 Type II attestation, are among the most stringent in the industry.

VelocityEHS is headquartered in Chicago, Illinois, with locations in Ann Arbor, Michigan; Tampa, Florida; Oakville, Ontario; London, England; Perth, Western Australia; and Cork, Ireland. For more information, visit www.EHS.com. 

Media Contact
Jennifer Sinkwitts
jsinkwitts@ehs.com

The MIL Network –
March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI China: Boao establishes zero-carbon zone in pursuit of sustainable development

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

BOAO, Hainan, March 25 — China’s Boao has announced the establishment of its first zero-carbon zone, a significant step forward in the country’s pursuit of low-carbon development, according to authorities in Hainan.

One expert has said that the achievement is a pioneering example for global carbon reduction efforts, and underscores China’s commitment to carbon neutrality and sustainable development.

Spanning about 190 hectares, the demonstration zone includes Dongyu Island, which is the permanent site of the annual Boao Forum for Asia (BFA) conference.

By focusing on green building renovation and renewable energy adoption, the demonstration zone has successfully reduced carbon dioxide emissions from buildings and other infrastructure from 11,300 tonnes in 2019 to zero tonnes in 2024, according to data from local authorities.

Since its formal inauguration in 2001, the BFA has served as a key platform for the advancement of green development across Asia, facilitating the exchange of insights to promote sustainable growth in the region and beyond.

Asia is rapidly advancing in emerging green technology, positioning itself as a potential leader in such fields as advanced battery materials and biodegradable plastic, boosted by strong industrial capabilities and policy support, according to a report released on Tuesday by the BFA.

China is at the forefront of Asia’s expanding green hydrogen industry and now sources 85 percent of its new energy capacity from renewables, according to the report.

Asia’s largest emitters, including China, have set ambitious climate targets, the report notes. It says that according to the United Nations Environment Programme, China and India have been assessed as likely to meet their current 2030 Nationally Determined Contributions targets with their existing policies.

MIL OSI China News –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI: Dr. Sandeep Rout Joins Locus Technologies to Drive EHS Software Adoption

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

MOUNTAIN VIEW, Calif., March 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Locus Technologies, the sustainability and Environmental Health and Safety (EHS) compliance software leader, welcomed Sandeep Rout, PhD, MBA, as Director of Customer Success, effective immediately. Dr. Rout will leverage more than two decades of expertise in the EHS domain, mostly with Global Oil & Gas and Chemical companies, to deliver expert guidance to Locus clients and contribute to R&D. Dr. Rout earned his Doctoral degree in Biochemical Engineering and Biomaterials and an M.S. in Engineering Science from Louisiana State University, as well as an MBA from Cornell University.

“Locus continues to differentiate through talent, and Sandeep Rout is no exception,” said Neno Duplan, Founder and CEO of Locus Technologies. “We aren’t a generic software company that targets an environmental niche. Locus is comprised of highly educated environmental engineers and scientists with incredibly rich and relevant backgrounds who steer the innovation and implementation of Locus software. Dr. Rout will be an asset to Locus clients as they optimize their EHS&S practices.”

Dr. Rout has worked in the EHS and Information Systems fields since 2001 — specializing in implementing EHS software solutions that collect, calculate, and report Air Emissions/GHG.

“As an experienced advisor in the EHS field, I have long admired the technical capability of Locus software and I’m pleased to contribute to the company’s continued growth in the US and abroad,” said Dr. Rout. “This is a pivotal era with organizations facing regulatory uncertainty, data complexity, and shifting expectations from shareholders. I’m looking forward to helping organizations neutralize those complications with Locus Platform and the company’s growing portfolio of purpose-built applications.”

To learn more about Locus software and the company’s elite team of subject matter experts, please visit http://www.locustec.com.

About Locus Technologies
Locus Technologies, the global environmental, social, governance (ESG), sustainability, and EHS compliance software leader, empowers companies of every size and industry to be credible with ESG reporting. From 1997, Locus pioneered enterprise software-as-a-service (SaaS) for EHS compliance, water management, and ESG credible reporting. Locus apps and software solutions improve business performance by strengthening risk management and EHS for organizations across industries and government agencies. Organizations ranging from medium-sized businesses to Fortune 500 enterprises, such as Sempra, Corteva, Chevron, DuPont, Chemours, San Jose Water Company, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, Port of Seattle, and Los Alamos National Laboratory, have selected Locus. Locus is headquartered in Mountain View, California. For further information regarding Locus and its commitment to excellence in SaaS solutions, please visit http://www.locustec.com or email info@locustec.com.

The MIL Network –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Civil society says court decision blocking GM crops “a pivotal moment”, calls for protection of farmers’ rights and food sovereignty

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

For Pictures click here
For audio click here
For video click here

NAIROBI, KENYA – Greenpeace Africa, Kenya Peasants League, and BIBA Kenya have praised the recent landmark decision by the Court of Appeal temporarily halting the importation of genetically modified (GM) crops into Kenya. Speaking at a joint press conference held at Chester House. The ruling sets an important precedent as we approach a potentially game-changing seed litigation case that will define the future of farmer-managed seed systems across Kenya and potentially Africa.

Elizabeth Atieno, Greenpeace Africa’s Food Sovereignty Campaign Lead, said;

“This court ruling is a triumph for Kenyan farmers and consumers alike. The temporary halt on GMO imports provides us with a critical opportunity to reassess our agricultural policies and promote solutions that truly serve our farmers and protect our biodiversity. Agroecological practices have proven their effectiveness in ensuring food security while preserving our environmental heritage. We must now focus our collective efforts to ensure the upcoming seed litigation in May cements strong legal protections for farmer-managed seed systems..”

Ann Maina of the Biodiversity and Biosafety Association (BIBA Kenya) emphasised the risk corporate seed monopolies pose.

“The struggle for seed sovereignty is a battle against corporate control over our livelihoods and food systems. We celebrate the decision not only as a victory for farmers but also as a reaffirmation of our rights to save and exchange seeds without interference. Farmers must control their seeds – the essential foundation of our food supply. Our farmer-managed seed systems have sustained communities for generations. We cannot allow corporate interests to monopolise our seed heritage and compromise our food sovereignty.”

Cidi Otieno from the Kenya Peasants League, added;

“The upcoming seed litigation case in May will be crucial in determining the future of Kenya’s food systems. We’re fighting not just against GMOs, but for the protection of our indigenous seed varieties, farmers’ rights to save and exchange seeds, and the preservation of our agricultural biodiversity. This is about securing food sovereignty for generations to come.”

Asker Akinyi, a Farmer, said:

“We are the custodians of seeds and food systems. If these laws criminalise our right to save and exchange seeds, we will be forced into permanent dependency on multinational corporations. Farmer-managed seed systems are climate-resilient, cost-effective, and culturally significant. These laws must recognise and protect them.”

The conference underscored agroecology as a practical and farmer-centered alternative to GMOs. Advocates highlighted agroecology’s role in promoting biodiversity, restoring soil health, and enhancing climate resilience while upholding farmers’ rights to seed sovereignty.

Stakeholders called for unified action from farmers, civil society, and policymakers through active engagement ahead of the May litigation, underscoring the potential for the court to set a regional precedent, positively affecting food sovereignty policies across Africa.

For Media Inquiries, Contact:

Ferdinand Omondi, Communication and Story Manager, Greenpeace Africa, +254 722 505 233, [email protected] / [email protected]

ENDS

About Greenpeace Africa: Greenpeace Africa campaigns for a sustainable environment and food security, working with communities across Africa to implement ecological farming practices that guarantee a sustainable and safe food future.

About Kenya Peasants League: KPL is an advocacy group focused on mobilising peasants and small-scale farmers to protect peasant rights and boost food sovereignty through farmer-managed seed systems.

About BIBA Kenya: Biodiversity and Biosafety Association of Kenya (BIBA Kenya) works to protect Kenya’s biodiversity and promote biosafety by advocating for policies that foster biological diversity and food security free from genetic modification.

MIL OSI NGO –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Career Day at SPbGASU: recommendations for employment and invitations to internships and work

Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

Source: Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering – Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering – Poster session

The Center for Student Entrepreneurship and Career of SPbGASU together with the Russian developer of engineering software “Nanosoft” held a large-scale career guidance event – Career Day.

At various sites of our university and in various formats, meetings of students and graduates with industry practitioners and experts, representatives of specialized companies were organized in order to solve the main tasks: the first – to find a company for industrial practice, employment, the second – to attract young personnel.

On this day, lectures, master classes, and poster sessions were held in the main building, at the Automobile and Road Engineering Faculty, and the Faculty of Forensic Science and Law in Construction and Transport.

How to become a cool BIM specialist

In his lecture, Dmitry Polyakov, BIM manager of the architectural bureau Studio 44, spoke about his professional activities and dispelled the established stereotypes about specialists in the field of building information modeling (BIM or TIM specialists). Initially, he worked as a designer and was sure that he had found himself in this profession. Over eight years of work, he realized that automation is closer to him, it allows designers to simplify and improve work processes so much that, for example, one operation can be performed not in two days, but in twenty seconds.

“Today, there are stereotypes about VIM specialists that we want to destroy. The main one is that for this position it is enough to understand the software: learn a certain program and “twist and turn your models” in it. This is not so. Other specialists also work in the program, including architects and designers. Also, a beam specialist is often mistaken for a system administrator who is required to eliminate failures in office equipment. In addition, the heads of some bureaus can even assign responsibility for decisions that go beyond the scope of such a specialist’s responsibilities: for example, calculate the number of engineers needed to design a certain number of buildings,” explained Dmitry Polyakov.

He emphasized that the real work process begins like this: the customer contacts the design bureau with an idea, technical specifications, and finances. As part of the competition, the bureau prepares a draft design, which generally demonstrates the appearance of the building and provides technical and economic indicators. Already at the draft design stage, a VIM model appears, regardless of whether it is a matter of constructing a new facility or rebuilding an old building. The design bureau has a large department of subcontractors. The BIM specialist first thinks about which path to take to effectively organize all processes, which software to choose, how to implement each task, and establish communication with project participants. He controls everything that happens in the model, how the parameters are observed in it, how the model is submitted for examination, that is, he monitors the work process and eliminates any collisions that arise. Insufficient control on the part of the VIM specialist can lead to serious discrepancies with the requirements of the construction site, which the bureau will eliminate at its own expense. Without a beamer, departments would communicate with each other in a disjointed manner and via different communication channels. In such a case, misunderstandings arise, and it is impossible to find the history of the error, because the employees were talking about something somewhere in between. To prevent this, a beamer comes and connects everyone in one model.

“Who is a cool beam designer? He understands design and, if necessary, will show on the model any detail that an experienced designer asks for. He is not afraid of digital technologies. He knows who does what at the site, monitors work processes and delves into them. He is diligent: it happens that it takes an hour to think over the optimal solution. Sociable: this job is not for introverts – you constantly need to communicate with someone, be able to listen. He follows developments in the field of information technology, global trends, the practice of both large and small companies. Ready for continuous learning: if they ask a question that he has not encountered, he studies it. He is open to unexpected turns: for example, they give him a new object, the likes of which he has not seen, but he implements it. The main thing is that he thinks with his own head, despite the fact that the customer or someone else said that “we do not do it this way, it should be like this.” “You can listen to comments, but in general you should do what you and your team think is right,” advised Dmitry Polyakov.

He talked about the programs he uses in his work, cited examples of completed projects, and focused on the correct regimen so that the chosen activity would be interesting and not turn into a test.

How neural networks help an architect

Leading architect of ATRIUM Alisa Silantyeva gave a lecture on neural networks in architecture. In her professional activity, she is engaged in the search for concepts and projects from furniture to urban development projects, and the ATRIUM company as a whole is aimed at developing complex projects in different countries. The topic is interesting for future architects: as it turned out, many of them already use neural networks in developing their concepts. The lecturer reminded that the initial stage of the concept is the creation of an image of the future object. Neural networks generate new forms and designs. Deep learning algorithms analyze thousands of architectural samples and create new, unique forms that meet the specified parameters and requirements. Alisa Silantyeva showed examples of how, taking the shape and geometry of a perfume bottle, a watermelon or scattered cubes with turrets as a basis, with the help of a neural network you can get the first sketches of a unique appearance of a building and then refine the sketches.

“Neural networks help to quickly transform an interesting idea into a sketch and find the optimal combination of styles,” noted Alisa Silantyeva.

How to Write a Resume That Will Attract a Recruiter

Senior consultant of the equipment market and CX of ANCOR Recruitment Alina Aipova gave valuable advice on writing a resume. According to her, a resume should clearly answer a number of questions that are important to a potential employer: what is your specialty, what specific skills in this area do you have, what results have you achieved. A simple list of responsibilities will not do. Digitize your achievements: for example, indicate that you became the author of five startups, participated in the implementation of five such-and-such projects. Avoid empty phrases: stress-resistant, sociable, punctual, etc.

The lecturer presented a schematic portrait of a “star” applicant, which a recruiter will definitely notice and an employer will appreciate: an applicant will be successfully employed if he clearly sees his career path, is focused on a specific company and knows why he is here and how he can be useful.

“Experience without an official entry in the work record book is also experience. Include in your resume industrial practices, internships, exchange training, experience in creating a startup, participation in case championships and business games, conferences, work in student councils and university projects. In addition, today employers greatly value participation in the volunteer movement. All of the above speaks of your developed soft skills,” Alina Aipova emphasized.

How to Pass an Interview Successfully

If an employer has chosen your resume, you are only halfway to success, because there is an interview ahead. GeekSource (ANCOR Group) consultants Anna Krestyantseva and Natalia Komarinen, who specialize in recruiting IT specialists, told us how to pass it in order to get the desired position.

“Before the interview, it is advisable to study information about the company you intend to work for: the employer values interest and awareness of their activities. Prepare a self-presentation for five to ten minutes. Typical mistakes that applicants make during an interview: in order to be liked, they give socially desirable answers; they do not have information about the employer; they do not show interest or are driven only by monetary motivation; they talk a lot or, on the contrary, little, they allow a lot of negativity or criticism, they react irritably to questions,” said Anna Krestyantseva.

She also emphasized important details of the online interview: it is necessary to tidy up your appearance and background: untidiness, disorder and inclusion of strangers in the dialogue can be a reason for refusal to hire.

How to learn business communication skills

Olga Zenina

Olga Zenina, head of the career guidance department at SuperJob and certified expert in emotional intelligence, devoted her speech to business communication skills. She clarified that modern youth are interested in building long-term business communications both with each other and with older people, but they do not always understand that not everything that is acceptable in everyday life is appropriate in professional communication.

“In your email, fill out the signature: indicate your contacts, position, company name, or area of freelance activity. Indicate a specific subject of the letter: for example, “Report for February 2025”, and no “Important” or “Please respond”, otherwise the letter may go to spam. The names of the attached files should also be “telling” ones. Accompany the letter with words of greeting to the addressee, addressing them by name and excluding emoticons. Not responding to a letter for more than a day is bad form.

When communicating in messengers, express your thoughts in one message and send them during working hours. It is better to discuss the need for a phone call in advance and choose a place for it without extraneous noise. For a video call, tidy up your appearance and surroundings. In corporate chats, it is worth paying attention to the choice of statuses: this way, colleagues will see that you, for example, are currently busy and cannot answer. It is advisable to put a personal photo on the avatar so that the interlocutor clearly imagines with whom he is communicating,” Olga Zenina explained.

The lecturer emphasized that following these simple rules will please partners and customers and will improve their attitude towards you, which means it will increase your chances of success in your professional activities.

Poster Session Meetings

On the balustrades of the main building, company representatives unfolded their presentations. Students lined up at each one to learn about the organizations’ areas of activity, the conditions for completing an internship, and employment opportunities.

Third-year student of the Faculty of Environmental Engineering and Urban Management Daniil Abdulin stopped by the stand of the China National Chemical, Engineering and Construction Corporation “Seven”. “Today I learned that the company owns the largest gas processing complex in Europe. I am interested in employment with them, but it will not be possible to combine it with studies for now – perhaps I will be able to do a summer internship,” Daniil said.

Ksenia Drozdova, a third-year student at the Faculty of Economics and Management, is approaching her industrial practice, and she considers the poster sessions to be an excellent opportunity to find a company to do it with right at the university. “There is a wide range of different companies represented here, and my specialty involves many areas of activity, so I am sure that I will be able to conclude an agreement on doing an internship. Perhaps this will become my professional choice,” Ksenia explained.

Fourth-year student of the architecture faculty Veronika Petrova learned that, for example, in the federal developer GloraX you can do not only an internship, but also a paid internship. “It’s great that GloraX has a direction that corresponds to my specialization, so this company interested me,” Veronika explained.

Fourth-year student of the construction faculty Alan Niyazov admitted that he paid attention to the company “Nanosoft”. “I am interested in TIM technologies, but I do not know programming languages yet. It turned out that this is an obstacle to employment. But now I am aware of the requirements and will acquire the missing knowledge,” Aslan said.

Fourth-year student of the construction faculty Alena Kosenkova reported that she and her classmates already have contracts with companies for internships, concluded at last year’s Career Day, but want to learn about vacancies in industry companies. “We want to be aware of the situation on the labor market. This is an interesting and informative acquaintance with companies,” Alena believes.

Companies are invited

Natalia Koneva, a recruitment specialist at Glavstroy-Petersburg, noted: “We are interested in young specialists, and we are happy when they grow professionally with us and subsequently occupy high positions. Today, we offer students practical training and internships. We are ready to add various specialists to our staff. For example, we are currently ready to accept an economist for an internship. There is an opportunity to do an internship in any department, both in the office and at construction sites. It is pleasant to observe active feedback from students.”

Leading specialist of the HR department of “Seven” Evgeniya Naido reminded that the company has been cooperating with SPbGASU for the third year: “Students of SPbGASU successfully complete their internship in our company, and we have already gained good experience of their further employment. Therefore, we are proud to know your university and are happy to cooperate with it. Our company is engaged in industrial construction, and at the moment we have vacancies for engineering positions. We consider students for internship in the positions of technicians of the production and technical department and surveying technicians with possible subsequent employment. It happened that students were hired directly for engineering positions. The internship is paid, the monthly salary is 35 thousand rubles, a technician of the production and technical department – 70 thousand rubles in hand,” noted Evgeniya Naido.

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

MIL OSI Russia News –

March 26, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on general guidelines for the preparation of the 2026 budget, Section III – Commission – A10-0042/2025

Source: European Parliament 2

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on general guidelines for the preparation of the 2026 budget, Section III – Commission

(2024/2110(BUI))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to Article 314 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

– having regard to Article 106a of the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community,

– having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 of 17 December 2020 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021-2027 [1] and to the joint declaration agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission in this context [2] and the related unilateral declarations [3],

– having regard to Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2022/2496 of 15 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 [4],

– having regard to the Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/765 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 [5] (MFF Revision),

– having regard to its position of 16 December 2020 on the draft Council regulation laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 [6],

– having regard to its resolution of 15 December 2022 on upscaling the 2021-2027 multiannual financial framework: a resilient EU budget fit for new challenges [7],

– having regard to its resolution of 3 October 2023 on the proposal for a mid-term revision of the multiannual financial framework 2021-2027 [8],

– having regard to its resolution of 27 February 2024 on the draft Council regulation amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 [9],

– having regard to Council Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 of 14 December 2020 on the system of own resources of the European Union and repealing Decision 2014/335/EU, Euratom [10],

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 22 December 2021 for a Council decision amending Decision (EU, Euratom) 2020/2053 on the system of own resources of the European Union (COM(2021)0570) and its position of 23 November 2022 on the proposal [11],

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast)[12] (the Financial Regulation),

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 2021 establishing the framework for achieving climate neutrality and amending Regulations (EC) No 401/2009 and (EU) 2018/1999 (‘European Climate Law’)[13],

– having regard to the EU’s obligations under the Paris Agreement and its commitments under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework,

– having regard to the EU gender equality strategy 2020-2025,

– having regard to its resolution of 10 May 2023 on the impact on the 2024 EU budget of increasing European Union Recovery Instrument borrowing costs [14],

– having regard to Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget [15],

– having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement of 16 December 2020 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management, as well as on new own resources, including a roadmap towards the introduction of new own resources [16],

– having regard to the Interinstitutional Proclamation on the European Pillar of Social Rights [17] of 13 December 2017,

– having regard to the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2025 [18] and the joint statements agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission annexed hereto,

– having regard to Enrico Letta’s report entitled ‘Much more than a market’, presented in the European Parliament on 21 October 2024,

– having regard to Mario Draghi’s report entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’, presented in the European Parliament on 17 September 2024,

– having regard to Sauli Niinistö’s report entitled ‘Safer together – Strengthening Europe’s civilian and military preparedness and readiness’, presented in the European Parliament on 14 November 2024,

– having regard to the presentation of the EU Competitiveness Compass by Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on 29 January 2025,

– having regard to the joint white paper of 19 March 2025 for European Defence Readiness providing a framework for the ReArm Europe plan (JOIN(2025)0120),

– having regard to the Commission communication of 26 February 2025 entitled ‘The Clean Industrial Deal: A joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation’ (COM(2025)0085),

– having regard to the proposal of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2025 amending Regulations (EU) 2015/1017, (EU) 2021/523, (EU) 2021/695 and (EU) 2021/1153 as regards increasing the efficiency of the EU guarantee under Regulation (EU) 2021/523 and simplifying reporting requirements (COM(2025)0084),

– having regard to the Council conclusions of 18 February 2025 on the budget guidelines for 2026,

– having regard to Rule 95 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on Transport and Tourism, the Committee on Regional Development and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development,

– having regard to the letters from the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, the Committee on Culture and Education and the Committee on Constitutional Affairs,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets (A10-0042/2025),

Budget 2026: building a resilient, sustainable and prosperous future for Europe

1. Highlights the anticipated economic growth projected for 2025 and 2026 within the EU [19], accompanied by an easing of inflation; notes nonetheless the uncertainties stemming from Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, which directly threatens the security of the EU, and the worsening effects of climate change and the biodiversity crisis, also manifested in the increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters, which are compounded by new significant geopolitical changes and a deteriorating international rules-based order, heightened security threats and a rise in global protectionism; emphasises that, in such an increasingly volatile landscape, it is imperative for the EU to enhance its defence and security capabilities, social, economic and territorial cohesion and political and strategic autonomy, decrease its dependence, increase its competitiveness and ensure a prosperous future for the continent and its people, who are currently facing an increasingly high cost of living;

2. Is determined to ensure that the 2026 budget, by focusing on strategic preparedness and security, economic competitiveness and resilience, sustainability, climate, as well as strengthening the single market, provides the people in the EU with a robust ecosystem and delivers on their priorities, thus reinforcing a socially just and prosperous Europe; underlines the need for additional investment in security and defence, research, innovation, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), health, energy, migration, as well as land and maritime border protection, inclusive digital and green transitions, job creation, and the provision of opportunities for young people; insists that this be accompanied by administrative simplification, as indicated in the Competitiveness Compass; insists that the EU budget is the largest investment instrument with leverage effect, complementing national budgets and therefore enabling the EU to navigate the complexities of a rapidly changing world while ensuring prosperity, social cohesion and stability for its people; is strongly of the opinion that the EU should use this leverage effect to the maximum degree to boost the Union’s objectives and policymaking, as well as private investment;

Investing in a solid, sustainable and resilient economy

3. Is adamant that sound economic resilience and sustainability can be achieved in the EU by boosting public and private investment, increasing innovation and supporting competitiveness, including by addressing the skills gap and fostering more industrial production in Europe as a source for robust economic growth and quality jobs, and thereby guaranteeing the Union’s strategic autonomy, ensuring that the EU remains agile and self-reliant in the face of global challenges, disruptions and volatility; highlights the need to promote innovation, prioritise education, reduce costs and the administrative burden, and strengthen the single market, particularly as regards services;

4. Reaffirms, in this regard, that research and innovation remain crucial for the EU’s success in cutting-edge industries and new clean and sustainable technologies; recalls the long-standing goal of increasing research and innovation investment to 3 % of gross domestic product (GDP); calls, therefore, for increased funding to be provided under Horizon Europe to fund at least 50 % of all excellent proposals in all scientific disciplines, enable researchers as well as companies, especially SMEs, to bring new developments to the market, and to scale up, ensure solid economic growth and boost the Union’s competitiveness in the global economy, thereby preventing actors from leaving for competing regions while also ensuring that Europe has the knowledge base it needs to pursue the Green Deal commitments;

5. Highlights the importance of targeted support in encouraging public-private partnerships and accessible and increased financing to support SMEs as the backbone of the European economy and a vector for pioneering innovation, emphasising the role of the European Innovation Council, InvestEU and the SME component of the single market programme in empowering start-ups and scale-ups of innovative companies, supporting them in their growth and contributing to a greater role for the EU economy on the global stage; expresses its concern that, according to the interim evaluation of InvestEU, envelopes for many financial products may run out by the end of 2025 without budgetary reinforcements; takes note of the Commission proposal in this regard; underlines, furthermore, the importance of the single market programme to leverage the full potential of the EU’s cross-border dimension;

6. Stresses that the modernisation of the economy will require blending public and private investment; emphasises, in this regard, the necessity of private investments to maximise the leverage effect of public spending; recalls that these efforts should lead to simplification and reduce the financial burden for the EU’s SMEs while maintaining EU standards;

7. Underscores the urgency of further accelerating the digital and green transitions as catalysts for a future-oriented and resource-efficient economy that remains attractive for innovative businesses and that is based on market-driven investments providing quality jobs and leaving no one behind; advocates substantial investment in forward-looking digital infrastructure, underpinned by well-regulated, human-centred and trustworthy artificial intelligence and cybersecurity; stresses the need to improve citizens’ basic digital skills to match the needs of companies and to equip citizens to counter disinformation; stresses, further, the need to increase the resilience of the Union’s democracy in fighting malign foreign interference;

8. Recognises the strategic value of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) and the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) for contributing to the economic, social and climate goals of the EU’s cross-border transport infrastructure; calls for network extensions, particularly towards candidate countries and the EU’s strategic partners, as regards the EU’s sustainable and smart mobility strategy and the complementarities between the TEN-T and the Trans-European Networks for Energy (TEN-E);

A better-prepared Union, capable of effectively responding to crises

9. Underlines the need to enhance EU security and defence capabilities to create a genuine defence union and to better prepare for and respond to unprecedented geopolitical challenges and new hybrid security threats; stresses the essential role of common investment, research, production and procurement mechanisms, including in new disruptive technologies supporting an independent EU defence industry; considers that there is an EU added value in security and defence cooperation that not only makes Europe and its people safer but also leads to greater efficiency, potential savings, quality job creation and enhanced strategic autonomy; calls therefore for immediate upscaling and much better coordination of defence spending by Member States; stresses in particular the need to provide adequate resources to innovate and enhance Member States’ military capabilities, as well as their interoperability; takes note, in line with the Commission’s ‘ReArm Europe’ plan, of its call for the European Investment Bank (EIB) and other international financial institutions and private banks in Europe to invest more actively in the European defence industry while safeguarding their operations and financing capacity; recalls the importance of investing in and developing dual-use equipment and, particularly, of strengthening EU military mobility as regards funding dual-use transport infrastructure along priority axes; calls on the Commission to assess the possibility of using calls for this purpose under the CEF transport programme, in the light of the military mobility funding gap; underlines the urgent need to strengthen the EU’s cybersecurity capabilities to fight hybrid warfare;

10. Recalls the role of the EU’s space programme in enhancing the strategic security of the Union through a variety of civil and military applications; underlines that a strong European space sector is fundamental for European security, open strategic autonomy, secure connectivity, the protection of critical infrastructure and advancing the twin green and digital transitions, and therefore requires sufficient resources;

11. Highlights, in the face of new challenges in internal and external security, the importance of ensuring proper implementation of the Asylum and Migration Pact, in full compliance with international human rights law, and of respecting the principles of solidarity and the fair sharing of responsibility; stresses that effective management and protection of the EU’s external borders, both land and maritime, are essential for maintaining the freedoms of the Schengen area and crucial for the security of the EU and its citizens; emphasises the need to better protect people from trafficking and enhance support to strengthen cross-border cooperation between the Member States and the Union in combating criminal networks, particularly those involved in migrant smuggling and human trafficking, so as to reinforce law enforcement and the judicial response to these criminal networks, as well as to support Member States facing hybrid threats, in particular the instrumentalisation of migrants as defined in the Crisis Regulation [20];

12. Recalls the vital role that the Integrated Border Management Fund, the Border Management and Visa Instrument (BMVI) and the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund play in protecting external borders; calls, in addition, for appropriate funding for border protection capabilities, including physical infrastructure, buildings, equipment, systems and services required at border crossing points, as provided for in Annex III to the BMVI Regulation [21], and for the requirements to be met in terms of reception conditions, integration, return and readmission procedure; reaffirms that cooperation agreements with non-EU countries in full respect of international law can help to prevent irregular migration and strengthen border security;

13. Acknowledges the common agricultural policy (CAP) as a key strategic European policy for food security and greater EU autonomy in affordable and high-quality food production; stresses the crucial role of the CAP in ensuring a decent income for EU farmers as well as a productive, competitive and sustainable European agriculture; regrets that direct payments have significantly decreased in real terms due to inflation, while the administrative burden on farmers has increased due to the accumulation of bureaucracy; urges the Commission to reduce the administrative burden while maintaining high production standards and the requirement to implement EU legislation; calls for adequate resources and for direct payments to be protected to help farmers cope with the impact of inflation, fuel costs, changes in the global food and trade market and adverse climate events, affecting agricultural production and threatening food security, including in the outermost regions; highlights, in this regard, the role of the agricultural reserve; emphasises the need to help small and medium-sized farms and new and young farmers by supporting generational renewal and ensuring continued support for the promotion of EU agricultural products; underlines the need for appropriate support for research and innovation to make the agricultural sector more sustainable, including water management, in particular through the Horizon Europe programme, without reducing European agricultural production and while preventing European farmers from facing unfair competition from imported products that do not meet our standards; welcomes the Commission’s preparation of a second simplification package; underscores that food security is an essential component for geopolitical stability;

14. Stresses the strategic role of fisheries and aquaculture and the need for them to be adequately supported financially; acknowledges that the common fisheries policy ensures a stable income and long-term future for fishers by contributing to protecting sustainable marine ecosystems, which are key to the sector’s competitiveness; insists that special attention must be devoted to the EU’s fishing fleet in order to improve safety and security, including by combating illegal fishery actions and improving working conditions, energy efficiency and sustainability, as well as by renewing the fleet; reaffirms that the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund should support a human resources policy capable of addressing future challenges, in order to promote an inclusive, diversified and sustainable blue economy; expresses its concern about the effect of the end of the Brexit transition period in June 2026 on the fishing and aquaculture sectors;

15. Stresses that enhancing energy security and independence remains fundamental for the EU; highlights the EU’s role in ensuring security of energy supply, assisting households, farmers and businesses in mitigating price volatility and managing price gaps in comparison to the rest of the world; calls, therefore, for additional investment in critical infrastructure and connectivity, including large-scale cross-border electricity grids and hydrogen infrastructure for hard-to-abate sectors, which are an essential prerequisite to the decarbonisation of European industry, in low-carbon and renewable energy sources and connectivity, in particular by properly funding the CEF, as well as in energy efficiency; highlights the need to adapt European infrastructure to meet future energy demands as part of the transition to a clean and modern economy; underlines the importance of investing in new, expanding and modernising interconnector capacity for electricity trading, in particular cross-border capacity, for a fully integrated EU energy market that enhances Europe’s diversified supply security and resilience to energy market disruptions, reducing external dependencies and ultimately ensuring affordable and sustainable energy for EU citizens and businesses; stresses, in this regard, the need to strengthen cooperation with Africa;

16. Recalls, in this context, the current housing crisis in Europe, including the lack of decent and affordable housing; calls, therefore, for swift additional investments through a combination of funding sources, including the EIB and national promotional banks, in areas with a positive impact on reducing the cost of living for households, improving the energy efficiency of buildings and deploying renewable energy sources; calls for a coordinated approach at EU level that respects the principle of subsidiarity, encourages best practices and effectively uses all relevant funding mechanisms in addressing this pressing challenge;

17. Is highly concerned by the strong impacts of climate change and the biodiversity crisis both in Europe and globally and by the fact that the year 2024 was assessed to be the planet’s warmest year on record; calls for sufficient funding for the LIFE programme to finance climate and environment-related projects, including in the area of climate change mitigation and adaptation, and for increased budgetary flexibility to adequately respond to natural disasters in the EU; regrets that increasing numbers of natural disasters have led to a high number of victims, as well as to long-term devastating effects on citizens, farmers and businesses based and working in the regions concerned, as well as in the ecosystems impacted; calls for increased funding for the EU Solidarity Fund, RESTORE (Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction) and the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, including for increasing rescEU capacities, which allow for more cost-efficient capacity building, in order to support Member States quickly and effectively in overwhelming crisis situations; recognises the EU’s role as a hub for coordinating and improving Member States’ preparedness and capacities to respond immediately to large-scale, high-impact emergencies, and its added value both for Member States and citizens; stresses, in this regard, that the EU Civil Protection Mechanism is a tangible expression of European solidarity, reinforcing the EU’s role as a crisis responder; acknowledges that the European Union Solidarity Fund or any other fund alone cannot fully compensate for the extreme weather events of increased frequency and severity caused by climate change today and in the future; stresses the need to invest in and prioritise preparedness, prevention, and adaptation measures, prioritising nature-based solutions; stresses that it is crucial to ensure that Union spending contributes to climate mitigation, adaptation efforts and water resilience infrastructure; emphasises that these investments are far lower than the cost of climate inaction;

Enhancing citizens’ opportunities in a vibrant society

18. Insists that continued investment in EU4Health and Cluster Health in Horizon Europe are key to improving health and preparedness for future health crises, thereby improving the health status of EU citizens; stresses the need for health investments for maximum impact; highlights its support for a holistic regulatory and funding approach to Europe’s life sciences and biotech ecosystem, including the creation of cutting-edge European clusters of excellence, as a central pillar of a stronger European health union, to which a European plan for cardiovascular diseases and lifestyles should be added, focusing on primary and secondary prevention as key objectives to increase life expectancy in the EU; highlights the need to create a more supportive care system to respond to demographic challenges and the ageing population; reiterates its support for Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, as well as the importance of European investment in tackling childhood diseases, rare diseases and antimicrobial resistance; reiterates the importance of the gender aspect of health, including sexual and reproductive health and access to services; is highly concerned by the current mental health crisis in Europe, affecting in particular the young generation, exacerbated by recent global events, which requires immediate action to be taken; underlines the need to prevent shortages of critical medicines, medical countermeasures and healthcare workers faced by some Member States; calls, in this respect, for better coordination at EU level and joint procurement of medicines in order to reduce costs;

19. Stresses the importance of investing in young generations and their skills, as major agents of change and progress, by ensuring access to quality education; considers it essential that all students, without discrimination and in every EU Member State, should have full access to the Erasmus+ programme and underlines the essential role of Erasmus+ in facilitating cultural exchange, strengthening European identity and promoting peace through mutual understanding and cooperation, making it a cornerstone of European integration and unity; recalls the need to tackle the skills deficit, the brain drain and the correlation between market needs and skills; considers that for the EU workforce to remain competitive in the future, establishing key areas for training and reskilling is needed; stresses that further investment is required in modernising the Union’s education systems, by equipping them for the digital and green transitions, creating talent booster schemes and incentivising young entrepreneurs; points, in this respect, to the relevance of sufficient financial resources for EU programmes such as the European Social Fund Plus, Erasmus+ and the EU Solidarity Corps, which have proven highly effective in helping to achieve high employment levels and fair social protection, in broadening education and training across the Union, as well as in promoting new job opportunities and fostering skills, youth participation and equal opportunities for all; calls on the Commission to do its utmost so that all university students remain eligible to participate in the Erasmus+ programme, including in Hungary;

20. Recalls the role of the EU budget in contributing to the objectives of the European Pillar of Social Rights; highlights the role of the EU budget in contributing to initiatives that reinforce social dialogue and facilitate labour mobility, including in the form of training, networking and capacity building;

21. Highlights the ever-increasing threats and dangers of organised and targeted disinformation campaigns against the EU by foreign stakeholders undermining European democracy; calls for the mobilisation of all relevant Union programmes, including Creative Europe, to fund actions in 2026 that promote inclusive digital and media literacy, in particular for young people, combating disinformation, countering online hate speech and extremist content, while encouraging the active participation of citizens in democratic processes and safeguarding media freedom and pluralism for good cultural resilience, all of which are fundamental to a thriving democracy;

22. Calls on the Commission to increase EU funding for protecting citizens, religious communities and public spaces against terrorist threats, combating radicalisation and terrorist content online, as well as countering hate speech and rising antisemitism, anti-Muslim hatred and racism;

23. Calls on the Commission to ensure the swift, full and proper implementation and robust enforcement of the Digital Services Act [22], the Digital Market Act [23] and the Artificial Intelligence Act [24], also by allocating sufficient human resources; stresses the importance of tackling foreign interference, addressing the dangers of biased algorithms, and safeguarding transparency, accountability and the integrity of the digital public space;

24. Underlines the added value of funding programmes in the areas of democracy, rights and values; recalls the important role that the EU budget plays in the promotion of the European values enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union and in supporting the key principles of democracy, the rule of law, solidarity, inclusiveness, justice, non-discrimination and equality, including gender equality; reaffirms, furthermore, the essential role of the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values programme in promoting European values and citizens’ rights, in particular its Union Values strand, as well as gender equality, thereby sustaining and further developing an open, rights-based, democratic, equal and inclusive society based on the rule of law; stresses the need for targeted measures to address gender disparities and promote equal opportunities through EU funding allocations; stresses that supporting investigative journalism with sufficient resources is a strategic investment in democracy, transparency and social justice; reiterates the importance of the Daphne and Equality and Rights programmes, and stresses that necessary resources should be devoted to combating discrimination in all its forms, as well as tackling forms of violence;

25. Emphasises the valuable work carried out under the Union Values strand, which provides, among other things, direct funding to civil society organisations as key actors in vibrant democracies; stresses that citizens and civil society organisations, promoting the will and interest of citizens, represent the core of European democracy; underlines, in this regard, the importance of all EU programmes and increased funding in supporting the genuine engagement of civil society, particularly in the context of the impact of reduced funding for civil society by the EU’s international partners;

26. Considers it essential for the Union’s stability and progress and its citizens’ trust to ensure the proper use of Union funds and to take all steps towards protecting the Union’s financial interests, in particular by applying the rule of law conditionality; underscores the undeniable connection between respect for the rule of law and efficient implementation of the Union’s budget in accordance with the principles of sound financial management under the Financial Regulation; reiterates that under the Rule of Law Conditionality Regulation [25], the imposition of appropriate measures must not affect the obligations of governments to implement the programme or fund affected by the measure, and in particular the obligations they have towards final recipients; insists, therefore, that in cases of breaches of the rule of law by national governments, the Commission should explore alternative ways to implement the budget, including by assessing the possibility of diverting sources to directly and indirectly managed programmes, in order to ensure that local and regional authorities, civil society and other beneficiaries can continue to benefit from Union funding, without weakening the application of the regulation; highlights the role of the European Court of Auditors and its constant activity in defence of transparency, accountability and strict compliance with the regulations on all of the funds and programmes;

A strong Union in a changing world

27. Observes that the need for the EU to maintain and augment its presence on the global stage is increasingly crucial amid escalating global conflicts, geopolitical shifts and foreign influence efforts worldwide, particularly considering developments with other major global providers of aid; stresses that in order to achieve this, the Union requires sufficient funding and resources to act, including to respond to major crises in its neighbourhood and throughout the world, in particular in the light of the sudden decrease in international funding; stresses the importance of the humanitarian aid programme and regrets that resources are not increasing in line with record-high needs; underscores the need to strengthen the EU’s role as a leading humanitarian actor while effectively addressing emerging crises, particularly in regions facing protracted conflict, displacement, food insecurity and natural disasters; emphasises that the Union also requires sufficient resources for long-term investments in building global partnerships, and points out the importance of the participation of non-EU countries in Union programmes, where appropriate;

28. Underlines that the EU’s security environment has changed dramatically following Russia’s illegal, unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine and unpredictable changes in the policies of its main allies; recalls the importance of enhancing citizens’ safety and of achieving efficiency in the area of defence and strategic autonomy, through a comprehensive approach to security that covers military and civilian capabilities, external relations and internal security; stresses the importance of the Internal Security Fund to ensure funding to tackle increased levels of serious organised crime with a cross-border dimension and cybercrime; recognises the pressure which increased defence spending represents for Member Sates’ national budgets; stresses the importance of Member States stepping up their efforts and increasing funding for their defence capabilities, in a consistent and complementary manner in line with the NATO guideline;

29. Stresses that, beyond the enormous sacrifices of the people of Ukraine in withstanding Russia’s war of aggression for our common European security, this war has also had substantial economic and social consequences for people throughout Europe; recalls that certain Member States, in particular those with a land border with Russia and/or Belarus in the Baltic region, and frontline Member States, as well as vulnerable sectors of the economy, remain particularly exposed to the consequences of the war and deserve support in areas such as agriculture, infrastructure and military mobility, in the spirit of EU solidarity;

30. Firmly reiterates its unconditional and full support for Ukraine in its fight for its freedom and democracy against Russian aggression, as the war on its soil has passed the three-year mark; underlines the ongoing need for high levels of funding, including in humanitarian aid and for repairs to critical infrastructure, and for improved capacity along the EU-Ukraine Solidarity Lanes; welcomes the renewed and reinforced intention of the Commission and Member States to work in a united way to address Ukraine’s pressing defence needs and to further support the Ukrainian economy by providing regular and predictable financial support and facilitating investment opportunities; welcomes the agreement with the Council on macro-financial assistance for Ukraine of up to EUR 35 billion, making use of the proceeds of frozen Russian assets through the new Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism, in order to support Ukraine’s recovery, reconstruction and modernisation, as well as to foster Ukraine’s progress on its path to EU accession; stresses the importance of ensuring accountability regarding core international crimes;

31. Insists on the benefits of pre-accession funds, both for the enlargement countries and for the EU itself, as the funding creates more stability in the region; welcomes the implementation of the Growth Plan for the Western Balkans to further support the economic convergence of Western Balkan countries with the EU’s single market through investment and growth in the region; insists on the need to deploy the necessary funds to support Moldova’s accession process, in line with the EU’s commitment to enlargement and regional stability; underlines the role of the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova and highlights the necessity of securing sufficient financial resources for its full implementation; underlines the importance of sustained support for candidate countries in implementing the necessary accession-related reforms, in particular regarding the rule of law, anti-corruption and democracy and in enhancing their resilience and preventing and countering hybrid threats; calls on the Commission to allocate additional funding to support civil society, independent media organisations and journalists;

32. Underlines, furthermore, that EU neighbourhood policy, namely its Eastern and Southern Partnerships, contributes to the overall goal of increasing the stability, prosperity and resilience of the EU’s neighbours and thereby of increasing the security of our continent; stresses, therefore, the importance of reinforcing the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhood budget lines in order to support political, economic and social reforms in the regions, facilitate peace processes and reconstruction and provide assistance to refugees, in particular through continuous, reinforced and predictable funding and continuous implementation on the ground; recalls that the EU must continue to alleviate other crises and assist the most vulnerable populations around the world through its humanitarian aid programme, as well as by maintaining its global positioning with the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument for supporting global challenges and promoting human rights, freedoms and democracy, as well as for the capacity building of civil society organisations and for delivering on the Union’s international climate and biodiversity commitments, within a comprehensive monitoring and control system;

Cross-cutting issues in the 2026 budget

33. Underlines that the repayment of the European Union Recovery Instrument (EURI) borrowing costs is a legal obligation for the EU and therefore non-discretionary; notes that borrowing costs depend on the pace of disbursements under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) as well as on market fluctuations in bond yields and are therefore inherently partly unpredictable and volatile; insists, therefore, on the need for the Commission to provide reliable, timely and accurate information on NextGenerationEU (NGEU) borrowing costs and on expected RRF disbursements throughout the budgetary procedure as well as on available decommitments; expects the Commission to update the decommitments forecast when it presents the draft budget; recalls that the three institutions agreed that expenditures covering the financing costs of NGEU must aim at not reducing EU programmes and funds;

34. Recalls its support for the amended Commission proposals for the introduction of new own resources; is highly concerned by the complete lack of progress on the new own resources in the Council, in particular in view of increasing investment and unforeseen needs; considers that the introduction of new own resources, in line with the roadmap in the interinstitutional agreement of 2020, is essential to cover NGEU borrowing costs while shielding the margins and flexibility mechanisms necessary to cater for these needs;

35. Highlights again Parliament’s full support for the cohesion policy and its key role in delivering on the EU’s policy priorities and its general growth; reiterates that the cohesion policy’s optimal added value for citizens depends on its effective and timely implementation; in the same vein, urges the Member States and the Commission to accelerate the implementation of operational programmes under shared management funds as well as of the recovery and resilience plans so as to ensure swift budgetary execution and to avoid accumulated payment backlogs in the two last years of the MFF period, in particular through additional capacity building and technical assistance for Member States; reaffirms the imperative of a robust and transparent mechanism for accurately monitoring disbursements to beneficiaries;

36. Notes that particular attention must be paid to rural and remote areas, areas affected by industrial transition and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as islands and outermost, cross-border and mountain regions and all those affected by natural disasters; stresses that these regions should benefit from adequate funding to offset the special characteristics and constraints of their structural social and economic situation, as referred to in Article 349 TFEU; stresses the vital importance of the POSEI programme for maintaining agricultural activity in the outermost regions and bringing food to local markets; calls for the programme budget to be increased to reflect the real needs of farmers in these regions; notes that there has been no such increase since 2013, despite the fact that farmers in these regions face higher production costs due to inflation and climate change; stresses also that the Overseas Countries and Territories associated with the EU, as referred to in Articles 198-204 TFEU, should benefit from adequate funding for their sustainable economic and social development, in the light of their geopolitical importance for global maritime trade routes and key partnerships such as those on sustainable raw materials value chains;

37. Reiterates that EU programmes, policies and activities, where relevant, should be implemented in such a way that promotes gender equality in the delivery of their objectives; welcomes the Commission’s work on developing gender mainstreaming in order to meaningfully measure the gender impact of Union spending, as set out in the interinstitutional agreement;

38. Takes note that the climate mainstreaming target of 30 % is projected to be met by 33.5 % in 2025, while the biodiversity target will be below 8.5 % in 2025, and unless dedicated action is undertaken the 10 % target will not be met in 2026; stresses the need for continuous efforts towards the achievement of the climate and biodiversity mainstreaming targets laid down in the interinstitutional agreement in the Union budget and the EURI expenditures;

39. Stresses that the 2026 Union budget should be aligned with the Union’s ambitions of making the Union climate neutral by 2050 at the latest, as well as the Union’s international commitments, in particular under the Paris Agreement and the Kunming-Montreal Agreement, and should significantly contribute to the implementation of the European Green Deal and the 2030 biodiversity strategy;

40. Recalls that effective programme implementation is achievable only with the backing of a committed administration; emphasises the essential work carried out by bodies and decentralised agencies and asserts that they must be properly staffed and sufficiently resourced, while taking into account inflation, so that they can fulfil their responsibilities effectively and contribute to the achievement of the Union political priorities, also when given new tasks and mandates;

41. Recalls that, in accordance with the Financial Regulation, when implementing the budget, Member States and the Commission must ensure compliance with the Charter of Fundamental Rights and respect the Union’s values enshrined in Article 2 TEU; underlines in particular Articles 137, 138 and 158 of the Financial Regulation and recalls the Commission and the Member States’ obligation to exclude from Union funds any persons or entities found guilty by a final judgment of terrorist offences, as well as by final judgments of terrorist activities, inciting, aiding, abetting or attempting to commit such offences, and corruption or other serious offences; highlights the need to leverage efforts in tackling fraud both at Union and Member State level and to this end ensure appropriate financial and human resources covering the Union’s full anti-fraud architecture; recalls the importance of providing the Union Anti-Fraud Programme with sufficient financial resources;

42. Underlines the importance of effective communication and the visibility of EU policies and programmes in raising awareness of the added value that the EU brings to citizens, businesses and partners;

° °

43. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS (20.2.2025)

for the Committee on Budgets

on guidelines for the 2026 budget – Section III

(2024/2110(BUI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Michael Gahler

OPINION

The Committee on Foreign Affairs calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following into its motion for a resolution:

1. Welcomes the fact that the multiannual financial framework (MFF) revision in 2024 provided for additional funding under Heading 6 and for the EUR 50 billion Ukraine Facility; deplores, however, the fact that the MFF revision fell short of the needs identified by Parliament; reiterates the urgent need to increase funding, particularly in crisis-affected regions where the needs are greatest, and to address the various challenges in the neighbourhood, invest in partnerships and strengthen the geopolitical position of the EU; underlines in particular the need for continued efforts to finance Ukraine’s immediate funding needs; emphasises that the EU should without any delay intensify its efforts to enable frozen and immobilised Russian assets to be used for Ukraine’s reconstruction, reparations and budgetary needs, in full compliance with EU and international law; underlines that the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument – Global Europe (NDICI – Global Europe) and the Global Gateway are crucial instruments within the Union’s external action toolbox; stresses the importance of the EU’s humanitarian aid policies and instruments; calls in general for a more strategic and impactful approach to EU funding abroad while advancing open strategic autonomy;

2. Reiterates that an increased level of funding should be allocated for the Southern Neighbourhood in 2025 to support political, economic and social reforms in the region; highlights in particular the pressing need to contribute significantly to the reconstruction of Gaza and to provide additional humanitarian aid in Gaza, Lebanon and Syria; recalls that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNWRA) has up to now been the principal humanitarian assistance structure in Gaza and the West Bank as well as an essential service provider in the region; recalls the need to continue supporting key regional partners such as Jordan in order to foster peace in the region;

3. Welcomes the new Reform and Growth Facility for the Western Balkans and the proposed Facility for Moldova, as well as the role of the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) III in financing actions in the region; underlines that the Reform Agendas, which beneficiaries need to develop, are a promising instrument to speed up transformation and compliance with EU norms; calls on the Commission, in the interests of a successful accession process, to strictly apply the conditionalities enshrined in the two facilities; calls furthermore on the Commission to accompany all 10 enlargement countries on their path to European integration and to provide tailored assistance to address their respective challenges; calls on the Commission to allocate additional funding to support civil society and independent media organisations and journalists; calls on the Commission to ensure that it retains the possibility to withhold funds, either temporarily or indefinitely, if those funds would contribute to the budgets of governments – whether at the national or sub-national level – whose actions are significantly undermining the stability of the country or its neighbours, or the country’s progress towards European integration, particularly regarding democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to present a proposal for an instrument for pre-accession assistance for the next MFF that incorporates the facilities to avoid overlaps and covers all 10 enlargement countries and which should ensure strong institutional and economic preparedness for EU membership; calls also on the Commission to speed up the integration of all candidate countries in the EU roaming area;

4. Highlights the importance of the EU’s ensuring that EU funds do not go towards financing educational literature that romanticises martyrdom, violence or terrorism;

5. Underlines the need for the Directorate-General for Enlargement and the Eastern Neighbourhood (DG ENEST), the Directorate-General for the Middle East, North Africa and the Gulf (DG MENA) and the European External Action Service (EEAS) to be provided with sufficient financial and human resources to promote peace, prosperity, security and EU values and interests in both the European neighbourhood and across the globe; underlines the need to provide adequate resources to both the EEAS and the Commission for strategic communication and to counter disinformation; highlights the need to maintain the current structure of the network of EU delegations around the world and to provide financing that is commensurate with the role that the Union expects all delegations to play on the ground; notes, furthermore, that the EEAS, with 145 delegations around the globe, cannot be measured according to the same logic as that applied to European institutions in Brussels and Luxembourg; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Council not to apply the 2 % logic to the EEAS; insists on a budgetary increase for common foreign and security policy (CFSP) actions and common security and defence policy (CSDP) missions, as well as other appropriate peace, conflict and crisis response instruments; stresses the need to improve IT and security protocols within EEAS headquarters, EU Delegations and in Commission directorates-general with responsibilities in EU External Action; stresses the importance of investing in European security and defence by bolstering the Union’s strategic autonomy and collective defence capabilities;

6. Welcomes the establishment of the EU Partnership Mission in Moldova (EUPM Moldova); highlights the essential role of the EUPM Moldova and calls on the EU and its Member States to extend the mission’s mandate beyond May 2025, while increasing resources to enhance its effectiveness;

7. Reiterates the EU’s commitment to promoting gender equality and the empowerment of women globally, as enshrined in the EU Gender Action Plan III (2021–2025); calls for increased resources to support women’s rights, including efforts to eliminate gender-based violence, strengthen women’s participation in decision-making processes and promote economic empowerment; emphasises the importance of gender mainstreaming across all budgetary and policy initiatives to ensure equal opportunities and inclusivity; stresses that gender equality is not only a fundamental right but also a crucial driver of social and economic development;

8. Calls on the Commission to collaborate with the EPLO office in Washington, D.C., and the EU delegation in the United States to identify, fund and implement initiatives aimed at strengthening the transatlantic relationship, including exchange programmes for professionals working in public institutions in both the EU and the United States;

9. Underlines that any disbursements from the European budget must depend on the beneficiary country’s respect for the rule of law, human rights and compliance with international obligations, and with respect for international agreements;

10. Considers that more EU funds need to be allocated to joint cyber defence in order to counter the digital threats from Russia, the People’s Republic of China and others; considers that the Commission needs to secure the necessary funding for a future cyber army that can help EU institutions and Member States to defend themselves against cyberattacks from hostile states;

11. Stresses the need for the visibility and communication of EU aid, particularly in candidate countries, but also in other partner countries;

12. Stresses the urgent need for the EU to invest in research and development concerning low-cost drones, not only in order to support Ukraine in its efforts to defend itself against Russia, but also to strengthen European defence; considers that the EU should cooperate with Ukraine on the development of a drone system following their successful use of drones.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur for the opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted	19.2.2025
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	40 13 8
Members present for the final vote	Mika Aaltola, Petras Auštrevičius, Dan Barna, Wouter Beke, Robert Biedroń, Ľuboš Blaha, Ioan-Rareş Bogdan, Marc Botenga, Helmut Brandstätter, Sebastião Bugalho, Tobias Cremer, Danilo Della Valle, Loucas Fourlas, Alberico Gambino, Giorgos Georgiou, Christophe Gomart, Rima Hassan, Rasa Juknevičienė, Sandra Kalniete, Łukasz Kohut, Ondřej Kolář, Rihards Kols, Andrey Kovatchev, Reinhold Lopatka, Antonio López-Istúriz White, Marion Maréchal, David McAllister, Vangelis Meimarakis, Sven Mikser, Francisco José Millán Mon, Hannah Neumann, Urmas Paet, Kostas Papadakis, Tonino Picula, Thijs Reuten, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Mounir Satouri, Andreas Schieder, Alexander Sell, Villy Søvndal, Davor Ivo Stier, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Cristian Terheş, Riho Terras, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Reinier Van Lanschot, Nicola Zingaretti, Željana Zovko
Substitutes present for the final vote	Krzysztof Brejza, Jaroslav Bžoch, Engin Eroglu, Tomasz Froelich, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Ana Catarina Mendes, Alessandra Moretti, Ana Miguel Pedro, Chloé Ridel, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Marco Tarquinio
Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote	Anna Bryłka, Mélissa Camara, Alexander Jungbluth, Erik Marquardt, Leire Pajín, Kristian Vigenin

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

40	+
ECR	Cristian Terheş
PPE	Mika Aaltola, Wouter Beke, Ioan-Rareş Bogdan, Krzysztof Brejza, Sebastião Bugalho, Loucas Fourlas, Rasa Juknevičienė, Sandra Kalniete, Łukasz Kohut, Ondřej Kolář, Andrey Kovatchev, Reinhold Lopatka, Antonio López-Istúriz White, David McAllister, Vangelis Meimarakis, Francisco José Millán Mon, Davor Ivo Stier, Riho Terras, Željana Zovko
Renew	Petras Auštrevičius, Dan Barna, Helmut Brandstätter, Engin Eroglu, Ilhan Kyuchyuk, Urmas Paet, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann
S&D	Robert Biedroń, Tobias Cremer, Ana Catarina Mendes, Sven Mikser, Alessandra Moretti, Tonino Picula, Thijs Reuten, Chloé Ridel, Nacho Sánchez Amor, Andreas Schieder, Marco Tarquinio, Kristian Vigenin, Nicola Zingaretti

13	–
ECR	Rihards Kols, Marion Maréchal
ESN	Tomasz Froelich, Alexander Jungbluth, Alexander Sell
NI	Ľuboš Blaha, Kostas Papadakis
PfE	Jaroslav Bžoch, Pierre-Romain Thionnet
The Left	Marc Botenga, Danilo Della Valle, Giorgos Georgiou, Rima Hassan

8	0
ECR	Alberico Gambino, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza
Verts/ALE	Mélissa Camara, Erik Marquardt, Hannah Neumann, Mounir Satouri, Villy Søvndal, Reinier Van Lanschot

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

– : against

0 : abstention

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM (19.2.2025)

for the Committee on Budgets

on general guidelines for the preparation of the 2026 budget, Section III – Commission

(2024/2110(BUI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Gheorghe Falcă

OPINION

The Committee on Transport and Tourism calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following into its motion for a resolution:

A. whereas the Connecting Europe Facility for Transport (CEF-T) has been a highly successful EU instrument for strategic investment in the development of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), aimed at transforming the EU’s roads, railways, ports, inland waterways and airways into a connected, safe, efficient, sustainable and competitive transport system; whereas the completion deadlines of 2030 for the core network, 2040 for the extended core network and 2050 for the comprehensive network are binding on the Member States and often require massive and sustained infrastructure investments; whereas the CEF-T should remain an important transport funding instrument in the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework (MFF);

B. whereas modern, interconnected and multimodal transport infrastructure within a single European transport area is central to creating growth and jobs in the EU, completing the European single market and ensuring territorial cohesion, including for the benefit of peripheral, rural, mountainous, island and outermost regions and other geographically disadvantaged areas; whereas the Draghi and Letta reports call on the EU to step up its efforts to develop a competitive industrial strategy in the face of global competition; whereas successful decarbonisation that safeguards the global competitiveness of European industries requires significant investment in renewable-energy-based transport networks and alternative fuel infrastructure for sustainable transport; whereas digitalisation across all transport sectors can yield significant efficiency gains, which often have the potential to exceed the initial investments; whereas sufficient investment is required to achieve this and other technological solutions to enhance interoperability between digital, energy and transport networks and to maximise network benefits; whereas increased investment in road safety is necessary to achieve the goals of the EU’s Vision Zero strategy and ensure the safety of roads and road users; whereas the transport sector faces labour and skills shortages, combined with sometimes poor working conditions;

C. whereas the efficient use of EU funds is paramount to achieving strategic objectives within limited financial envelopes, particularly in the light of inflationary pressures that have led to significant increases in construction, energy and raw material costs, threatening the financial feasibility of key infrastructure projects of common European interest; whereas resilient and coordinated EU funding mechanisms are vital for maintaining project momentum despite economic volatility; whereas the imperative of maximising the impact of EU spending requires inflation-adjusted budgetary provisions, the reallocation of underutilised funds, as well as clear monitoring and improved reporting frameworks;

D. whereas delays in planning, permitting and procurement processes also hinder the timely implementation of transport and infrastructure projects, jeopardising EU transport and infrastructure development; whereas establishing optimised approval procedures is crucial to accelerating project timelines and ensuring budget absorption;

E. whereas, as envisaged under the Omnibus simplification package outlined by the Commission in its Competitiveness Compass, reducing regulatory and administrative burdens and simplifying implementation are key to ensuring equal access to funding for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), regional authorities and disadvantaged regions; whereas the simplification of EU regulatory and administrative processes at all levels, coupled with streamlined access to funding, are essential for achieving the timely and efficient implementation of projects under CEF-T and tourism programmes, particularly for SMEs and regional authorities;

F. whereas the action plan on military mobility 2.0 outlines ambitious EU-level initiatives; whereas, however, inadequate funding remains a significant obstacle to their effective implementation;

G. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, like the COVID-19 pandemic, has underscored the vulnerability of the EU’s transport and tourism sectors to external shocks; whereas it is more necessary now than ever before to strengthen transport connections with Ukraine and Moldova; whereas the EU-Ukraine road transport agreement, which facilitates road freight transport and transit by setting up solidarity corridors, has been extended until 30 June 2025, with the possibility of tacit renewal for a further six months; whereas the European transport network is critical infrastructure facing increasing digital and/or physical security risks and needs to be protected from external threats to maintain the societal functions for which it is vital;

H. whereas tourism, a major economic activity accounting for almost 10 % of the EU’s GDP and identified in the Commission’s 2021 industrial strategy as a critical ecosystem for the EU’s economy and for employment, continues to face economic, environmental, employment-related and digital challenges;

1. Calls for a significant increase in the CEF-T budget to secure adequate funding for ongoing and planned TEN-T projects, focusing on cross-border infrastructure with the highest added value for the EU and on the elimination of bottlenecks and missing links, including within Member States, in order to enhance passenger and freight flow throughout Europe; underlines, furthermore, the value of smaller-scale projects in improving cross-border connectivity and their eligibility for EU funding;

2. Welcomes the Commission’s announcement that it will develop an EU industrial action plan for the automotive sector, as proposed in the Draghi report, and calls for swift progress in the ongoing strategic dialogue;

3. Welcomes the Commission’s announcement that it will develop a new maritime industrial strategy to enhance the competitiveness, sustainability and resilience of the European maritime manufacturing sector; appreciates the Commission’s announcement that it would present a European port strategy to limit the risks of economic dependence, espionage and sabotage linked to the economic presence and operational involvement of entities from non-EU countries in EU ports;

4. Calls, further, for a strategic action plan for the EU aviation sector to identify potential reductions in administrative burdens and to assess financial needs for maintaining the sector’s competitiveness in the face of decarbonisation pressures and the associated risks, including an uneven playing field and carbon leakage, and geopolitical challenges, and with regard to a cross-country analysis of working conditions as a determinant in attracting and retaining skilled workers and boosting productivity;

5. Welcomes the commitment to put forward a plan to develop an ambitious European high-speed rail network to help connect EU capitals, including through night trains, and to accelerate rail freight, as well as to set up a single digital ticketing and booking system for railways as soon as possible, as already outlined in the revised TEN-T guidelines; underlines the need for ambitious support for the deployment of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS);

6. Advocates a comprehensive strategy on hyperloop, with clear timelines, detailed investment frameworks and support for research, development and deployment;

7. Welcomes, in this respect, the Commission’s announcement under the Competitiveness Compass presenting a sustainable transport investment plan and calls on the Commission to define financing measures for the above-mentioned strategies and action plans, including by de-risking the investment needed to swiftly ramp up charging infrastructure as well as for the production and distribution of renewable and low-carbon transport fuels, without jeopardising existing market choices;

8. Underlines again the role of the Social Climate Fund in supporting investment for an inclusive transition towards more sustainable mobility and calls on the Member States to address transport poverty with specific policies and financing measures in their national Social Climate Plans;

9. Highlights the need to address the shortage of qualified labour, women’s employment and an ageing workforce in the transport sector; calls, in this regard, for sufficient support for the safety and good working conditions of transport workers as well as for the funding of safe and secure truck parking areas across the EU;

10. Calls for the digitalisation of transport through intelligent solutions and digital booking platforms to facilitate seamless cross-border travel; calls for the systematic reduction of EU regulatory burdens across all transport modes to free up resources, including EU budgetary means, for increased investment in transport infrastructure; underlines the strong need for prior impact assessments of all new legislative initiatives with respect to their budgetary implications but also the regulatory or administrative burdens that the proposals would create or resolve;

11. Calls on the Commission to address inflationary pressures and resource scarcity by incorporating inflation adjustments into the budget; notes that the inclusion of realistic price adjustments is essential to safeguarding the viability of transport and infrastructure projects against the impact of inflation-induced cost increases; supports the reallocation of unused funds to strategic clusters, such as transport infrastructure, sustainable transport solutions and innovation; calls strongly for the integration of inflation-resilient frameworks and adaptive budget mechanisms within the MFF to avoid financing challenges in upcoming cycles;

12. Emphasises the importance of bolstering co-financing mechanisms, particularly for large-scale projects such as the Clean Aviation, Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) and Europe’s Rail Joint Undertakings, to ensure their timely implementation despite economic constraints; insists on the leveraging of public-private partnerships (PPPs) to mobilise additional resources;

13. Advocates innovative financing models, in particular the facilitation of PPPs by providing guarantees or implementing risk-sharing mechanisms, in order to attract private investment in transport and tourism infrastructure, including for a faster transition to alternative fuels; stresses that these PPPs can also contribute to knowledge-sharing, innovation and support for SMEs and start-ups;

14. Stresses the need to reinforce the budgets of transport agencies, in particular the EU Aviation Safety Agency, the European Maritime Safety Agency, and the EU Agency for Railways, so that they can fulfil the additional tasks assigned to them by the co-legislators in recently adopted EU legislation, as well as in order to support critical safety, sustainability, interoperability, competitiveness, innovation and modernisation initiatives;

15. Calls resolutely for the streamlining of application and reporting procedures in relation to EU funds in line with Directive 2021/1187 [26]; insists on transparent and fair allocation of EU transport funding using digital platforms in order to simplify access for SMEs and regional stakeholders; calls for the establishment of expedited review processes for critical transport and infrastructure projects in order to reduce delays; proposes the implementation of the ‘once-only’ principle for administrative processes, allowing applicants to provide information once and reuse it across EU programmes, thus reducing redundancy and delays, including for the increased blending of EU funds;

16. Insists on the restoration of the military mobility budget to the originally proposed EUR 6.5 billion over seven years; reiterates that the drastic cut of 75 % to military mobility funding within the transport pillar considerably weakens this policy; highlights the critical role of that funding in adapting parts of the TEN-T infrastructure for dual use along priority axes, in order to facilitate the short-notice, large-scale movement of military equipment and humanitarian aid across the continent, enabling a joint response to military threats to the EU Member States and their allied nations; calls for military mobility to be included in the white paper on the future of European defence;

17. Reiterates that, to help Ukraine withstand Russia’s war of aggression and to accelerate its post-war recovery and integration into the EU market, alongside the upcoming decisions on the renewal of the EU-Ukraine road transport agreement, it is imperative to pursue projects to improve the capacity along the EU-Ukraine Solidarity Lanes, encompassing railway upgrades, improved border crossings and the crucial step of integrating relevant lines of Ukraine’s rail system into the EU’s standard gauge to facilitate the uninterrupted movement of goods and services; considers that the 2026 budget should also help alleviate the economic and social hardship faced by the people of the EU’s eastern border regions, especially the Baltic states, Finland, Poland and Romania, who have been particularly affected by economic losses and the suspension of cross-border mobility as a consequence of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine; calls for the financing of further EU measures against the Russian shadow fleet;

18. Reiterates its repeated request to create a specific EU programme and a dedicated budget line for tourism in the current MFF and beyond, increasing the sector’s resistance to economic shocks and contributing to further growth and jobs across the value chain, bringing significant benefits and long-term well-being to local people and their businesses; highlights the need to reduce administrative burdens for SMEs operating in the tourism sector by simplifying rules, minimising data collection requirements, where appropriate, and providing tailored financial support; notes that the tourism sector stands to benefit greatly from digital innovations, such as smart tourism platforms and integrated digital ticketing systems for attractions and services, which enhance visitor experiences while driving significant economic growth for local communities; stresses that the further development of sustainable tourism, including through the promotion of regional products to strengthen local value chains or the management of tourist flows, could foster economic growth in less popular, more remote and peripheral areas, improve urban-rural connectivity and bolster the climate resilience of EU territories.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted	19.2.2025
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	36 6 0
Members present for the final vote	Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Daniel Attard, Tom Berendsen, Nina Carberry, Benoit Cassart, Carlo Ciccioli, Vivien Costanzo, Johan Danielsson, Valérie Devaux, Siegbert Frank Droese, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Sérgio Humberto, François Kalfon, Elena Kountoura, Merja Kyllönen, Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus, Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Milan Mazurek, Alexandra Mehnert, Ştefan Muşoiu, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Philippe Olivier, Matteo Ricci, Arash Saeidi, Marjan Šarec, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Kai Tegethoff, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi, Kosma Złotowski
Substitutes present for the final vote	Arno Bausemer, Ondřej Krutílek, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Elena Nevado del Campo, Luděk Niedermayer, Andrey Novakov, Beata Szydło, Flavio Tosi, Kathleen Van Brempt
Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote	Marie Dauchy, Elisabeth Grossmann

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

36	+
ECR	Carlo Ciccioli, Ondřej Krutílek, Beata Szydło, Kosma Złotowski
PPE	Tom Berendsen, Nina Carberry, Gheorghe Falcă, Jens Gieseke, Sérgio Humberto, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Alexandra Mehnert, Elena Nevado del Campo, Luděk Niedermayer, Andrey Novakov, Flavio Tosi, Elissavet Vozemberg-Vrionidi
Renew	Oihane Agirregoitia Martínez, Benoit Cassart, Valérie Devaux, Jan-Christoph Oetjen, Marjan Šarec
S&D	Daniel Attard, Vivien Costanzo, Johan Danielsson, Elisabeth Grossmann, François Kalfon, Ştefan Muşoiu, Matteo Ricci, Rosa Serrano Sierra, Kathleen Van Brempt
The Left	Elena Kountoura, Merja Kyllönen, Arash Saeidi
Verts/ALE	Vicent Marzà Ibáñez, Virginijus Sinkevičius, Kai Tegethoff

6	–
ESN	Arno Bausemer, Siegbert Frank Droese, Milan Mazurek
NI	Luis-Vicențiu Lazarus
PfE	Marie Dauchy, Philippe Olivier

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

– : against

0 : abstention

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (19.2.2025)

for the Committee on Budgets

on general guidelines for the preparation of the 2026 budget – Section III – Commission

(2024/2110(BUI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Gabriella Gerzsenyi

OPINION

The Committee on Regional Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following into its motion for a resolution:

A. whereas pursuant to Article 174 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), ‘in order to promote its overall harmonious development, the Union shall develop and pursue its actions leading to the strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion. In particular, the Union shall aim at reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least-favoured regions’;

B. whereas cohesion policy is a key instrument for reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions within the Union and for addressing the fact that the least-favoured regions lag behind, playing a vital role in promoting sustainable development and also addressing environmental challenges, complementing national budgets and enhancing the EU’s ability to navigate global complexities;

C. whereas among the regions concerned, particular attention must be paid to rural areas, areas affected by the industrial and automotive transitions, less-developed areas inside the so-called developed regions, eastern EU regions bordering on Russia, Belarus or Ukraine, regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, as well as outermost regions, islands and Mediterranean regions facing environmental and economic vulnerabilities;

D. whereas the absorption rate of cohesion policy funds remains very low partly owing to delays to the start of programmes and the high level of bureaucracy and complexity required in cohesion-funded projects, which can lead to unforced errors;

E. whereas among the beneficiaries concerned, particular attention should be paid to vulnerable people, such as persons with disabilities;

1. Considers that, as the EU’s main long-term investment instrument, cohesion policy is based on solidarity, creates sustainable growth and jobs across the Union and contributes to key Union objectives and priorities, including its climate, energy and biodiversity targets, competitiveness, as well as sustainable and socially inclusive economic growth, to tackle demographic challenges and ensure equitable access to affordable housing;

2. Recalls that cohesion policy has proven to be a helpful tool in tackling challenges in various crises, such as the Russian war of aggression against Ukraine and its effects on the energy supply, the high cost of living, inflation, and the needs of refugees and displaced persons, as well as natural disasters; underlines, however, that the resulting legislative amendments to cohesion policy have repeatedly brought unexpected changes to its objectives and resources, while cohesion policy should, when needed, complement rather than replace other financial instruments designed for emergency response;

3. Reiterates the need for coordination at budgetary level between all the financial instruments supporting cohesion policy; believes that, to make the most of NextGenerationEU funds, these should support and complement cohesion policy measures;

4. Emphasises the need to ensure that the ‘do no harm to cohesion’ principle is observed across the EU budget; stresses, in this regard, that cohesion policy should not undergo any fundamental changes which could jeopardise the structural and investment funds’ ability to deliver on their goals; stresses that the setting of new priorities should entail new resources and underlines that the long-term investment objectives of cohesion policy are to reduce regional disparities and enhance competitiveness;

5. Is concerned about the state of implementation of cohesion policy programmes for 2021-2027; urges the Commission to step up monitoring efforts, ensuring respect for the rule of law, a transparent, fair and responsible use of EU resources, as well as their sound financial management; urges the Commission to strengthen its cooperation with the Member State authorities at all levels in order to reduce bureaucracy to make cohesion funds more accessible to local and regional authorities, among others, and to avoid decommitments, unfinished projects and any political manipulation of fund allocation; stresses, therefore, the need to introduce a ‘smart conditionality’ mechanism;

6. Notes that the Just Transition Fund needs adequate financial resources and a long-term perspective to ensure its effectiveness in supporting regions’ transition towards climate neutrality, while ensuring that the most vulnerable regions are properly supported in the transition process; emphasises the need for a realistic and balanced approach to the just transition, ensuring economic, social and environmental sustainability, with the meaningful participation of local and regional authorities, as well as economic and social partners;

7. Calls for further simplification of cohesion policy to reduce the growing administrative burden, enhance fund accessibility and ensure investments tailored to the specific needs of regions while enabling the effective management of funds in line with the needs of final beneficiaries; highlights, in this context, the importance of the newly-created EU Councillors network, which is jointly run by the European Committee of the Regions and the European Commission, as a key tool for strengthening the ability to gather evidence of how the Union operates at local level;

8. Underlines that rural areas are a core part of Europe’s identity and economic potential; welcomes cohesion policy measures that recognise the contribution of more prosperous and resilient rural areas to Europe’s overall resilience; calls for adequate funding to enhance their role in environmental protection, food production, tourism and ensuring ‘the right to stay’; calls for increased public investment to tackle demographic challenges and support young people by improving services and infrastructure, expanding access to digital education, technologies and innovations, so as to raise living standards, increase the stock of affordable housing and foster equal access for citizens and families to culture and high quality education, essential social services and other public services, while making more efficient use of resources, reducing the impact on the environment and creating new opportunities for rural SMEs;

9. Notes that the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund support investments in sustainable urban development, underlining its importance as a key component of integrated territorial development, with at least 8 % of ERDF resources at the national level being allocated to urban areas through the relevant mechanisms; further notes that this should include special attention to the sustainable development of functional urban and metropolitan areas, facilitating the digital, green and industrial transitions;

10. Calls for increased investment in digitalisation and innovation to enhance the competitiveness of SMEs in less-developed regions, including rural and peripheral areas, in order to bridge the digital divide and foster inclusive economic growth;

11. Underlines that sustainable development is directly linked to having a highly skilled work force; insists, therefore, on the need for increased efforts to ensure an adequate degree of upskilling and reskilling of all relevant working age individuals, as well as initiatives to increase citizens’ acceptance of the economic, industrial and energy transitions;

12. Recalls the importance of mechanisms and strategies adapted to the diversity of the EU’s territories, and therefore calls for a full use of Article 349 TFEU to adapt cohesion policy to the specificities of the outermost regions; reiterates that the outermost regions should receive specific additional allocations to offset the extra costs incurred as a result of permanent constraints on their development; calls for an Islands Pact to be considered by the EU institutions with the participation of the principal stakeholders, along the lines of the Urban Pact and the future Rural Pact;

13. Reaffirms the need for close cooperation between national, regional, local and other authorities as well as their dialogue with civil society organisations and all relevant stakeholders, including economic and social partners, universities and innovation centres; recognises the importance of research and innovation policy in driving economic growth and enhancing competitiveness in order to fulfil cohesion policy objectives; highlights the need to support the commercialisation and scaling up of interregional innovation projects, underlining the importance of developing value chains, particularly in less-developed regions;

14. Reiterates the need to strengthen the administrative capabilities and capacity of local, regional and national authorities, which are key components in the effective planning and implementation of initiatives and projects at the local level; highlights the importance of stronger ownership, responsibility, partnership and decentralisation; strongly considers that increased financial resources dedicated to technical assistance are key to effective project implementation;

15. Emphasises that the implementation of cohesion policy must respect horizontal principles, including its place-based nature, multilevel governance, sustainability, the partnership principle, gender equality and non-discrimination, ensuring that all projects contribute to a more equitable and inclusive Union;

16. Stresses the need to strengthen awareness-raising among European citizens about cohesion policy achievements and calls for further information measures promoting it such as accessible data platforms, as cohesion policy is a particularly effective means of promoting strong and balanced European regions.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur for the opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted	19.2.2025
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	29 0 1
Members present for the final vote	Adrian-Dragoş Benea, Gordan Bosanac, Irmhild Boßdorf, Daniel Buda, Klára Dobrev, Klara Dostalova, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Krzysztof Hetman, Ľubica Karvašová, Elsi Katainen, Isabelle Le Callennec, Elena Nevado del Campo, Andrey Novakov, Valentina Palmisano, Vladimir Prebilič, Sabrina Repp, Marcos Ros Sempere, André Rougé, Antonella Sberna, Mārtiņš Staķis, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Rody Tolassy, Francesco Ventola, Marta Wcisło
Substitutes present for the final vote	Dan Barna, Sofie Eriksson, Denis Nesci, Jacek Protas
Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote	Francisco Assis

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

29	+
ECR	Denis Nesci, Antonella Sberna, Şerban Dimitrie Sturdza, Francesco Ventola
PPE	Daniel Buda, Gabriella Gerzsenyi, Krzysztof Hetman, Isabelle Le Callennec, Elena Nevado del Campo, Andrey Novakov, Jacek Protas, Marta Wcisło
PfE	Klara Dostalova, André Rougé, Rody Tolassy
Renew	Dan Barna, Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle, Ľubica Karvašová, Elsi Katainen
S&D	Francisco Assis, Adrian-Dragoş Benea, Klára Dobrev, Sofie Eriksson, Sabrina Repp, Marcos Ros Sempere
The Left	Valentina Palmisano
Verts/ALE	Gordan Bosanac, Vladimir Prebilič, Mārtiņš Staķis

1	0
ESN	Irmhild Boßdorf

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

– : against

0 : abstention

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (19.2.2025)

for the Committee on Budgets

on guidelines for the 2026 budget – Section III

(2024/2110(BUI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Dario Nardella

OPINION

The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following into its motion for a resolution:

1. Highlights the crucial role of agricultural and rural development policies, particularly the common agricultural policy (CAP), in achieving the Union’s objectives under Article 39 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; highlights the fact that these policies are tools for farmers to provide safe, healthy, affordable and sustainable food of high quality, while ensuring fair and viable incomes for all farmers, in particular active, small-scale and young farmers, including targeting to prevent land abandonment and promoting short food supply chains; underlines that these policies aim to foster sustainable food systems and secure the long-term viability, profitability, sustainability and safety of EU agricultural production, the development of rural areas and the Union’s food sovereignty, while taking into consideration animal welfare standards, climate protection, mitigation and biodiversity measures; recalls, in this regard, that the strong and simplified EU financial support for a competitive and sustainable farming sector should be increased in the 2026 CAP budget allocation to better reflect the growing challenges in rural areas, including depopulation, and keep rural areas alive; underlines that, according to the latest Eurobarometer survey, support for the CAP has reached an all-time high, with over 70 % of respondents agreeing that the CAP fulfils its role in providing safe, healthy and sustainable food of high quality;

2. Notes that spending under the CAP significantly exceeds the climate and biodiversity mainstreaming targets and requests that this surplus be used to allocate funds that directly contribute to achieving the primary objectives of the CAP;

3. Calls on the Commission to secure additional funding for further nature objectives rather than relying on the CAP, which must above all remain a fund that ensures food security and a viable income for our farmers;

4. Upholds the promotion of EU agricultural products as a cornerstone of agricultural policy, with the aim of strengthening the competitiveness and relevance of all production sectors, especially that of wine and high-quality products, which need to have better access to both internal and external markets so as to promote diversification and internationalisation; recalls the success achieved by such promotion programmes in the opening up and consolidation of new markets; stresses the need to ensure an adequate promotion-policy budget in the coming financial years;

5. Stresses the need for a stronger, better equipped, flexible and more reactive agricultural reserve, with adequate funding to cope with market imbalances or unpredictable external factors, such as extreme and recurring weather events, animal diseases, water stress or an evolving geopolitical context, which are having an increasing impact on agricultural production and markets, farmers’ incomes, farm continuity and food security; calls on the Commission to make use of the crisis reserve in the most efficient, expeditious and transparent way; stresses the need to simplify administrative procedures in order to guarantee the swift disbursement of that aid; points out that an increase in the agricultural reserve must not affect direct payments; calls on the Commission to develop a comprehensive crisis management strategy for each major agricultural sector, ensuring the rapid and effective deployment of the crisis reserve, while considering the establishment of new crisis and risk management instruments; acknowledges though that the agricultural reserve alone cannot fully compensate for the increasing frequency and severity of extreme weather events caused by climate change; stresses the need to fund preventive mitigation and adaptation measures that enhance the resilience, including climate resilience, of rural areas and food production systems;

6. Strongly opposes any proposals to reduce the level of pre-allocated funds from the CAP in the future budget; points out that those funds should be increased by at least the equivalent of cumulative inflation since the start of the current budget period in order to avoid hidden reductions in CAP funding; stresses that farmers need the continuity and predictability of the CAP and that emerging new priorities cannot lead to cuts to the CAP budget; advocates for transparency and accountability in the allocation of CAP funds and encourages Member States and the Commission to enhance cooperation and strengthen anti-fraud measures; stresses the need for a fair distribution of CAP support between and within Member States; calls on the Commission to mobilise funds outside the CAP, given the challenges facing EU agriculture and to simplify the administrative procedures for farmers who receive aid; insists that any revenue accruing to the Union budget from assigned revenue or repayments of irregularities relating to agriculture should remain under the agriculture component of Heading 3 of the multiannual financial framework (MFF);

7. Underlines that CAP simplification measures adopted in 2024 must be the starting point for the next CAP reform;

8. Recalls that innovation can play a key role in enhancing the productivity, competitiveness, resilience and adaptability of agriculture; underlines, in this regard, the importance of increasing funding for research, thereby avoiding additional bureaucracy, both in the future budget allocations in the framework of the Horizon Europe research programme, as well as in the CAP, while creating funding mechanisms that ensure the continuity of existing and successful agri-food projects, established and funded through the NextGenerationEU instrument; calls therefore for adequate funding for climate change mitigation, precision agriculture, circular economy projects, renewable energy production in rural areas, development and technology-neutral innovation, including for projects promoting animal and plant health and the efficient use of resources, such as water, in agriculture; notes that production efficiency may also be an aim in itself, and that such funding should, in addition to improving the competitiveness of the agricultural sector, increase its resilience to challenges such as climate change and the spread of animal diseases; stresses the importance of ensuring adequate resources for training and knowledge exchange through European instruments, such as the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems;

9. Highlights the fact that digitalisation is a crucial tool in the development and enhancement of the value of rural areas, including inner areas, and plays a key role in addressing depopulation and attracting young people to these areas; welcomes the digital transformation in agriculture and rural areas, including its use in irrigation, to improve the efficiency, environmental, social and economic sustainability, traceability and precision of agricultural systems, ensuring more effective use of the EU’s budgetary resources and promoting entrepreneurship in rural areas, thus making them more attractive to people and businesses; calls on the Commission and the Member States, in this context, to strengthen the technological and communications infrastructure in rural areas, including broadband internet coverage, and encourages them to leverage technologies to enhance access to critical information and digitalise administrative processes for CAP support so as to reduce the bureaucratic burden and enable more efficient access to support and services; recalls that the uptake of innovative digital technologies requires sufficient funding, as well as targeted training, education and support programmes for farmers, particularly for small-scale and older farmers, to ensure equitable and affordable access to digital tools;

10. Notes with concern the continuing loss of farms and farmers, which has a significant socio-economic impact on rural areas; urges, therefore, the EU institutions and Member States to address labour and skills shortages by stepping up their efforts to promote generational renewal in the agricultural sector and rural areas, including in outermost regions and inner areas; highlights the importance of improving the profitability of the agricultural sector by enhancing fiscal and support measures that make farming activities more attractive and by improving access to land, financing and insurance, particularly for women, families involved in small-scale farming, marginalised groups and first-time farmers, such as young people; underlines that young farmers have the potential to be a driving force in sustainable and climate-friendly farming and highlights the need to empower them, including through the use of Union funds and adapted advisory and training tools; underlines that building and modernising rural infrastructure improves the quality of life in rural areas, which is essential for generational renewal; proposes, in this context, the inclusion of a specific indicator in future policies to monitor the rate of generational renewal and the level of services and infrastructure in rural areas;

11. Calls for EU programmes to prioritise projects that safeguard existing jobs in the agricultural sector and promote the creation of quality employment; stresses that all jobs in the agricultural sector must respect workers’ rights, provide stable and regulated pay, and ensure good working conditions; emphasises the importance of effectively combating poverty and social exclusion in rural areas;

12. Recalls the challenges that the agri-food sector has faced and is facing, such as the COVID-19 crisis, the harmful effects of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, natural disasters and rising input costs; regrets that direct payments and CAP subsidies have decreased significantly in real terms due to inflation, resulting in difficulties in implementing rural development measures, while the administrative burden on farmers has increased due to the accumulation of bureaucracy; calls on the Commission to allocate adequate resources to help farmers cope with those inflationary effects, including fuel costs, and underscores that the 2 % deflator of the current MFF does not compensate for the loss of value resulting from inflation; asks the Commission to provide a more flexible deflator in the next MFF and, furthermore, to work closely with the Member States to implement best practices at national and European levels to help farmers cope with inflation and record costs;

13. Requests that, following the repeated economic crises and extreme weather events caused by climate change that have affected agricultural companies, the unspent resources of the 2014-2022 rural development plans be spent by 31 December 2026 as a derogation from the N+3 rules laid down in Article 38 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 [27];

14. Welcomes the decision of the European Investment Bank to identify agriculture and the bio-economy as key priorities in its 2024-2027 Strategic Roadmap;

15. Expresses its concern about the adverse effects on the European agri-food sector of political instability in certain Member States and at global level, as well as of geopolitical tensions related to trade or international crises; underlines that the signing of the Mercosur Agreement in December 2024 will have implications for Union farmers and producers; invites the Commission to improve trade agreements to protect EU farmers, to ensure fair competition and a level playing field, and to allocate sufficient funds to mitigate the negative effects of trade agreements on the agricultural sector; recalls that European farmers may face unfair competition from third country producers who do not meet the same production standards as those in the EU and calls therefore for a proper level of reciprocity; reiterates the negative cascade effects of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine on global food security and farmers’ livelihoods; highlights the need to make sure that the reform of the Association Agreement between the EU and Ukraine provides stability and protection for EU farmers; highlights the need to start better preparation for an enlargement of the Union, taking account of European farmers’ interests, especially with regard to the adoption of balanced and enhanced measures to safeguard the European agricultural sector, while also ensuring support for Ukraine;

16. Calls on the Commission to encourage Member States to revise their national strategic plans, including the rapid use of funds from the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development, and to provide funding to strengthen the relative negotiating positions of farmers in value chains, and for the Commission to swiftly approve these modifications;

17. Stresses the vital importance of the programme of options specifically relating to remoteness and insularity (POSEI) for maintaining agricultural activity in the outermost regions of Europe, for the provision of food and agricultural products there and for the food sovereignty of the EU as a whole; calls for the budget of the scheme, which has not been increased since 2013, to be increased to reflect the real needs of farmers in the outermost regions, as farmers in those areas are facing higher production costs; calls therefore on the Commission to apply without delay a 2 % deflator to the POSEI financial envelopes in order to mitigate the substantial losses for producers in real terms and ensure fairer support for all farmers;

18. Urges the Commission to ensure adequate resources for the implementation of an EU water management strategy and to continue developing water collection, storage and distribution activities, while preserving the status of water bodies, in order to render the use of water reserves more efficient in agriculture, both in crop irrigation and livestock farming, given that droughts are becoming increasingly severe across the Union.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted	18.2.2025
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	34 2 8
Members present for the final vote	Sergio Berlato, Stefano Bonaccini, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Daniel Buda, Waldemar Buda, Gheorghe Cârciu, Asger Christensen, Barry Cowen, Carmen Crespo Díaz, Ivan David, Valérie Deloge, Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral, Herbert Dorfmann, Carlo Fidanza, Luke Ming Flanagan, Maria Grapini, Cristina Guarda, Martin Häusling, Krzysztof Hetman, Céline Imart, Elsi Katainen, Stefan Köhler, Norbert Lins, Cristina Maestre, Dario Nardella, Maria Noichl, Gilles Pennelle, André Rodrigues, Katarína Roth Neveďalová, Bert-Jan Ruissen, Eric Sargiacomo, Christine Singer, Raffaele Stancanelli, Anna Strolenberg, Pekka Toveri, Jessika Van Leeuwen, Veronika Vrecionová, Thomas Waitz, Maria Walsh
Substitutes present for the final vote	Peter Agius, Benoit Cassart, Ton Diepeveen, Elisabetta Gualmini, Esther Herranz García

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

34	+
ECR	Sergio Berlato, Waldemar Buda, Carlo Fidanza, Bert-Jan Ruissen, Veronika Vrecionová
NI	Katarína Roth Neveďalová
PPE	Peter Agius, Daniel Buda, Carmen Crespo Díaz, Paulo Do Nascimento Cabral, Herbert Dorfmann, Esther Herranz García, Krzysztof Hetman, Céline Imart, Stefan Köhler, Norbert Lins, Pekka Toveri, Jessika Van Leeuwen, Maria Walsh
PfE	Raffaele Stancanelli
Renew	Benoit Cassart, Asger Christensen, Barry Cowen, Elsi Katainen, Christine Singer
S&D	Stefano Bonaccini, Gheorghe Cârciu, Maria Grapini, Elisabetta Gualmini, Cristina Maestre, Dario Nardella, Maria Noichl, André Rodrigues, Eric Sargiacomo

2	–
PfE	Ton Diepeveen
The Left	Luke Ming Flanagan

8	0
ESN	Ivan David
PfE	Mireia Borrás Pabón, Valérie Deloge, Gilles Pennelle
Verts/ALE	Cristina Guarda, Martin Häusling, Anna Strolenberg, Thomas Waitz

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

– : against

0 : abstention

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETARY CONTROL (18.2.2025)

Mr Johan Van Overtveldt

Chair

Committee on Budgets

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on Guidelines for the 2026 Budget – Section III (2024/2110(BUI))

Dear Mr Van Overtveldt,

Under the procedure referred to above, the Committee on Budgetary Control has been asked to submit an opinion to your committee. At its meeting of 18 February 2025, the committee decided to send the opinion in the form of a letter.

Yours sincerely,

Niclas Herbst

CONT Chair

Rapporteur for the Commission Discharge

OPINION

1. Recalls its strong commitment to the fundamental principles and values enshrined in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU);

2. Stresses the fundamental importance of respect for the rule of law to protect the financial interests of the Union in the implementation of EU funds; recalls the improvements needed in the application of the Rule of law Conditionality Regulation and a swifter follow-up by the Commission on breaches of the rule of law principles that affect or risk affecting the EU financial interests, including the Single Market dimension, as for example procurement and state aid;

3. Stresses that the sound and timely implementation of the budget contributes to addressing more efficiently and effectively the needs and challenges faced by the Union and its citizens in different policy areas; warns that the implementation of the budget under time pressure may lead to an increase in errors and irregularities;

4. Recalls that for the last years all available flexibility measures in the EU Budget were used; reiterates the need for flexibility in the EU Budget to address potential new circumstances where EU action is necessary; notes that increasingly the headroom in the EU Budget is used to provide funding to respond to crises; notes in addition, that exposure of the EU Budget to guarantees and contingent liabilities is projected to rise in the coming years, putting additional strain on the headroom in the Budget which further limits the flexibility of the EU Budget, as are the increased interest payments for NGEU related borrowing; urges the Commission to work on a more stringent risk assessment framework to define the exposure more accurately to prevent over-burdening of the EU Budget;

5. Stresses the need to protect the EU Budget from any misuse, particularly fraud and corruption, and calls on the Commission to continue to be vigilant and proactive in the current and future cases when the lack of respect for Union values and the Rule of Law affect or threaten to affect the Union’s financial interests;

6. Stresses the importance of the EU anti-fraud architecture and the need to provide increased resources and to strengthen the role of the European anti-fraud office (OLAF), the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO), the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation (Eurojust) and the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) in the fight against fraud and corruption; stresses the need for a comprehensive cooperation between all these institutions;

7. Notes that while the digital transformation is indispensable to increase the efficiency, control and transparency of the EU Budget, this shift has also heightened its exposure to cyber fraud affecting the financial interests of the Union; calls on the Commission to allocate sufficient funds to strengthen EU digital infrastructure, research and development while ensuring that investments in cybersecurity are impactful and contribute to the overall protection of the Union’s financial interests;

8. Is concerned that total outstanding commitments are reaching record levels for several years now; notes that the Commission projects outstanding commitments to decrease after 2024, when NGEU draws to a close; considers that until the projected decrease of the RAL, the risk of decommitments, and a related reduction of EU added value for the EU Budget, remains high; calls on the Commission to enact a more strategic, transparent, and proactive approach to managing decommitments, also considering the use of decommitments in the cascade mechanism;

9. Is concerned that the Union’s debt continues to rise, with a large share of this increase attributed to the temporary recovery instrument NGEU; is concerned that the increased debt and the associated higher interest costs will have long-term consequences on the EU’s fiscal stability, potentially leading to greater financial strain and a reduced capacity to respond to future challenges or invest in key strategic areas; encourages the Commission to explore options to reduce the overall debt burden, such as optimising the timing and structure of debt issuance, and consider alternative financing mechanisms that could reduce reliance on high-interest debt; stresses that introducing new own resources is also necessary to prevent future generations from bearing the burden for past debts;

10. Expresses regret that the overall error rate estimated by the Court has been increasing since the 2020 financial year, reaching 5,6 % for the 2023 financial year; notes significant variations in error rates across different budget headings, with some areas reporting error rates below the materiality threshold of 2 %, while cohesion policy has an error rate as high as 9,3 %; notes in particular the conclusion that errors found in 100 % EU-funded priorities contributed 5,0 % to the total estimated level of error of 9,3 %; is concerned that increasing flexibilities without at the same time either decreasing requirements or increasing ex ante checks and controls contributed to the high error rate; calls on the Commission to take careful consideration of the lessons learned from the implementation of EU crisis response tools, such as increased flexibility;

11. Notes that the Court issued a qualified opinion on the legality and regularity of the RRF expenditure in 2023; expresses concern that the Court found 7 out of 23 RRF payments made in 2023 were impacted by quantitative issues, with 6 of these payments being affected by material errors; notes in addition that absorption of RRF funds was delayed in 2023, and that Member States may not be able to complete all measures at the end of the RRF’s implementation period; notes further that the second half of the RRF’s implementation period (post 2023) is more challenging with an increase in number of milestones and targets to be implemented, a shift from reforms to investments, and a high proportion of measures to be completed in the last year; calls on the Commission to support the Member States’ authorities in the implementation of funds, in particular where additional administrative capacity is needed, to stimulate absorption and reduce the occurrence of errors; calls on the Commission to transparently inform the Parliament about the progress of implementation and absorption of funds and to timely propose solutions where bottlenecks in the implementation are observed;

12. Recalls the importance of protecting the Union’s own resources from any fraudulent irregularity and, to that end, stimulate the cooperation between anti-fraud services and customs agencies to detect, prevent and correct fraud affecting Union revenue; recalls its position on the amended Commission proposals endorsing the introduction of new own resources.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR OPINION HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The Chair in his capacity as rapporteur for opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, CLIMATE AND FOOD SAFETY (18.2.2025)

Mr Johan Van Overtveldt

Chair

Committee on Budgets

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on Guidelines for the 2026 Budget – Section III (2024/2110(BUI))

Dear Mr Chair,

The Coordinators of the Committee on the Environment, Climate and Food Safety (ENVI) decided on 16 December 2024 that ENVI would provide an opinion on the Guidelines for the 2026 budget – Section III (2024/2110(BUI)) in the form of a letter. Therefore, as both ENVI Chair and Standing Rapporteur for the Budget, let me provide you with ENVI’s contribution in the form of resolution paragraphs, which was adopted by ENVI at its meeting [28] of 18 February 2025 and which I kindly request will be taken into account by your committee:

1. Highlights that the current serious geopolitical context requires the Union to allocate sufficient resources for accelerating the green transition to transform the EU into a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy; calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure the full execution of the REPowerEU Plan to accelerate the deployment of renewable energy sources and of energy efficiency technologies to speed up the green transition and end dependency on fossil fuels

2. Stresses the importance of the Paris Agreement’s goal of keeping the global average temperature increase below 1,5°C compared to pre-industrial times; recalls the Union’s obligations to deliver the financial commitments made for international climate financing; considers that the Union should continue leading the efforts towards decarbonisation at global level;

3. Stresses that the Union’s budget for 2026 should be aligned with the realisation of the European Union’s objectives to reduce pollution and enhance biodiversity, as well as the long-term vision for a prosperous, modern, competitive and climate-neutral economy, the legally enshrined objective to reach climate neutrality by 2050 and the Union’s intermediate climate targets for 2030 and 2040, as laid down in the European Climate Law;

4. Points out that the European Green Deal is a growth strategy, whose effective implementation with adequate funding is fundamentally connected to the Union’s strength and competitiveness; believes that the future Clean Industrial Deal and Circular Economy Act should further increase the Union’s competitiveness capacity and sustainability and resource-efficiency to achieve the European Green Deal objectives and ensure a just and inclusive transition;

5. Reminds that the EU’s long-term budget for 2021-2027, together with NextGenerationEU, is aimed at implementing the EU’s long-term priorities in various areas, including climate and the environment; emphasizes, specifically, that 30 % of total EU expenditures under the MFF have to be allocated to climate-related projects, including clean-tech and innovation projects; stresses that the future Multi-Financial Framework post-2027 should maintain the level of ambition on climate and environment protection;

6. Considers it unacceptable that the Union did not reach its objective of allocating at least 7.5 % of annual expenditure to biodiversity in 2024; calls on the Member States and Commission to take the necessary measures to ensure that the 10 % objective will be reached in both 2026 and 2027 in order to achieve concrete outcomes, including the objectives set in the Kunming-Montreal Agreement, whilst ensuring cost-effectiveness and long-term sustainability; notes the importance of the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) to reach biodiversity objectives;

7. Emphasises the need to allocate sufficient funding for each individual budget line that contributes to the achievement of the green transition, with a particular focus on sustainability, climate change, innovation, competitiveness, resource-efficiency and biodiversity conservation, such as attention to bees and pollinators’ protection and their role as indicators for healthy ecosystems; emphasizes the importance of the Social Climate Fund (SCF), established to support vulnerable groups in the Union’s green transition;

8. Highlights the importance of improving disaster prevention and preparedness by implementing climate adaptation measures, allowing the Union to better prevent and respond to emergencies like recent climate change events; emphasizes the ongoing need to ensure sufficient funding for the Union’s civil protection mechanism;

9. Notes the relevance of the reports adopted by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) in relation to the management of EU funds linked to climate and environment; urges the Commission and the Member States to implement the recommendations of the reports, in particular report 15/2024 on climate adaptation [29] regarding the need to ensure that all relevant EU-funded projects are adapted to the current and future climate conditions; recalls the importance of the ECA recommendations in its special report 14/2024 [30], emphasising the need for the Commission to better estimate climate spending under future funding instruments, to ensure their adequate design, and to enhance the performance of green transition measures;

10. Emphasises the need for more ambitious funding allocations for programs like LIFE to support climate and environment-related projects, as well as for the Just Transition Fund to assist the most vulnerable carbon-intensive regions in addressing the economic and social impacts of the climate transition to leave no one behind; emphasises that the funding under LIFE is crucial for the protection of nature and biodiversity, the transition towards an energy efficient, circular, climate neutral, competitive and climate resilient economy and for democratic participation in decision-making processes; notes that efficient and result-driven climate and biodiversity financing should be integrated into programming activities, while remaining flexible enough to address the diverse needs of different regions and sectors;

11. Reminds that a stronger European Health Union requires adequate funding with health-related expenditure that follows the ‘One Health’ and ‘Health in all policies’ approaches, securing the proper implementation of, inter alia, the European Health Data Space and of the Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan;

12. Strongly reiterates its regrets over the redeployment from the EU4Health programme of 1 billion EUR over the 2025-2027 period; considers that this funding shortfall threatens the programme’s ability to achieve its critical objectives; renews its call for the Commission, Member States, and other stakeholders to identify practical solutions to offset this cut, ensuring that the programme’s objective of building stronger, more resilient, and more accessible health systems is achieved; calls as well for increased amounts allocated to Cluster Health in Horizon Europe; recognises that stronger health systems directly contribute to economic stability and productivity by reducing health-related workforce disruptions and increasing the resilience of the labour market;

13. Highlights the importance of effectively allocating sufficient human and financial resources to all relevant DGs for the implementation of the adopted legislation related to climate environment, chemicals and health as well as to the relevant European agencies, including the European Environment Agency (EEA), the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA);

14. Highlights the need for a strengthened EU own resources system that can address current challenges while supporting the Union’s environmental, climate and health objectives; stresses the importance of implementing the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism effectively, enabling the Commission to take compensatory measures to address any shortfalls in meeting the EU budget’s overall climate spending target.

I have sent a similar letter to Mr Andrzej Halicki, general rapporteur for the 2026 budget.

Yours sincerely,

Antonio Decaro

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The Chair in his capacity as rapporteur for the opinion declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY (19.2.2025)

Mr Johan VAN OVERTVELDT

Chair

Committee on Budgets

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion in the form of a letter on the Guidelines for the 2026 budget – Section III (2024/2110(BUI))

Dear Mr Chair,

Under the procedure referred to above, the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy has been asked to submit an opinion to your committee. On 19 February 2024, the committee adopted an opinion in the form of letter during its regular meeting.

The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy calls on the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution.

Yours sincerely,

Borys BUDKA

ITRE Chair

SUGGESTIONS

1. Recalls that the Union Budget for 2026 should concretely reflect the political priorities of the new legislative term, considering also the various pledges made by Commissioners during their confirmation hearings in Parliament in November 2024; insists that the 2026 budget needs to fully implement all programmes agreed under the current Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), as well as set in motion and finance new strategic EU initiatives, such as the Clean Industrial Deal for competitive industries and quality jobs; underscores that the 2026 budget must be aligned with the Union’s objectives and international commitments;

2. Notes that multiple challenges facing Europe require greater investment and coordination at European level, as well as more concrete action by Member States; calls on the Commission to propose a Union Budget for 2026 that reflects the urgent nature of these challenges; among others, the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine and hybrid attacks on Member States and their energy and digital infrastructure; maintains this requires multiple forms of EU and national level investments and preparedness, including improving the resilience of digital and energy infrastructure, direct support for Ukraine, accelerated investment in Europe’s defence industry, and support for the EU’s Eastern border regions most directly impacted by the war and Russian hybrid operations; the need to strengthen Europe’s economic competitiveness and industrial base in a volatile environment where global competitors benefit from extensive state support, leading to unfair competition for European companies; the urgent necessity to improve Europe’s research and innovation capabilities, including greater support for SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups; the digital revolution, including the acceleration of artificial intelligence and growing concerns about cybersecurity; and the need to achieve a just climate transition, as we adapt our economy to the Union’s long-term energy goals and climate neutrality by 2050, by accelerating the decarbonisation in Europe’s energy markets, implementing European Green Deal legislation and achieving a circular economy;

3. Notes that EU companies face considerably higher electricity and gas prices compared with the USA, China and other global actors, which presents a significant competitiveness disadvantage, especially but not only for Europe’s energy intensive industries; emphasises the need to tackle energy poverty and limit the damaging effects of high energy prices on European consumers, many of whom are already struggling with a high cost of living; stresses the importance of reducing EU dependence on fossil-fuels and improving energy efficiency; underlines that security of supply concerns remain paramount and should be addressed in the 2026 budget, given that energy supplies are easily weaponised by state actors; insists on the need to improve energy interconnections, modernise energy grids, integrate a higher share of renewables while ensuring sufficient clean baseload energy and system flexibilities, therefore calls for significantly increased funding for the Connecting Europe Facility – Energy, which is the flagship EU programme in this field but currently has limited resources to credibly advance Europe towards an interconnected, resilient and decarbonised energy system, able to deliver affordable prices; calls for urgently ending any remaining EU import dependencies on Russia:

4. Recalls the need to strengthen the resilience of the EU economy and the competitiveness of Union industries, with ambitious EU industrial policies that can create quality jobs and contribute significantly towards achieving the EU’s social, digital and green objectives, whilst preserving a level playing field in the Single Market; therefore believes that the Union Budget for 2026 should mark the start of the investment boost recommended in the Draghi report by investing strongly in industrial competitiveness, open strategic autonomy and creating pathways towards decarbonisation, while securing EU supply chains for strategic sectors and technologies and improving access to critical raw materials; insists that the 2026 budget must continue strengthening the Union’s competitiveness with increased support for SMEs, midcaps and start-ups, including greater support for scale up to compete globally, in particular through the European Innovation Council;

5. Recalls that the 2026 budget for Horizon Europe will be the first after the mid-term review of this strategic EU programme, and therefore needs to offer sufficient investment in fundamental and applied research, foster collaborative research and facilitate the scale-up and commercialisation of research results to ensure Europe can retain and further develop the necessary knowledge base to confront the scientific and economic challenges of the coming decades; regrets that the existing level of Horizon Europe funding is ultimately insufficient to develop the ideas and technologies necessary for the twin green and digital transitions, or to fully deliver on the stated EU goals of sustainable growth and open strategic autonomy; calls for an increase in the 2026 budget for Horizon Europe, including through the reuse of all available decommitments allowing each sub-programme to fund at least 50% of all excellent proposals, given that presently a majority of excellent proposals remain unfunded; calls for maintaining stable and sufficient funding of the ITER project;

6. Stresses that significant investments are necessary to address Europe’s connectivity gap and other Digital Decade 2030 targets; recalls that the European Commission estimates that achieving the full gigabit target could exceed €200 billion; calls therefore for adequate resources to be allocated to provide high speed connectivity including gigabit and 5G services, in addition to investments in next generation digital infrastructures and emerging technologies; calls for further investments that foster the development of European digital sovereignty and an EU-based digital sector in order to catch up in crucial areas such as quantum computing and Artificial Intelligence; calls on the Commission to allocate sufficient resources to ensure the full implementation and robust enforcement of the Digital Services Act and the Digital Markets Act; stresses the importance of tackling foreign interference, addressing the dangers of biased algorithms, and safeguarding transparency, accountability, and the integrity of the digital public space.

7. Underlines that a strong and sustainable European space sector is fundamental for European security, open strategic autonomy, secure connectivity, protection of critical infrastructure and advancing the twin green and digital transitions; regrets that EU and its Member States funding for space programmes is highly fragmented and only a fraction of the level in the US, while other global actors including China are rapidly increasing investments; calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure sufficient funding for the European space industry, which includes fostering investments from the private sector; calls furthermore for a sufficient level of EU investments supporting R&I in the field of space;

8. Calls for adequate funding and staffing for all agencies and Union bodies in the policy areas of industry, research, energy, space and cybersecurity, in order to cope with increased workload and new regulatory obligations;

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON CULTURE AND EDUCATION (19.2.2025)

Mr Johan Van Overtveldt

Chair

Committee on Budgets

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on Guidelines for the 2026 Budget –Section III 2024/2110(BUI)

Dear Mr Van Overtveldt,

to above, the Committee on Culture and Education has been asked to submit an opinion to your committee. At its meeting of 3 December 2024, the committee decided to send the opinion in the form of a letter. It considered the matter at its meeting of 19 February 2025 and adopted the opinion at that meeting [31].

The Committee on Culture and Education:

1. Insists that funding for the most successful EU and crucial programmes like Erasmus+, the European Solidarity Corps (ESC), Creative Europe and the Citizens, Equality, Rights and Values (CERV) programme has to be excluded from debt repayment needs for the European Union Recovery Instrument (EURI) over the whole remaining MFF period; stresses that the ‘EURI cascade mechanism’ has to be implemented effectively, protecting important programme initiatives that directly benefit citizens;

2. Welcomes further simplification in line with EP calls, e.g. through the use of lump sums in Erasmus+ , for the programmes that are close to the citizens and need to be accessible also for organisations with limited administrative capacities, and calls for further efforts to achieve that end; underlines that attention should be given to peripheral, mountainous and rural areas that experience more difficulties in accessing EU funds; calls on the Commission to continue to share regularly with Parliament, including the Committee on Culture and Education, updated indicators and statistics on the absorption of funds in these programmes;

3. Welcomes that mobility grants under Erasmus+ were increased to offset rising living costs, upon Parliament’s insistence on an increase to the programme’s budget, to ensure that the programme remains accessible and inclusive;

4. Stresses necessary efforts to widen participation and to meet inclusivity targets in order to widen the participation of the most vulnerable youth groups and people with disabilities;

5. Strongly warns against any cuts, and calls for an increase of the funding for the programme, taking into account the high implementation rates and absorption capacities of the programme; calls in particular to preserve funding to initiatives that support teacher development, such as the European Universities and the Erasmus+ Teacher Academies; highlights the growing number of applicants – e.g. a 94% increase in school education mobility applications from 2022 to 2023 ; regrets, however, the consequence of lower success rates, notably for school accreditations, which underscores the need for a substantial funding increase to meet the growing demand;

6. Insists that all funding initially allocated to the programme will be used for investing in the future of young people;

7. Emphasises the need to support sport under Erasmus+ to promote its role in improving physical and mental health and social inclusion, and to fight discrimination;

8. Deplores the additional, unanticipated costs for the media strand of Creative Europe, including the implementation of not only the AVMSD, but also of EMFA, including the secretariat of the European Board for Media Services, an additional expenditure that was not taken into account when the current MFF was set up; insists that new initiatives should always be financed from fresh money;

9. Stresses that the budget for the Creative Europe programme is insufficient to meet the high demand for projects across all its strands, with alarmingly low success rates (e.g. 17% in 2023 under the culture strand); calls for an increase of its funding and highlights the need for synergies between Creative Europe and other EU funds.

10. Calls for an increase in funding for the ESC programme, given the modest year-on-year increases of about 2% of its budget under the MFF, which is not sufficient to offset inflation rates, and the fact that it is heavily over-subscribed, resulting in a high rejection rate and, therefore, in many cases, disappointment for the young applicants; welcomes the fact that the number of participants with fewer opportunities in the programme (38%) is the highest of any EU programme and should be maintained;

11. Stresses the importance of the CERV programme for building bridges between European citizens from different Member States and promoting their engagement and participation in the democratic life of the Union, while also contributing to preserving social cohesion and helping to prevent democratic backsliding, particularly in the current challenging political situation; insists, therefore, on an increase for its budget;

12. Points out that pilot projects and preparatory actions (PPs and PAs) serve as testbeds for new policy initiatives and need adequate funding to properly fulfil that function; deplores any attempts to thwart potentially successful proposals for PPs and PAs already at the selection stage and calls for better cooperation between the Commission and the European Parliament on the selection and implementation of PPs and PAs.

Yours sincerely,

Nela Riehl

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (18.2.2025)

Mr Johan Van Overtveldt

Chair

Committee on Budgets

BRUSSELS

Subject: Opinion on Guidelines for the 2026 Budget – Section III (2024/2110(BUI))

Dear Mr Van Overtveldt,

Under the procedure referred to above, the Committee on Constitutional Affairs has been asked to submit an opinion to your committee. At its meeting of 29 January 2025, the committee decided to send the opinion in the form of a letter.

The Committee on Constitutional Affairs considered the matter at its meeting of 18 February 2025. At that meeting [32], it decided to submit the opinion set out below to the Committee on Budgets, as the committee responsible.

Yours sincerely,

Sven Simon

OPINION

1. Points out that future substantial EU enlargement cannot be met without a larger EU budget and sufficient new own resources; calls for the necessary budgetary and institutional reforms to be agreed and adopted before substantial enlargement takes place;

2. Reminds of the need to secure proper financing for the structures within the EU institutions that are responsible for communication with citizens and countering disinformation such as the Commission Representations and European Parliament Liaison Offices, in order to enable them to effectively fulfil their tasks;

3. Recommends that the Authority for European Political Parties and European Political Foundations receives adequate resources, in particular for staffing purposes in view of the significant enlargement of its tasks as foreseen by the Commission proposal for the recast of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 1141/2014;

4. Urges the Committee on Budgets to incorporate the above mentioned budget lines augmentations in its position, as they serve the purpose of delivering concrete results and quality communication to citizens.

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS
FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The Chair declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Date adopted	20.3.2025
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	27 8 0
Members present for the final vote	Georgios Aftias, Rasmus Andresen, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Olivier Chastel, Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Thomas Geisel, Andrzej Halicki, Monika Hohlmeier, Alexander Jungbluth, Fabienne Keller, Ondřej Kovařík, Janusz Lewandowski, Victor Negrescu, Danuše Nerudová, João Oliveira, Karlo Ressler, Bogdan Rzońca, Julien Sanchez, Hélder Sousa Silva, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs, Lucia Yar, Auke Zijlstra
Substitutes present for the final vote	Stine Bosse, Mohammed Chahim, Rasmus Nordqvist
Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote	Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Łukasz Kohut, Marit Maij, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Mirosława Nykiel, Leire Pajín, Krzysztof Śmiszek

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

27	+
ECR	Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Bogdan Rzońca
PPE	Georgios Aftias, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Andrzej Halicki, Monika Hohlmeier, Łukasz Kohut, Janusz Lewandowski, Danuše Nerudová, Mirosława Nykiel, Karlo Ressler, Hélder Sousa Silva
Renew	Stine Bosse, Olivier Chastel, Fabienne Keller, Lucia Yar
S&D	Sakis Arnaoutoglou, Mohammed Chahim, Marit Maij, Victor Negrescu, Leire Pajín, Krzysztof Śmiszek, Carla Tavares, Nils Ušakovs
Verts/ALE	Rasmus Andresen, Rasmus Nordqvist, Nicolae Ştefănuță

8	–
ESN	Alexander Jungbluth
NI	Thomas Geisel
PfE	Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Ondřej Kovařík, Julien Sanchez, Auke Zijlstra
The Left	João Oliveira

Key to symbols:

+ : in favour

– : against

0 : abstention

MIL OSI Europe News –

March 26, 2025

MIL-OSI China: Calls for closer cooperation resonate at Asian forum amid global uncertainties

Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

BOAO, China, March 25 — Political and business leaders worldwide are gathering in Boao, a coastal town in southern China’s Hainan Province, for the Boao Forum for Asia Annual Conference 2025 running from March 25 to 28.

Amid rising global economic fragmentation and geopolitical tensions, the forum, themed “Asia in the Changing World: Towards a Shared Future,” serves as a critical platform for fostering regional cooperation, driving global economic growth and strengthening the region’s role in global governance.

As Asia plays a bigger role in global growth, discussions are centering on how the region can help navigate challenges and drive sustainable development, with participants recognizing Asia as the world’s growth engine and highlighting regional coordination, economic inclusivity and technological advancements as key drivers in addressing economic uncertainties and building up momentum for growth.

GROWING INTEGRATION

Founded in 2001 and headquartered in Hainan, the forum has long been a platform for regional dialogue, but its role is evolving as Asian economies become more integrated. “Fast-growing South-South trade and investment is making the Boao Forum for Asia relevant beyond the boundaries of Asia,” said Denis Depoux, global managing director at Roland Berger, a Germany-based consultancy.

Often referred to as the “Asian Davos,” the forum brings together political and business leaders to discuss trade, investment and technology, with growing participation from Global South countries in recent years.

“The forum highlights the power of partnership through its ability to create space for exchanging ideas, building relationships and collectively shaping the future of Asia,” said Dino Otranto, CEO of Australia’s mining giant Fortescue Metals.

In an increasingly uncertain economic environment, Asia remains a key growth engine for the world economy. According to a report released by the forum, real GDP growth in Asia is projected to rise from 4.4 percent in 2024 to 4.5 percent in 2025, while the region’s share of global GDP is expected to increase from 48.1 percent to 48.6 percent at purchasing power parity in the same period.

The growth not only highlights Asia’s economic dynamism but also its role as a stabilizing force in a world where traditional economic powerhouses face mounting challenges.

Given complex geopolitical and economic dynamics, multilateralism, governance and development have become hot topics of discussions at the forum. “These terms are critical in shaping a more stable and prosperous regional landscape amid evolving global challenges,” said Anna Malindog-Uy, vice president of Asian Century Philippines Strategic Studies Institute, a think tank in Manila.

ASIA’S POTENTIAL

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), comprising 15 Asia-Pacific countries, has emerged as a powerful force in bolstering regional economic integration. The International Monetary Fund has projected that from 2023 to 2029, the RCEP region’s GDP will grow by 10.9 trillion U.S. dollars, contributing over 40 percent to global economic growth.

The integration of Asian supply chains has accelerated, driven by the need for greater competitiveness and resilience, Depoux said.

“Asia’s future in the shifting global landscape is incredibly exciting and full of promise,” Otranto said. “It’s not just about economic growth, but also about Asia leading the way in areas like innovation, technology and sustainability.”

As global trade and supply chains evolve, Asia’s role in driving advancements in artificial intelligence (AI), green energy and digital transformation will undoubtedly be critical, he added.

Take DeepSeek, a representative Chinese startup in the AI sector that attests to Asia’s growing innovation capacity. Its latest R1 model outperforms many of the world’s top AI developers across a variety of benchmarks, drawing significant attention from Silicon Valley. This breakthrough showcases Asia’s growing technological prowess in advanced fields, notably AI.

Technological innovation has become a key driver of Asia’s sustainable transformation. From solar panels stretching across China’s western Gobi Desert to smart city networks leveraging digital twin technology in ASEAN countries, Asia is reshaping its development model with cutting-edge technologies, said Wu Xiaochen, vice president of the Hainan Research Academy of Environmental Sciences.

Meanwhile, experts at the forum stressed the importance of attuning technological progress to environmental responsibility. They called for stronger policies to ensure that businesses align their innovations with sustainable growth objectives.

CHINA’S ROLE

Asia, particularly China, is seen as a key driver of global growth. The world’s second-largest economy is restructuring by prioritizing high-end manufacturing, digital development and green industries, bringing new opportunities for Asia and beyond.

As a key pillar of Asia’s development, China is pivotal to rebalancing globalization, inclusive growth and regional economic integration, said Zhang Jun, secretary general of the Boao Forum for Asia.

“China’s rapid advancements in digitization, green transition and AI have positioned it as a key driver of global sustainable development,” said Malindog-Uy. “Through cutting-edge research, large-scale industrial transformation and international collaboration, China’s innovation-driven approach benefits global cooperation and economic progress.”

By fostering global partnerships in green energy, digital infrastructure and smart industries, China plays a crucial role in shaping a more resilient and interconnected global economy, she added.

Through multilateral cooperation, China is injecting “Asian momentum” into global growth, translating regional experiences into viable ways for global governance, said Chi Fulin, head of the China Institute for Reform and Development.

MIL OSI China News –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI: Idaho Copper Announces US Forest Service Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact for CuMo Exploration Project Plan

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Boise, Idaho, March 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Idaho Copper Corp. (OTC Pink: COPR) is pleased to announce that on March 14, 2025 the United States Forest Service, Boise National Forest (“USFS”) issued a Decision Notice and Finding of No Significant Impact under an Environmental Assessment approving the Company’s Plan of Operations (“PoO”) to conduct exploration drilling and related activities at its CuMo project located in Boise County, Idaho.

Andrew Brodkey, Company CEO commented, “This is a major milestone for Idaho Copper. We have been working with the Forest Service since 2016 to build a plan that complies with myriad federal laws and regulations to ensure that exploration activities at CuMo will not have any significant effect on the environment. The Forest Service has done an admirable job, with hundreds of pages of specialist reports addressing all conceivable environmental concerns from exploration. In addition, the Decision Notice requires the Company to implement dozens of mitigation measures and best management practices designed to protect the environment. Idaho Copper’s work under the PoO will consist mainly of temporary road building, maintenance, and drilling activities, and requires that when complete, all roads, drillpads, and drillholes are properly closed and reclaimed. Most importantly, there will be no significant impact to the Boise River, its tributaries, or the Boise River Watershed, through the application of mitigating measures set forth in the Forest Service Decision Notice.”

The exploration activities outlined in the PoO are needed to develop additional data to determine if a future decision to proceed with a mine is justified. Nothing beyond exploration has been approved by the Forest Service via this DN, and any decision to develop a mine is years away. Any such decision will depend, among other things, on the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (“EIS”) under federal law, in which the public will have the right to participate.

About Idaho Copper Corporation

Idaho Copper Corporation is a mineral exploration and development company focused on exploring and developing a massive copper-molybdenum-silver deposit in Idaho (United States), (“the CuMo” project). The CuMo project currently consists of one hundred and twenty-six (126) federal unpatented lode mining claims, and six (6) patented mining claims. In total, the project comprises approximately 2,640 acres. The unpatented lode mining claims and patented claims are situated in an unorganized mining district in Boise County, Idaho.

For more information, visit: www.idaho-copper.com.

Safe Harbor Statement

This press release contains forward looking statements which are based on current expectations, forecasts, and assumptions that involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from those anticipated or expected. These statements are not historical facts but rather are based on the Company’s current expectations, estimates, and projections regarding its business, operations and other similar or related factors. Words such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “anticipate,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “project,” “believe,” “estimate,” and other similar or related expressions are used to identify these forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. Actual results and the timing of certain events could differ materially from those projected in or contemplated by the forward-looking statements due to a number of factors. Stockholders and potential investors should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Although the Company believes that its plans, intentions and expectations reflected in or suggested by the forward-looking statements in this report are reasonable, the Company cannot assure stockholders and potential investors that these plans, intentions or expectations will be achieved. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other factors, some of which are beyond the Company’s control and difficult to predict and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or forecasted in the forward-looking statements. Except to the extent required by law, the Company has no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, a change in events, conditions, circumstances or assumptions underlying such statements, or otherwise. You are urged to carefully review and consider any cautionary statements and other disclosures, including the statements made under the heading “Risk Factors” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on May 15, 2024, and the Company’s other periodic and quarterly filings with the SEC.

For further information, please contact: info@idaho-copper.com

The MIL Network –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Linking Indigenous Knowledge with Decision Making

Source: US State of Connecticut

Alaska Native peoples have been hunting, fishing, and gathering wild resources for as long as people have been in Alaska, says Dillon Patterson ’24 Ph.D., but after the United States took control of Alaska, laws were passed that challenges their access to these resources and traditional lifeways. Patterson, first as a graduate researcher and now an anthropologist for the Alaska Subsistence Program in the United States National Park Service, is collaborating with Indigenous communities to work toward the goal of restoring subsistence access for Alaska’s original residents.

Patterson embarked on his studies in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Fall of 2020, but he benefited from the unique situation in a way that propelled his dissertation field research. When he saw a posting for a student position with the National Park Service (NPS) in Alaska, it caught his attention. At the time, he had not yet settled on a research topic, but Patterson was interested in the position’s focus on subsistence issues, and since all but one of his classes were online, he thought it was something he could make work. After clearing the idea with his advisor, Department of Anthropology Assistant Professor Elle Ouimet, he applied and was offered the job.

Patterson says it is not uncommon for anthropology students to travel far for their research, so he seized the opportunity and moved 3,000 miles to Alaska and got started on his project in the Katmai National Park and Preserve, which benefited from the longer-term fieldwork and collaboration he was able to incorporate into his study.

The History

Knowing the history of Alaska’s national parks is important to understand the challenges the Indigenous population faces. Patterson says the laws the United States passed after taking control of the territory focused on land settlement and resource rights issues and are primarily aimed at stripping Alaska Native land claims and presenting opportunities for nonrenewable resource development, and as a result, they have greatly limited Indigenous subsistence ways of life.

The most important law regarding subsistence was passed and signed by President Jimmy Carter in 1980 called the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), Patterson explains. It created most national park lands in Alaska and nearly doubled the number of national park lands in the U.S., where most of the designated NPS units were also authorized for the continuation of subsistence use.

“A lot of folks wanted there to be an Alaska Native priority for subsistence, a priority over all other consumptive uses, to ensure Alaska Native subsistence rights were protected,” Patterson says. “Ultimately, the Act didn’t distinguish between Alaska Natives and non-natives and the subsistence priority was given to rural Alaska residents.”

This presents an issue since much of Alaska’s population of 700,000 lives in cities, with half of the population in Anchorage alone. This means Alaska Natives who live in Anchorage or Juneau are not qualified subsistence users, and that happens a lot, says Patterson, because people move to pursue education or to accept jobs in the city.

Examples like this demonstrate how rigid bureaucratic constraints can challenge Indigenous ways of life, and Patterson is trying to help address this.

Learning from Knowledge Holders

Over the years, Patterson says caribou population numbers have fluctuated dramatically due to climate and human development as well as natural boom and bust cycles characteristic of the species. Patterson’s work focuses primarily on the Mulchatna Caribou Herd, which is one of many large barren ground caribou herds in Alaska and the largest herd in the southwest region of the state. The population peaked in the 1990s at around 200,000 caribou and has reduced in number to around 14,000 today. The hunt was closed in 2019 for all caribou in the Mulchatna Herd range in hopes the population would rebound.

Dillon Patterson ’24 Ph.D. seized a unique opportunity to work as a graduate researcher for the National Park Service in Alaska for his dissertation research. Here he is posing by the welcome sign for Igiugig, one of the villages where his Indigenous collaborators live. (Contributed photo)

Patterson’s research started by focusing on a small population of caribou in the Katmai National Preserve that supported two villages, Kokhanok and Igiugig, which are approximately 15 miles north of the northern boundary of the Katmai Preserve.

The villagers asserted the smaller Katmai Herd is distinct from the Mulchatna Herd. Before the hunt was closed in 2019, the Katmai Herd supported local needs without jeopardizing the Mulchatna Herd’s numbers.

“When the Mulchatna Herd was healthy and large in number, it didn’t matter if this small population in Katmai was managed as part of the Mulchatna Herd. Now it’s a problem because you’ve closed hunting due to conservation concerns for the Mulchatna Herd, which shouldn’t apply to this small population.”

Patterson started working with knowledge holders from the villages, where he applied an activist research approach to collaborate and document the vast knowledge from the local and Indigenous populations about the caribou. Since Alaska Native peoples have lived and hunted the region’s animals for millennia, Patterson says that these knowledge holders have a far deeper understanding of the caribou population than the limited research done by Western science thus far and are also the most invested in the survival of the caribou population.

While gathering supporting evidence to make the case for differentiating the herds, Patterson also learned about the long history of problems with access, including some confusion within the NPS about how to process formal requests for off-road vehicle access for subsistence hunters. By identifying these hurdles, Patterson worked with the communities navigate the bureaucracy and submit a formal request to perhaps get decision-makers to adapt the policy to account for changing circumstances.

‘The subsistence way of life will always find a way to persist’

Hunting caribou requires traveling, sometimes as many as 40 miles into the sprawling 308,000 acres of Katmai Preserve. If the hunt is successful, trekking back with hundreds of pounds of harvest is an arduous task without the right equipment, especially since there are no roads in the area.

From a preservation perspective, the tundra landscape is easily damaged, and movement across the landscape, especially by motorized vehicles can lead to damage so the subject of whether or not to allow all-terrain vehicle (ATV) access is tricky.

While some parks and preserves allow access via ATVs like four-wheelers for subsistence purposes, when Katmai was created in 1980 Patterson explains ATV access was not permitted. Snowmachines (also known as snowmobiles) are allowed if there are at least six inches of snow on the ground to prevent damage to the landscape; however, with the changing climate, snow cover is no longer guaranteed in the colder months. Snow comes later, and Patterson says that even in January of this year, there was less than an inch on the ground, and by the end of February, there was no snow on the ground at all, so access is greatly impacted by the climate, and expanding what vehicles are allowed could help, especially, as noted by a local knowledge holder, they haven’t had much winter lately.

“The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act uses the language that other types of motorized vehicles could only be used for subsistence access where traditionally employed, but it doesn’t define what ‘traditionally employed’ means,” Patterson says. “Historically, the Park Service has interpreted that to mean that there was more than one generation of use prior to 1980, and so the issue of access with four-wheelers has been a frustrating problem for locals, but it’s become more of an issue today.”

Patterson’s project then took on two parts – one with a focus on access to caribou for subsistence purposes, and the second to document the history of access technology used by the local Indigenous population.

Patterson wanted to emphasize that people in the region have been adapting and using whatever technology they have available while also using the same trails for thousands of years. For example, people have long used dog sleds in the area and, more recently, reindeer sleds after reindeer herding was introduced by government officials in the 20^th century.

“Over time, the type of technology they use to access different places changed, and typically that change is driven by adaptation to socioeconomic changes and climate changes. The climate has been changing in Alaska for a long time just like the socio cultural and economic situation has been changing dramatically in Alaska for a long time.”

With all of this in mind, Patterson asks, what is considered “traditional”?

“If we’re going to use that word about Alaska Native cultures, we need to acknowledge that they’re highly adaptable to these new stressors, and the subsistence way of life will always find a way to persist.”

“Everything in bureaucracy moves slowly”

Through the course of his studies and fieldwork, Patterson documented evidence that detailed how successive generations have used ATVs for access to Katmai Preserve prior to 1980. With the knowledge he gathered, he developed presentations and briefing documents for decision-makers. With this information, the park superintendent signed a memorandum acknowledging that history and that it likely met the criteria for what ANILCA calls traditionally employed use of motorized surface transportation, says Patterson.

“However, the Park Service can’t just make that decision and then all of a sudden, allow all-terrain vehicle use. Everything in bureaucracy moves slowly,” says Patterson.

This work builds upon work that previous Park Service anthropologists conducted, including oral histories about the use of off-road vehicles in the 1990s, and the process resulting in the signing of a memorandum took a lot of work and patience on behalf of many people. Though changes have not been made yet, it is an important step in the right direction.

Patterson collaborated with community members from two villages, Igiugig (photographed here) and Kokhanok, which are located about 15 miles north of Katmai. (Contributed photo)

“Meanwhile, the decision maker for caribou hunting is not the National Park Service; it is the Federal Subsistence Board, but those regulations can change much faster because there’s a bi-annual cycle for hunting and fishing regulatory change.”

Therefore, this aspect of his project saw a result more quickly. In 2023, the Igiugig village tribal council submitted a proposal to the Federal Subsistence Board to open the caribou hunt for local residents, acknowledging that the smaller herd is separate from the Mulchatna Herd.

“The first caribou hunt in Katmai in six years is now occurring. Despite the lack of snow, the first caribou was caught in late February and shared throughout the communities. The hunt will go into the end of March.”

Ouimet adds that Patterson’s work carefully navigating the complexities between federal offices and local communities, has been extremely effective at changing regulation that has been stalled for decades.

In addition to his successes in aiding in the changing of regulation, Patterson successfully defended his dissertation in the Fall of 2024 and has since transitioned into a permanent role as a Cultural Anthropologist with the Park Service. He views his job as one that links the complex laws and regulations with serving the subsistence needs of the local Indigenous population.

Patterson appreciates that his position allows him to work more closely with decision-makers than he may otherwise have as an anthropologist, and this has allowed him to gain greater insight throughout the process, including appreciating the pressure they operate under.

“For example, another park in Alaska right now that authorized off-road vehicles for subsistence use in the 80s was later sued by environmentalist groups for damage done to the landscape by off-road vehicles. I just say that to acknowledge the people who make decisions are under a lot of pressure from all sides, so I think my job is to help them make the best-informed decision.”

Patterson’s approach also centers on activist methods to gain deeper insights into the context and needs of his Indigenous collaborators, and he says in his day-to-day work, if someone asks why an anthropologist works for the park service, he pushes back,

“No one questions why a biologist would work for the National Park Service so I feel defensive when people challenge the notion that an anthropologist would be advocating on behalf of local Alaska Native communities. I feel like my job is to, as best I can, understand the local perspective and bring it back to the internal management conversations at the Park Service.”

MIL OSI USA News –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Solihull man prosecuted for failing to remove waste from land
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

News story

Solihull man prosecuted for failing to remove waste from land

The Environment Agency has successfully prosecuted a Solihull man who failed to remove waste from his land.
Birmingham Magistrates Court imposes fines and costs totalling £7,752.85

Defendant given 4 months to completely clear outstanding waste

Plastics, metals and treated wood among waste found on land

Benjamin Summers ignored a formal Notice from the Environment Agency to remove the waste and also operated a waste facility without the necessary environmental permit.

At Birmingham Magistrates on Friday 21 March 2025, Benjamin Robert Summers, 80, of Pig Trot Lane, Tanworth-in-Arden, Solihull, admitted the offences.

He was fined £1107 and ordered to pay costs of £6545.85.

Additionally, the magistrates imposed a Remediation Order of 4 months to completely clear any outstanding waste from the land.

Environment Agency investigation

The Environment Agency commenced an investigation in February 2023, having been notified by the Local Authority. They provided evidence that approximately 35 cubic metres of mixed waste was being stored on the land, made up of plastics, metal, treated wood and derivatives.

Between February 2023 and August 2023, Environment Agency officers made a total of 5 site visits and requested Summers to clear the waste. However, the waste remained on site and was added to over time.

On 1 November 2023, a formal Notice was served on Summers to clear the waste by 1 January 2024.

On 9 January 2024, Environment Agency officers made a further site visit and discovered that no waste had been removed.

A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said:

The Environment Agency will pursue any person or company that fails to uphold the law to protect nature and will continue to press for the strongest possible penalties.

Failure to comply with these legal requirements is a serious offence that can damage the environment and harm human health.   

If anyone has environmental concerns, they should call our 24/7 hotline on 0800 80 70 60 or Crimestoppers anonymously and in confidence on 0800 555 111.

The charges

1, Benjamin Summers, on 2 January 2024, being the occupier of land, namely Summerhill Cottage, Pig Trot Lane, Danzey Green, Tanworth-in-Arden, Solihull, B94 5BJ failed without reasonable excuse to comply with a Notice dated 1st November 2023 to remove controlled waste from the land, contrary to sections 59ZB (2) and 59ZB (6) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

2, Benjamin Summers, prior to and between 17 February 2023 and 3 May 2024, operated a regulated facility on land at Summerhill Cottage, Pig Trot Lane, Danzey Green, Tanworth-in-Arden, Solihull, B94 5BJ which was not authorised by an Environmental Permit, namely a non- exempt waste operation involving the deposit, storage and disposal of waste, contrary to Regulations 12 (1)(a) and 38 (1)(a) of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016.

Share this page

The following links open in a new tab

Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)

Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

Updates to this page

Published 25 March 2025
MIL OSI United Kingdom –
March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Centre safeguards consumer rights via various provisions under Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Source: Government of India

Centre safeguards consumer rights via various provisions under Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Central Consumer Protection Authority imposes penalty of ₹ 77 lakh 60 thousand on 24 coaching institutes for misleading advertisements

Department of Consumer Affairs secures refunds of ₹1.56 crores for over 600 aspirants and students in education sector through National Consumer Helpline

Posted On: 25 MAR 2025 3:44PM by PIB Delhi

Department of Consumer Affairs is continuously working for consumer protection and empowerment of consumers by enactment of progressive legislations. With a view to modernize the framework governing the consumer protection in the new era of globalization, technologies, e-commerce markets etc. Consumer Protection Act, 1986 was repealed and Consumer Protection Act, 2019 was enacted.

Salient features of the new Consumer Protection Act, 2019 are establishment of a Central Consumer Protection Authority(CCPA); simplification of the adjudication process in the Consumer Commissions such as enhancing pecuniary jurisdiction of the Consumer Commissions, online filing of complaint from the Consumer Commission having jurisdiction over the place of work/residence of the consumer irrespective of the place of transaction, videoconferencing for hearing, deemed admissibility of complaints if admissibility is not decided within 21 days of filing; provision of product liability; penal provisions for manufacture/sale of adulterated products/spurious goods; provision for making rules for prevention of unfair trade practice in e-commerce and direct selling.

The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 provides for a three tier quasi-judicial machinery at District, State and Central levels commonly known as “Consumer Commissions” for protection of the rights of consumers and to provide simple and speedy redressal of consumer disputes including those related with unfair trade practices. The Consumer Commissions are empowered to give relief of a specific nature and award compensation to consumers, wherever appropriate.

The National Consumer Helpline (NCH) administered by the Department of Consumer Affairs has emerged as a single point of access to consumers across the country for their grievance redressal at a pre-litigation stage. Consumers can register their grievances from all over the country in 17 languages including Hindi, English, Kashmiri, Punjabi, Nepali, Gujarati, Marathi, Kannada, Telugu, Tamil, Malayalam, Maithili, Santhali, Bengali, Odia, Assamese and Manipuri through a toll-free number 1915. These grievances can be registered on Integrated Grievance Redressal Mechanism (INGRAM), an omni-channel IT enabled central portal, through various channels- WhatsApp (8800001915), SMS (8800001915), email (nch-ca[at]gov[dot]in), the NCH app, the web portal (consumerhelpline.gov.in) and the Umang app, as per their convenience. 1049 companies, who have voluntarily partnered with NCH, as part of the ‘Convergence’ programme directly respond to these grievances according to their redressal process and revert by providing feedback to the complainant on the portal. Complaints against those companies, who have not partnered with National Consumer Helpline, are forwarded to the company for redressal.

To safeguard the interests of consumers from unfair trade practices in e-commerce, the Department of Consumer Affairs has notified the Consumer Protection (E-commerce) Rules, 2020 under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. These rules, inter-alia, outline the responsibilities of e-commerce entities and specify the liabilities of marketplace and inventory e-commerce entities, including provisions for consumer grievance redressal.

The Department of Consumer Affairs, in consultation with all the stakeholders, has finalized a “safety Pledge” which is a voluntary public commitment of e-Commerce platforms to ensure the safety of goods sold online and respect the consumer rights. Aligned with global best practices, this initiative strengthens consumer protection in the e-Commerce. On the National Consumer Day 2024, 13 major e-Commerce companies including Reliance Retail group, Tata sons group, Zomato, Ola, Swiggy etc. signed the Safety Pledge for ensuring consumer safety. The support and agreement of major e-Commerce companies to abide by the safety pledge will go a long way in ensuring protection of consumer rights.

Under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA), an executive agency, came into existence on 24.07.2020. It is designed to intervene, to prevent consumer detriment arising from unfair trade practices and to initiate class action(s), including the enforcement of recalls, refunds and return of products. Its core mandate is to prevent and regulate false or misleading advertisements which are prejudicial to the public interest.

Dark patterns involve using design and choice architecture to deceive, coerce, or influence consumers into making choices that are not in their best interest. Dark patterns encompass a wide range of manipulative practices such as drip pricing, disguised advertisement, bait and switch, false urgency etc. Such practices fall under the category of “unfair trade practices” as defined in the Sub-section 47 under Section 2 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.

The CCPA, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019, has issued “Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Dark Patterns, 2023” on 30th November, 2023 for prevention and regulation of dark patterns listing 13 specified dark patterns identified in e-Commerce sector. These dark patterns include false urgency, Basket Sneaking, Confirm shaming, forced action, Subscription trap, Interface Interference, Bait and switch, Drip Pricing, Disguised Advertisements, Nagging, Trick Wording, Saas Billing and Rogue Malwares.

The CCPA has also notified the Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements for Misleading Advertisements, 2022 on 9th June, 2022. These guidelines inter-alia provide for; (a) conditions for an advertisement to be non-misleading and valid; (b) certain stipulations in respect of bait advertisements and free claim advertisements; and, (c) duties of manufacturer, service provider, advertiser and advertising agency. These guidelines states that due diligence is required for endorsement of advertisements such that any endorsement in an advertisement must reflect the genuine, reasonably current opinion of the individual, group or organisation making such representation and must be based on adequate information about, or experience with, the identified goods, product or service and must not otherwise be deceptive.

Further to strengthen consumer protection, the CCPA enacted the Guidelines for Prevention and Regulation of Greenwashing and Misleading Environmental Claims, 2024 (effective 15th October 2024), mandating transparency in environmental claims and the Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements in the Coaching Sector, 2024 (effective 13th November 2024), addressing false claims, exaggerated success rates and unfair practices in coaching institutes.

The CCPA has imposed a penalty of ₹ 77 lakhs 60 thousands on 24 coaching institutes for misleading advertisements. The Department of Consumer Affairs (DoCA) has successfully secured refunds amounting to ₹1.56 crores for over 600 aspirants and students in the education sector through National Consumer Helpline (NCH). These students, enrolled in coaching centres for Civil Services, Engineering Course and other programmes, were previously denied rightful refunds despite following the terms and conditions set forth by the coaching institutes. The action by the Department has helped students receive compensation for unfulfilled services, late classes, or cancelled courses, ensuring they do not bear the financial burden of unfair business practices.

Action has already been taken by the CCPA against various entities including e-commerce platforms for affecting consumers, as a class, for violation of consumer rights, false and misleading advertisements and unfair trade practices as defined under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. Action has also been taken against the sale of domestic pressure cookers that do not meet compulsory BIS standards on e-commerce platforms. Additionally, as per CCPA’s directions, travel companies have refunded Rs. 1,454 Crores as of 20.03.2024 to consumers for cancelled flights due to the Covid-19 lockdown. CCPA has also mandated that these companies update their websites with clear instructions and status updates on refund claims related to cancelled tickets. Further, 13,118 listings of car seat belt alarm stopper clips have been delisted from major e-commerce platforms based on the Orders passed by CCPA to delist all such products which violates consumer rights and are unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 as the sale or marketing of said product compromise with the life and safety of consumer by stopping alarm beep when not wearing seat belts.

The Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) has notified framework on ‘Online Consumer Reviews — Principles and Requirements for their Collection, Moderation and Publication’ on 23.11.2022 for safeguarding and protecting consumer interest from fake and deceptive reviews in e-commerce. The standards are voluntary and are applicable to every online platform which publishes consumer reviews. The guiding principles of the standard are integrity, accuracy, privacy, security, transparency, accessibility and responsiveness.

Under CONFONET scheme, VC equipment for conducting hearing through video conferencing mode has been installed and made functional at 10 benches of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) and 35 benches of State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commissions (SCDRCs).

This information was given by the Union Minister of State for the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution, Shri B.L. Verma in a written reply today in the Rajya Sabha.

*****

Abhishek Dayal/Nihi Sharma

(Release ID: 2114829) Visitor Counter : 37

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: PARLIAMENT QUESTION: PROVIDING TAP WATER CONNECTION UNDER JJM

Source: Government of India (2)

Posted On: 25 MAR 2025 2:14PM by PIB Delhi

Government of India is committed to the provision of safe & potable tap water supply in adequate quantity, of prescribed quality and on a regular & long-term basis to all rural households in the country. Towards this end, the Government of India launched the Jal Jeevan Mission (JJM), to be implemented in partnership with States/ UTs, in August 2019. The Government of India supports the states by providing technical and financial assistance.

Significant progress has been made in the country since the launch of JJM, towards enhancing access to tap water for rural households. At the start of JJM in August 2019, only 3.23 Crore (16.71%) rural households were reported to have tap water connections. So far, as reported by State/UTs as on 20.03.2025, around 12.30 Crore additional rural households have been provided with tap water connections under JJM. Thus, as on 20.03.2025, out of 19.36 Crore rural households in the country, approximately 15.53 Crore (80.22%) households are reported to have tap water supply. The year-wise and State-wise including the Kushinagar district of Uttar Pradesh details of the progress made under the JJM in providing tap water connections since its inception are available on JJM IMIS Dashboard at https://ejalshakti.gov.in/jjmreport/JJMIndia.aspx.

The government of India is building strategic international partnerships to enhance international cooperation in specific areas of water supply, water distribution, wastewater and solid waste treatment, sewerage systems, re-use of treated wastewater, water management, and energy optimization.

At present, India and Denmark have entered into a Green Strategic Partnership on 28th September, 2020. Joint Work Plan (2021-2024) has subsequently been formulated between the National Jal Jeevan Mission, Ministry of Jal Shakti, New Delhi and Danish Environment Protection Agency, Ministry of Environment, Denmark (DEPA) to support Government of India’s objective of providing drinking water supply to all rural households. The objective of the work plan is to enhance cooperation in the specific areas of water supply, water distribution, wastewater treatment, sewerage systems, re-use of treated wastewater, water management and energy optimization in the water sector.

The cooperation is working to support a range of priorities of the JJM and co-create solutions in the fields of policy, planning, regulation and implementation as well as technology, research & development and skilling that combine Danish and Indian expertise.

As on date, 11 States/ UTs have become ‘Har Ghar Jal’ States/ UT i.e. 100% households are having tap water supply and the remaining States/ UTs are at various stages of achieving the objectives of the mission.

Government of India has taken a number of steps to ensure coordinated planning between infrastructure development projects, like road construction and water supply system, like pipelines installations which inter alia includes (i) nomination of a nodal officer in the Department for coordinating with Central nodal Ministries/ Departments/ agencies viz. M/o EF&CC, M/o RTH, NHAI, M/o Railways etc. to facilitate the States in obtaining Statutory/ other clearances; (ii) regular review meetings with central agencies and State level officers; (iii) State Programme Management Units (SPMUs) and District Programme Management Units (DPMUs) have been set up to bridge the gap in availability of technical skill sets and of HR for programme management; (iv) A network of Civil Society Organizations working in the water sector, the Rural WASH Partner Forum, has been set up to extend support to states for time bound implementation.

Under the Jal Jeevan Mission, as per existing guidelines, Bureau of Indian Standards’ BIS:10500 standards are adopted as benchmark for quality of water being supplied through the piped water supply schemes. BIS specifies ‘acceptable limit’ and ‘permissible limit in the absence of alternate source’ for various physio-chemical and bacteriological parameters for drinking water quality.

This information was provided by THE MINISTER OF STATE FOR JAL SHAKTI SHRI V. SOMANNA in a written reply to a question in Rajya Sabha today.

***

DHANYA SANAL K

(Rajya Sabha US Q2632)

(Release ID: 2114775) Visitor Counter : 30

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Singapore and India signs Letter of Intent to Cooperate on Maritime Digitalisation and Decarbonisation

Source: Government of India (2)

Posted On: 25 MAR 2025 12:53PM by PIB Delhi

Singapore and India have signed a Letter of Intent (LOI) to cooperate on maritime digitalisation and decarbonisation. The LOl was inked by Mr Teo Eng Dih, Chief Executive of the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore and Shri R. Lakshmanan, Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Ports. Shipping and Waterways ( (MOPSW) of India, and witnessed by Dri Amy Khor, Senior Minister of State, Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment and Ministry of Transport Singapore, and Shri Sarbananda Sonowal, Minister of Ports Shipping and Waterways of India.

Under the LOl, both sides will collaborate on maritime digitalisation and decarbonisation projects, including identifying relevant stakeholders who could contribute to the effort, and work towards formalising the partnership through a memorandum of understanding on a Singapore-India Green and Digital Shipping Corridor (GDSC).

India is a leading player in information technology with the potential to become a major producer and exporter of green marine fuels. Singapore, as a key transshipment and bunkering hub, also supports a dynamic research and innovation ecosystem.

The Singapore-India GDSC, when established, will enhance collaboration from both countries and help accelerate the development and uptake of zero or near-zero Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emission technologies and the adoption of digital solutions.

***

GDH/HR/SJ

(Release ID: 2114721) Visitor Counter : 88

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Lake Trichonida – ‘Energy Centre’ in a Natura area – E-001078/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001078/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Maria Zacharia (NI)

Lake Trichonida, covering an area of 98.6 square kilometres (km²), is the largest lake in Greece and the ecosystems it hosts have been designated Special Area of Conservation (SAC) GR2310009, Special Protection Area (SPA) GR2310013, Important Bird Area (IBA) GR091, Wildlife Refuge (WRF) and Corine Biotope, while it is also in constant interaction with the ecosystems of Panaitoliko, Arakynthos, the mountains of Nafpaktia, the Achelous and Dimikos rivers, the Agrinio plain, Makryneia, the lakes of Amvrakia and Lysimachia, the Ambracian Gulf and the Missolonghi lagoon (Ramsar wetlands), so that any environmental degradation or destruction in one of them will also affect the others.

Recently, residents have been confronted by the intention of construction companies to convert the lake into an ‘energy centre’ by building more pumped storage units, while an Environmental Impact Study has already been submitted for licensing for the construction of a pumping station project with a capacity of five million cubic metres of water. Such a change will be a springboard for the general degradation of the natural environment of the area, with social and economic implications.

In view of the above:

1.Is the Commission aware of the programme to convert a rare habitat into an ‘energy centre’?

2.What does the Commission intend to do to prevent the destruction of the largest wetland of European and international interest in Greece?

Submitted: 12.3.2025
Last updated: 25 March 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
March 26, 2025
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to study looking at the number of microplastics found in chewing gum
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

March 25, 2025

A preprint published at the American Chemical Society Spring Meeting looks at microplastics in chewing gum.

Prof Oliver Jones, Professor of Chemistry, RMIT University, said:

“This is an interesting preprint, but it has not undergone peer review, so its content may change before it is published, and I could not access the supplementary information.
“The idea that chewing gum might be a source of microplastics is not that new in itself, but this is the first study to attempt to quantify the potential problem.

“An interesting finding from this study is that they found very similar microplastics of microplastics in both the synthetic and the natural gums, even though there weren’t supposed to be plastics in the natural gums at all. In fact, the data from both groups is almost identical. Logically, this means either
1. i) There were actually microplastics in the natural gums when there shouldn’t have been.
2. ii) There was another source of microplastics common to both groups that had nothing to do with the gum (e.g., lab contamination of some form).
  iii) There was some form of measurement error common to both groups.
“A potential issue is that the authors used a dye called Nile Red to stain the microplastics to make them easier to see. This is a common approach, but the method has potential issues in that Nile Red can stain a wide variety of natural and synthetic particles (1), and some biological materials can autofluorescence, which makes them look like dyed plastic when they aren’t (2).

“I can’t see from the pre-print how these factors were controlled for, but Nile Red based microplastic data are inconclusive without adequate controls.
“If we assume the figures are accurate, 637, micrometre-sized pieces of plastic per gram of gum is a very small amount indeed. Since the lining of the intestine is fairly thick and well-regulated, any particles you swallowed would likely pass straight through you with no impact.

“In short, while microplastics are something we should definitely be keeping an eye on, I don’t think you have to stop chewing gum just yet – although you should certainly dispose of it appropriately in a bin when you are finished with it.”

1 – Stanton, T., Johnson, M., Nathanail, P., Gomes, R.L., Needham, T. and Burson, A. (2019) Exploring the efficacy of Nile Red in microplastic quantification: a costaining approach. Environmental Science & Technology Letters 6, 606-611.

2 – Catarino, A. I.; Frutos, A.; Henry, T. B., Use of fluorescent-labelled nanoplastics (NPs) to demonstrate NP absorption is inconclusive without adequate controls. Science of The Total Environment 2019, 670, 915-920.”

‘Ingestion Risk of Microplastics from Chewing Gums’ by Mohanty et al. was presented at the American Chemical Society meeting at 09:00 UK time on Tuesday 25th March.

Declared interests

Prof Oliver Jones “I am a professor of Chemistry at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. I have no direct conflicts of interest to declare. I have previously published research on microplastics in the environment. I have also received funds from the Environment Protection Authority Victoria and various Australian Water utilities for research into environmental pollution.”
MIL OSI United Kingdom –
March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI: ALE launches Private 5G solution powered by Celona to expand IoT connectivity

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

New solution expands high quality connectivity in complex enterprise environments, large outdoor areas through seamless integration with ALE networking portfolio

COLOMBES, France, and CAMPBELL, Calif., March 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise, a leader in secure Enterprise networking and communication solutions is proud to announce the launch of its innovative Private 5G solution powered by Celona. This new turnkey solution seamlessly integrates with ALE’s OmniVista, OmniSwitch and OmniAccess Stellar networking portfolio, enabling secure and high quality connectivity across complex enterprise environments including large outdoor spaces.

This strategic partnership with Celona represents a significant leap in enterprise-grade connectivity, designed to empower critical operations with unparalleled reliability, performance and security in challenging environments worldwide.

Transforming IoT Connectivity in Demanding Environments

The cutting-edge technology in ALE’s Private 5G solution is engineered for ultra-reliable connectivity in complex industrial settings such as manufacturing, refineries, logistics warehouses, and ports including airport apron/ramp areas. The Private 5G solution offers large-area wireless coverage, secure and reliable high-speed mobility, supporting real-time, critical industrial applications, leading to enhanced IoT and Industry 4.0 integration.

This technology enables connecting next-generation IoT devices and applications that demand ultra-low latency and deterministic performance in enterprises pioneering the use of state-of-the-art devices and technologies, including autonomous guided vehicles (AGVs), robotics, HD video analytics, augmented reality (AR), and virtual reality (VR) applications, all of which will benefit from robust wireless connectivity.

Unmatched Enterprise Connectivity with ALE’s End-to-End Solution

ALE is integrating Private 5G with its existing solutions, such as OmniVista Cirrus, OmniSwitch LAN, and OmniAccess Stellar WLAN, to deliver reliable augmented coverage across industrial sites, offices and campuses. This approach ensures end-to-end secure Zero Touch Network Access and high-performance connectivity for seamless operations and advanced applications.

Private 5G powered by Celona delivers on the promise of strong security with robust SIM authentication and Celona’s patented MicroSlicing™ and Aerloc technologies, which ensure reliable service and application-level SLAs, policy enforcement, and zero trust security for business-critical applications.

Stephan Robineau, EVP Network Business Division, Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise, comments:

“This exciting partnership with Celona offers the best Private 5G wireless solution purpose-built for enterprise environments. The integration into our end-to-end portfolio further enhances our ability to provide enterprise-wide connectivity with unmatched reliability and performance.

Furthermore, the advanced Private 5G technology aligns perfectly with our security-first approach and our vertical strategy, enabling us to meet the unique demands of industries like energy and utilities, transportation and the manufacturing industry.”

Rajeev Shah, co-founder and CEO, Celona, said:

“Our partnership with Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise is pivotal, and a testament to what can happen when two technology leaders come together. ALE has a rich history of innovation that resulted in world-class solutions. At Celona, after years of research and development with a focus on designing for the enterprise, our private 5G solution is best-in-class, highly secure, and easy to deploy and manage. It addresses wireless connectivity challenges in complex environments where some businesses still rely on pen and paper. To say this is a gamechanger is truly an understatement.”

About Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise

Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise provides secure networking and communication solutions which enable organizations and industries to accelerate their operational efficiencies and competitiveness. In the Cloud. On Premises. Hybrid.

All solutions have built-in security, limited environmental impact and are fully compliant with data protection requirements of organizations and individuals at a national sovereignty and international industry level.

Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise focus on providing sustainable technology solutions for the good of the environment, people, and business.

Over 100 years of innovation have made the company a trusted advisor to more than a million customers across the world. With headquarters in France and 3,400 business partners worldwide, Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise achieves an effective global reach with a local focus.

al-enterprise.com | LinkedIn | Facebook | Instagram

About Celona

Based in Silicon Valley, Celona is a pioneer and leading innovator of enterprise private wireless solutions. The company developed the industry’s first 5G LAN system, a turnkey private 5G solution that enables enterprises to address their growing needs for secure and reliable wireless connectivity for critical business applications. Celona 5G LAN has been deployed by a wide range of global customers across industries. To date, the company has raised over $135 million in venture funding from Lightspeed Venture Partners, Norwest Venture Partners, NTT Ventures, Cervin Ventures, DigitalBridge and Qualcomm Ventures. For more information, please visit celona.io.

Media Contacts

Carine Bowen, Global press Alcatel-Lucent Enterprise
press@al-enterprise.com

Janet Brumfield, IdealPR+ for Celona
janet@idealprplus.com
+1 614-582-9636

A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/75ea0569-8ee5-404e-bf1b-d1d1e75744d2

The MIL Network –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI NGOs: Greenpeace Australia Pacific urges Parliament to vote down Albanese’s extinction Bill

Source: Greenpeace Statement –

CANBERRA, 25 MARCH 2025—As Prime Minister Anthony Albanese introduces an ill-conceived bill to give Tasmania’s salmon industry a free pass from environmental oversight, Greenpeace Australia Pacific has urged parliament to vote down the legislation, calling it a death warrant for the endangered Maugean Skate.

“With this bill, the Prime Minister has chosen the profits of overseas corporations with unsustainable business models over the survival of the endangered Maugean Skate, of which there are only a few thousand left in the wild,” said Glenn Walker, Head of Nature, Greenpeace Australia Pacific.

“Greenpeace Australia Pacific calls on MPs to vote down this pro-extinction bill, which provides a loophole for the polluting salmon farming industry and also sets a dangerous precedent for giving special treatment to other multinational corporations, such as fossil fuels.

“This pro-extinction bill undermines and contradicts the government’s overnight recommitment to a national environmental protection authority and an overhaul of our nature laws. It risks rendering Labor’s ‘no new extinctions’ pledge worthless.

“It should be a source of deep concern that the Maugean Skate has survived in Tasmanian waters since the age of dinosaurs, but may not survive Anthony Albanese and everyone who votes for this ill-considered legislation. We urge all MPs not to be complicit in this death warrant and vote down the bill.

“It is still not too late for the PM to course-correct, and for Labor to get on with the job fixing our broken nature laws, establishing an independent Environmental Protection Authority, and ending species extinctions in Australia.

“That must start with dropping this terrible bill immediately and focusing instead on solutions to support and transition workers while still allowing industrial activity to be subject to appropriate scrutiny by the Federal Environment Minister, under the EPBC Act.

– ENDS-

For interviews, contact Vai at 0452 290 082 / [email protected]

MIL OSI NGO –

March 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Middlefield Canadian Income PCC – Annual Financial Report

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (the “Company”)

Including Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC (the “Fund”), a cell of the Company

Registered No: 93546

Legal Entity Identifier: 2138007ENW3JEJXC8658

ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT

The Company hereby announces the publication of its full unedited annual financial report for the year ended 31 December 2024 (the “AFR”).

In accordance with Listing Rule 6.4.1, a copy of the AFR has been submitted to the National Storage Mechanism and it will shortly be available for inspection at https://data.fca.org.uk/#/nsm/nationalstoragemechanism.

The AFR is also available from the ‘Trust Documents’ section of the Company’s website: https://middlefield.com/funds/uk-funds/middlefield-canadian-income-trust/

Enquiries:

Secretary

JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited

Tel.: 01534 700000

Dean Orrico

President

Middlefield International Limited

Tel.: 01203 7094016

END OF ANNOUNCEMENT

Middlefield Canadian Income Trust

Annual Report and Accounts

For the year ended 31 December 2024

LON: MCT

Focusing on high levels of stable and increasing income together with capital growth, this Fund invests in high quality, Canadian large capitalisation businesses. Middlefield Limited, the Fund’s investment manager, is a private and independent firm located in Toronto, Canada, and is regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission.

Financial Highlights

2024 DIVIDENDS PAID

5.3p per share

1.325p per share quarterly

5.5p per share New Dividend Guidance for 2025¹

YIELD

4.6%

SHARE PRICE

116.00p

NAV PER SHARE

134.05p

NET ASSETS

£142.7m

1. This is a target only and does not constitute, nor should it be interpreted as, a profit forecast.

Why Middlefield Canadian Income PCC?

Who is this fund for?

This Fund is for long-term investors seeking dividends and capital appreciation from a diversified portfolio of stable, profitable businesses domiciled primarily in Canada.

Reasons to buy

Unique

The UK’s only listed Canadian equity fund focused on high income – admitted to the FTSE UK All-Share Index in 2011.

Proven

Outperformance over the period since inception in 2006. The Fund’s total return for 2024 was 20.6 per cent versus the benchmark total return of 7.6 per cent.

Diversification

UK investors are underexposed to Canadian equities – Canada is one of the largest investable economies in the developed world.

High Income

Canadian equities offer a higher yield compared to other developed markets. MCT has consistently paid dividends in excess of 5p per share per annum since 2017 and increased its dividend in 2023, 2024 and 2025.

Stability

Canada is a member of the G7 and offers one of the most stable political and financial systems in the world.

Governance

Experienced Board of Directors with an independent majority, re-elected annually by shareholders to protect their interests.

A member of the Association of Investment Companies

Further details about the Company, including the latest annual and half yearly financial reports, fact sheets and stock exchange announcements, are available on the website at www.middlefield.co.uk/mcit.htm

Contents

Strategic Report

Key Information 4

Historical Performance 5

Chairman’s Statement 6

Investment Manager’s Report 11

Top Holdings 13

ESG Policy 16

Business Model 22

Biographies 26

Corporate Information 29

Report of the Directors 36

Corporate Report

Statement of Directors’ Responsibilities 40

Directors’ Remuneration Report 41

Corporate Governance Statement 43

Report of the Audit Committee 48

General Shareholder Information 51

General Data Key Investor Document and Related Data 52

Independent Auditor’s Report on the Fund 53

Financial Statements

Statement of Financial Position of the Fund 60

Statement of Comprehensive Income of the Fund 61

Statement of Changes in Redeemable Participating Preference Shareholders’ Equity of the Fund 62

Statement of Cash Flows of the Fund 63

Notes to the Financial Statements of the Fund 64

Independent Auditor’s Report on the Company 81

Statement of Financial Position of the Company 84

Notes to the Financial Statements of the Company 85

Definitions 86

Alternative Performance Measures 87

Key Information

This Fund invests in larger capitalisation Canadian and U.S. high yield equities with a focus on companies that pay and grow dividends.

Exposure to Key Canadian Themes & Industries

Canadian companies are amongst the world leaders across the real estate, financial and energy and power sectors.

Real Estate

Canada has had the highest population growth rate in the developed world. Immigration tailwinds and a highly educated workforce are expected to support ongoing demand for real estate in Canada. Middlefield is one of the top real estate investors in Canada with over 40 years of experience and $450M+ in AUM across real estate strategies.

Financials

One of the world’s most sophisticated and well-capitalised banking systems, Canada’s banks are well-positioned to consistently grow their dividends over time. Canadian financials have historically demonstrated less volatility than peers during periods of market uncertainty.

Energy and Power

North American energy is expected to play a vital role in energy security and the energy transition over the coming decades. Its domestic power market benefits from an abundance of renewable energy sources and robust demand for electricity driven by immigration, growing corporate demand, and improving global accessibility.

Key Data as at 31 Dec 2024

Historical Performance

As at 31 December 2024

Performance Since Inception to 31 December 2024

As at 31 December 2024

Notes:

1. Net asset value total returns (in Sterling, net of applicable withholding taxes, fees, and including the reinvestment of dividends).

2. The Fund’s benchmark, the S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index (“Benchmark”), has been currency adjusted to reflect the Canadian Dollar (“CAD”) returns from inception to October 2011 (while the Fund was CAD hedged) and Sterling (“GBP”) returns thereafter.

3. Prior to 31 October 2024, the Fund’s Benchmark as well as the S&P/TSX Composite Index, were calculated gross of withholding tax. Beginning 31 October 2024, the Benchmark and the S&P/TSX Composite Index are calculated net of a 15% withholding tax and all period returns have been restated on this basis.

Recent Performance	1 Mth	3 Mth	6 Mth	YTD	1 Year
Share Price	-10.8%	3.6%	15.3%	20.6%	20.6%
NAV	-4.2%	2.6%	12.9%	15.1%	15.1%
Benchmark	-4.7%	1.1%	7.7%	7.6%	7.6%
S&P/TSX Composite	-4.5%	4.2%	9.9%	13.5%	13.5%

Long-Term Performance	3 Year annualised	5 year annualised	7 Year annualised	10 year annualised	Since Inception annualised¹
Share Price	4.3%	8.2%	7.2%	6.7%	6.8%
NAV	3.3%	7.2%	6.8%	7.4%	7.2%
Benchmark	5.2%	7.9%	6.9%	7.1%	6.1%
S&P/TSX Composite	6.4%	9.8%	8.3%	8.4%	6.4%

Long-Term Performance	3 Year cumulative	5 year cumulative	7 Year cumulative	10 year cumulative	Since Inception cumulative¹
Share Price	13.5%	48.3%	62.8%	90.8%	239.0%
NAV	10.2%	41.9%	58.1%	104.1%	262.7%
Benchmark	16.4%	46.3%	59.2%	97.6%	199.1%
S&P/TSX Composite	20.5%	59.3%	74.6%	124.4%	215.0%

Sources: Middlefield, Bloomberg. As at 31 December 2024.

Past performance is not a guide to the future. The price of investments and the income from them may fall as well as rise and investors may not get back the full amount invested. All price information is indicative only.

Total returns including the reinvestment of dividends for all returns. Fund returns are net of fees.

Composite of monthly total returns for the S&P/TSX Income Trust Index from inception to 31 December 2010 and the S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index (formerly named the S&P TSX Equity Income Index).

Currency adjusted to reflect CAD$ returns from inception of MCT to Oct 2011 and GBP returns thereafter since MCT was CAD$ hedged from inception to Oct 2011

Prior to 31 October 2024, the Fund’s Benchmark, as well as the S&P/TSX Composite Index, were calculated gross of withholding tax. Beginning 31 October 2024, the Benchmark and the S&P/TSX Composite Index are calculated net of a 15% withholding tax and all period returns have been restated on this basis.

Chairman’s Statement

Michael Phair

Chairman

It is my pleasure to introduce the 2024 Annual Financial Report for Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (“MCT” or the “Company”) and its closed-ended cell known as Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC (the “Fund”). The Fund invests primarily in dividend-paying Canadian equities, with the objective of providing shareholders with a high level of dividend as well as capital growth over the longer term.

Investment Performance

The Fund delivered very good relative performance in 2024. MCT generated total returns of 20.6 per cent on its share price and 15.1 per cent on net assets, both of which were higher than the benchmark total return of 7.6 per cent. Financials, Energy, and Utilities were all positive contributors primarily due to sector allocation and stock selection gains. The Investment Manager believes that 2024 represented the early stages of a sustained outperformance following a period of challenging market conditions for the Fund’s core sectors. In January 2025, the Fund’s dividend was increased from 5.3p to 5.5p per share per annum.

Over 2024, the discount to net asset value at which the Fund’s shares traded narrowed from -16.8 per cent at the start of the year to -13.5 per cent at the end. The discount moved to within -6 per cent at the beginning of December 2024 which coincided with the share price increasing to 131.25p, a high point for the year. This increase reflected the buying activity by Saba Capital Management L.P. (“Saba”) which first announced a notifiable holding in the Fund’s shares in April 2024, and which has announced further increases in its holding since such date. Saba’s current total interest in the Fund’s shares (comprising its direct and indirect exposure) is estimated to be 29 per cent. Recent developments regarding Saba are discussed below under “Engagement with Saba”.

Investment Management

The Board has regular contact with the Investment Manager, Middlefield Limited, to discuss portfolio strategy and review its investment approach, gearing and sector allocations. We remain satisfied that the Investment Manager is applying the strategy consistently and professionally and are confident that the Investment Manager’s outlook and the Fund’s corresponding positioning are capable of delivering good performance over time.

Middlefield Limited, the Fund’s Investment Manager, has 45 years of investing experience. The Investment Manager uses an actively managed strategy, allowing it to take advantage of market dislocations across Canada and the U.S. In 2024, Canada was ahead of other developed countries in reducing their policy rates after sustained downward trends in inflation. Meanwhile, the U.S. Federal Reserve’s monetary policy remained restrictive for longer. In light of the high levels of cash flow and dividends that Canadian equities offer, and the valuation discounts at which they trade relative to U.S. companies, the Board remains supportive of the Investment Manager’s decision to be substantially invested in Canadian equities. In Q4 2024, against the backdrop of an improving outlook for the Canadian economy as well as a peaking of 10-year government bond yields in the U.S. and Canada, the Fund increased its exposure in Canadian energy from c. 19 per cent to c. 22 per cent which remains above the benchmark, while Real Estate remains the most overweight sector in the Fund relative to the benchmark.

Shareholder Engagement

Increasing investor interest in the Fund remains one of the Board’s highest priorities. The Board continues to promote the Company through the Investment Manager’s investor relations initiative, which is dedicated to keeping our shareholders well-informed, especially in times of market turmoil. The Investment Manager provides regular updates through commentaries and articles to get their perspectives directly. This content is accessible on the Investment Manager’s website, where it generates regular insights into the portfolio’s outlook and the decision-making process: Middlefield Canadian Income Trust Content. In addition, the Trust remains engaged with Kepler Partners. Kepler Partners continues to introduce the Investment Manager to new investors throughout London and its surrounding regions, while consistently producing research aimed at raising the profile of the Fund. Kepler Partner’ coverage of the Fund can be accessed at: Middlefield Canadian Income Research. The Board also works with Buchanan, a public relations firm tasked with enhancing the Fund’s reputation among retail investors. The Fund’s ongoing press engagements are featured on our website under “Featured Press”. Alternatively, prospective investors can subscribe to email updates on the Fund’s website to be updated regularly: Middlefield Canadian Income Trust | Middlefield Group.

Fund Sector Weights Compared to Benchmark as at 31 December 2024

Sector Allocation	MCT	Benchmark	Over/Underweight
Financials	27.3%	30.0%	-2.7%
Energy	22.4%	15.0%	7.4%
Real Estate	18.5%	4.4%	14.1%
Pipelines	16.9%	15.8%	1.1%
Utilities	9.5%	13.8%	-4.3%
Materials	2.8%	5.4%	-2.6%
Communication Services	2.6%	10.4%	-7.8%
Consumer Discretionary	0.0%	3.0%	-3.0%
Industrials	0.0%	0.8%	-0.8%
Consumer Staples	0.0%	0.8%	-0.8%
Health Care	0.0%	0.7%	-0.7%
Information Technology	0.0%	0.0%	0.0%
Total	100.0%	100.0%

Source: Middlefield, Bloomberg

The background to the Fund’s performance is explained in depth by Mr Dean Orrico in the Investment Manager’s accompanying report.

Engagement with Saba

Since the Fund’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Fund, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba.

The requisition notice received by the Fund on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Fund. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Fund’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates.

Following consultation with a number of the Fund’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Fund announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Fund and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders.

Gearing

The Fund reports its gearing relative to net and total assets in its monthly fact sheet. Gearing relative to total assets was consistent throughout 2024. This compares to the Fund’s upper gearing limit of 25 per cent. of its total assets at the time of drawdown. Net gearing, which represents borrowings as a percentage of net assets, is the AIC standard measure of gearing. Net gearing at the start of the year was 17.2 per cent and ended the period on 31 December 2024 at 19.3 per cent.

The cost of borrowing has come down in 2024 due to the Bank of Canada cutting rates by a total of 175 basis points throughout the year. We anticipate further declines in borrowing costs as the BoC is expected to continue its easing cycle in 2025. The Board continues to believe the use of gearing is warranted at prevailing interest rates due to an expected total return that exceeds total borrowing costs. The Board will continue to weigh the benefits of gearing against the costs and monitor the spread between interest expenses and the yield of the portfolio to ensure the use of leverage remains in the best interest of shareholders. On 3 April 2024, the credit facility was amended to replace Banker’s Acceptances with CORRA (Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average administered and published by the Bank of Canada) loans.

Earnings and Dividends

In light of the excess revenue earnings generated by the Fund this year, together with the prospect of dividend growth from the underlying portfolio, the Board approved a 0.2p increase to the annual dividend target in early 2025 to 5.5p for 2025. This is a target only and should not constitute, nor should it be interpreted as a profit forecast.

Quarterly interim dividends each of 1.325p per share were paid on 31 January 2024, 30 April 2024, 31 July 2024 and 31 October 2024 representing a 1.92 per cent. increase to quarterly payments made in 2023.

Consistent dividend growth is a core consideration for the Fund’s security selection process and factored into the Board’s decision to increase the dividend. The Company’s revenue earnings per share totalled 5.61p for the current year, reflecting a dividend coverage ratio of 1.06. This compares to dividend coverage ratios of 1.07 in 2023 and 1.16 in 2022. The Board regularly reviews the Fund’s dividend coverage and, subject to market conditions as well as the Fund’s earnings, it will continue to consider whether further dividend increases are warranted in the future.

Directors’ Remuneration

For 2024, the directors’ remuneration remained at £36,000 per annum for the chairman of the Board, £32,000 per annum for the chairman of the audit committee and £29,000 per annum for all other directors bar Mr Orrico, who has waived his entitlement for remuneration for acting as a director. The last increase was on 1 July 2023.

Related Party Transactions

The Company’s related parties are its directors and the Investment Manager. There were no related party transactions (as defined in the Listing Rules) during the year under review, nor up to the date of this report. Details of the remuneration paid to the directors and the Investment Manager during the year under review are shown in note 13.

Material Events

Save for the Saba requisition and the Board’s ongoing consideration of future strategic options for the Company following engagement with Saba as referred to above, the Board is not aware of any significant event or transaction which has occurred between 1 January 2025 and the date of publication of this statement which could have a material impact on the financial position of the Fund.

Company and Fund Annual General Meetings

At each of the Company and Fund Annual General Meetings held on 13 June 2024, all resolutions, relating to both ordinary business and special business were duly passed.

Board Composition and Succession Planning

The Board frequently reviews its succession planning strategy and has taken multiple steps in recent years to refresh its composition. We are pleased with the significant progress made to ensure the highest standards of good corporate governance. These steps include the appointment of four new nonexecutive directors over the past five years: Mr Michael Phair (on 13 June 2019), Ms Kate Anderson (on 12 April 2021), Ms Janine Fraser (on 13 September 2022) and Mr Andrew Zychowski (on 30 June 2023).

The Board currently comprises five nonexecutive directors, of whom four are independent and 40 per cent are female, including the senior independent director.

Contact

Shareholders can write to the Company at its registered office or by email to the Secretary at middlefield.cosec@ JTCGroup.com.

Principal Risks and Uncertainties

Trade policy uncertainty will remain a persistent overhang in the coming months, affecting business confidence, capital investment, and supply chain planning across North America. With the looming USMCA renegotiation deadline and ongoing discussions around tariffs, businesses face heightened risks when making strategic decisions. Companies reliant on cross-border trade may hesitate to expand operations, allocate capital, or engage in M&A, given the potential for new trade barriers and shifting regulatory frameworks. This uncertainty could lead to reduced investment and prolonged supply chain inefficiencies, ultimately weighing on economic growth and corporate earnings.

Additionally, although discussions to date between the Board and Saba have been constructive, uncertainty remains over how the Company will proceed going forwards. The Board remains mindful of the need to act at all times in the best interests of shareholders as a whole and wishes to avoid future engagement in costly and time-consuming activist shareholder campaigns.

Despite inflation moderating in 2024, the risk of an upside surprise in inflation remains a key concern. Stickier inflation could erode consumer purchasing power and increase the cost of borrowing, stifling economic activity. Persistently high inflation could delay further rate cuts from central banks, which could exacerbate financial stress, leading to higher delinquency rates and weaker household consumption.

The combination of expanding fiscal policies and easing monetary conditions could further strain government balance sheets in 2025. Canada and the US continue to run large fiscal deficits, with rising debt levels fuelling concerns about long-term sustainability. Increased government borrowing costs, especially in a higher-for-longer rate environment, could lead to investors demanding higher risk premiums and increased volatility in bond markets and sovereign credit ratings.

Geopolitical concerns in 2024 centred on the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, trade policy between the US and its trading partners, and a change in leadership in Canada and U.S. Although there are efforts to reach a ceasefire in both Ukraine and Israel, these conflicts all have the potential to disrupt global trade routes, commodity prices, and investor sentiment. The risk of further escalation could lead to supply shocks in energy markets, driving up commodity prices and putting renewed pressure on inflation. In addition, strained US-China relations – particularly over trade, technology and Taiwan – could introduce market volatility, affecting global supply chains and investment flows.

Managing Risks

The Board places significant emphasis on the Company’s risk assessment and the management of substantial risks. The Board prioritises this aspect, guided by its evaluation of the risks inherent in the Company’s operations. It oversees the controls implemented by the Board, the Investment Manager and other service providers. These evaluations and oversight activities are documented in the Company’s business risk matrix assessment, which remains an effective instrument for identifying and tracking primary risks.

The directors consider the principal risks of the Company to be those risks, or a combination thereof, that may materially threaten the Company’s ability to meet its investment objectives, its solvency, liquidity or viability. In assessing the principal risks, the directors consider the Company’s exposure to and likelihood of factors that they believe would result in significant erosion of value, such as the possibility of a recession, the ability of Canada to diversify its economy away from natural resources, ongoing geopolitical tensions, the impact of climate change risk on investee companies, foreign exchange rates and the impact of higher interest rates on the Company and investor sentiment.

At the time of this report, trade policy uncertainty, interest rates, and geopolitical tensions continue to have an impact on markets at both macro and micro levels. Growing geopolitical tensions can increase the risk of supply chain shocks and spikes in commodity prices. While the long-term severity and the impact on the Company’s principal risks and viability cannot currently be predicted with any accuracy, it is expected that a prolonged war in the Middle East would have detrimental effects on market sentiment, which could affect the Company’s asset values.

Outlook

Canada is well-positioned for economic resilience and market outperformance, supported by a lower rate environment, strong corporate fundamentals, and favourable structural tailwinds across key sectors. 2024 served as a strong base for the Fund’s core sector exposures, and we expect to build on that momentum. Canadian equities continue to offer attractive valuations, robust earnings growth, and compelling risk-adjusted returns relative to global peers. MCT remains strategically positioned to capitalise on these trends, with its core exposure in financials, real estate, energy, pipelines, and utilities – sectors that are well insulated from external trade policy uncertainty and provide strong income generation, stability, and long-term growth potential. The Fund does not hold significant exposure to industries most vulnerable to tariffs, such as manufacturing, autos, and materials, reducing its reliance on unpredictable trade negotiations.

Despite having similar expected earnings growth over the next two years, Canadian equities continue to trade at steep valuation discounts to US stocks. With a circa 4.5 per cent dividend yield, the Fund also provides a stable and growing stream of income to investors in the form of quarterly distributions. We believe the current valuation discount embedded in Canadian equities offers a compelling entry point into high-quality Canadian companies. We continue to advocate that UK investors seeking North American equity exposure should allocate capital to Canada.

We look forward to an ongoing dialogue with shareholders in order to inform our decision making process going forward and to enable us to continue to act in the best interests of all shareholders.

Michael Phair

Chairman

24 March 2025

Middlefield Group is a private and independent asset manager focused on equity income investment strategies. Located in Toronto, Canada, the company oversees a suite of funds, many of which have been recognised for excellence in various investment categories. Middlefield specialises in managing diversified equity income strategies for UK and Canadian investors with a particular focus on delivering stable distributions and capital appreciation over the long term.

Investment Manager’s Report

Dean Orrico

2024 was an exceptional year for MCT unitholders, as we look to build on the momentum for continued growth into 2025. Despite both the TSX Composite and S&P 500 closing near all-time highs, many areas of the market, such as dividend payers and small-caps, did not meaningfully participate in the 2024 market rally. Technology and communication services stocks led to the upside while cyclical and value sectors lagged. In British Pounds, shares in the Fund generated a total return of 20.6 per cent and a NAV total return of 15.1 per cent. In local currency, the S&P 500, NASDAQ Composite, and the TSX Composite returned 25 per cent, 30 per cent and 22 per cent, respectively. The TSX lagged the S&P 500 by 3 per cent in 2024, due to its lower exposure to technology stocks and greater weighting to cyclical and value sectors. The Fund’s benchmark is more concentrated in higher-yielding dividend stocks and returned 9.6 per cent, lagging the TSX by nearly 12 per cent. Price-to-earnings multiples remain depressed for the TSX, resulting in a 4x multiple discount relative to the S&P 500.

We are encouraged by several trends that emerged in mid-2024. Firstly, the Bank of Canada (BoC) began its first rate-cutting cycle in 4 years through a series of rate cuts totalling 175 basis points. Meanwhile, 10-year bond yields fell by more than 100 basis points from their 2023 highs as inflation concerns abated. Second, market breadth improved as companies and sectors that lagged throughout 2023 and H1’2024 benefitted from a relief rally. We believe this market broadening could represent the early stages of a prolonged recovery in dividend-paying stocks that should continue throughout 2025.

In British Pounds, the Fund’s net asset value generated a total return of 15.1 per cent. Stock selection within the energy sector was the biggest contributor to performance in 2024 following a difficult 2023 period, with Enbridge and TC Energy among the Top 5 biggest contributors to performance. Utilities were the next biggest contributor, with Capital Power generating a total return of 77.9 per cent due to its strategy to supply power for upcoming AI data centres in Canada. Capital Power remains a large overweight position relative to the benchmark and has been a consistent Top 10 holding in the Fund.

President Trump’s second term has introduced significant trade policy uncertainty. Despite all the trade noise, Canada’s economy remains on sound footing and is compelling for investors seeking attractive valuations and higher levels of income. While the scale and scope of potential US tariffs remain unpredictable, the Fund is well-positioned due to its diversification across resilient, high-quality sectors. With a focus on Canadian financials, pipelines, and REITs, the Fund is largely insulated from more tariff-targeted manufacturing industries, such as steel, aluminium, autos, and lumber. Similar to President Trump’s first term, we believe rational economic interests will prevail and the USMCA trade agreement will ultimately be renegotiated with minimal impact on Canadian equities. The U.S. represents over 75 per cent of Canadian exports and is an extremely important end-market for these sectors. US, Canada, and Mexico share over $1.5 trillion in annual trade, supporting 17+ million jobs across the three economies. This trilateral trade flow is one of the largest in the world, underscoring the significance of the USMCA agreement in maintaining economic stability in North America. Given this deep integration, renegotiations will likely aim to preserve trade stability rather than disrupt it.

The Canadian federal election which has been called for 28 April 2025, will be a key event to watch with potential positive implications for economic policy, trade, and capital markets. A Canada-first mentality is gaining traction, emphasizing deregulation, pro-business policies, and strengthening domestic industries. A more conservative, business-friendly government could lead to increased investment in key sectors such as energy infrastructure, along with streamlined regulatory processes to encourage economic growth. In addition, diversifying trade partnerships beyond the US could present significant opportunities for Canadian pipeline and energy companies. These developments could also lead to increased foreign investment in Canada, strengthening the Canadian dollar. However, trade policy negotiations will bring uncertainty in the markets, particularly if US protectionist policies weigh on exports.

Our base assumption remains that Canadian inflation will continue trending lower throughout 2025, supported by slowing immigration, easing supply chain pressures, and a more accommodative monetary policy stance from central banks. Over the past year, both the BoC and the Fed have seen meaningful progress in reducing inflation which has prompted rate cuts. However, deregulation, increased fiscal spending, and tax relief in the US could reintroduce inflationary pressures by stimulating aggregate demand, business investment, and consumer spending. While these policies are beneficial for long-term growth, they could delay or slow the pace of rate cuts if inflation proves to be stickier than expected. The balance between continued disinflation and the potential for reaccelerating inflation will be a key theme for policymakers in the year ahead.

We remain constructive on the Canadian real estate sector in 2025. Although there was a strong rally in REIT unit prices during Q3, we saw a reversal after 10-year yields began climbing again. Investor sentiment for the broader real estate sector is inflecting and we are now seeing foreign buyers of Canadian REITs after a prolonged disconnect between fundamentals and valuations. With bond yields declining and central banks cutting rates further, we believe certain REITs are extremely well-positioned to outperform. Canadian REITs continue trading at an approximate 25 per cent discount to NAV.

We expect quality REITs that generate stable and growing cash flows to narrow this discount throughout 2025. For these reasons, real estate remains the Fund’s largest active sector weight relative to the Benchmark. The Fund’s core real estate exposure areas include necessity-based retail, apartments, industrial, and seniors housing.

Energy was among the Fund’s biggest contributors to performance in 2024 and remains a high-conviction investment theme for 2025. Energy represents 22 per cent of the portfolio, which outweighs the benchmark by 7.4 per cent. As geopolitical tensions mount, energy security has become a paramount issue for many countries. Canada’s oil and natural gas reserves rank in the top five globally, positioning the Canadian energy sector for consistent growth for decades. The recently completed Trans Mountain Expansion project will help unlock this growth potential by increasing capacity for crude oil transportation by an additional 590,000 barrels per day. In addition, LNG Canada, the largest private infrastructure project in Canada’s history, will become operational later this year. With an export capacity of 1.8 Bcf/d, LNG Canada will provide Canadian gas producers with a material boost to production egress. These large infrastructure projects are expected to stimulate significant investments from energy producers as well as midstream companies that will need to add necessary processing and handling capabilities.

Financials represented 28 per cent of the Fund and remained the largest sector exposure in 2024. The decision stemmed from our growing confidence in the economic landscape both in Canada and the U.S, increasing corporate and investor sentiment as well as a pickup in capital markets activity. As the Bank of Canada began cutting rates mid-2024, Canadian banks rallied in Q3 after posting solid earnings results and improved sentiment. The banks remain well capitalised above regulatory minimums and are now strategically deploying capital to support organic growth. Credit concerns have been abating as we are past the peak in provisions for credit losses. The banks have prudently been building their capital reserves to ensure they remain well-equipped in the event of widespread credit defaults. With bond yields having fallen approximately 80 basis points from their April 2024 peak, and strengthening underwriting standards, we have become less concerned by this risk but continue to monitor credit quality closely. The Fund has been diversifying its exposure to financials by adding insurance companies and asset managers to the portfolio. These positions will expose the Fund to different revenue streams and geographies. Our highest weighted names remain Bank of Montreal, Royal Bank of Canada, and CIBC, all of which have well-capitalised balance sheets and fully covered dividends.

The Fund had 9.5 per cent of the portfolio allocated to utilities at the end of 2024, below the Benchmark weight of 13.8 per cent. This underweight positioning was additive to performance. Despite its traditionally defensive characteristics, the sector lagged the TSX last year by 9.6 percentage points, with a total return of 8.6 per cent (local currency). Independent power producers did most of the heavy lifting, while regulated utilities and renewables significantly lagged. We expect the rest of the sector to re-rate over time as interest rates decline. The surging demand for electricity to power new data centres is a positive trend and we remain bullish on the sector’s long-term growth prospects. Our preferred picks in the sector include AltaGas, Capital Power, and Brookfield Renewables.

Top Holdings

Top Holdings as at 31 December 2024

Company	Sector	% of Equities
Tourmaline Oil Tourmaline is Canada’s largest natural gas producer and one of North America’s top suppliers of low-cost energy. The company operates high quality assets in the Montney and Deep Basin formations, leveraging its scale and strong balance sheet to maintain industry leadership. Tourmaline has also built a solid track record of dividend growth while paying out frequent special dividends over the last few years driven by their strong cash flow generation and commitment to growing shareholder returns.	Energy	4.8%
Enbridge Inc. Enbridge is one of the largest energy infrastructure companies in North America with an extensive delivery network of crude oil, natural gas, natural gas liquids and renewable energy. The company also provides gas utility services in Ontario, Quebec, and New Brunswick. It is actively investing in low carbon technologies such as solar, wind and hydroelectric power generation facilities. Enbridge’s goal is to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 and reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2025.	Pipelines	4.7%
Bank of Montreal Bank of Montreal, which was founded in 1817, has grown to be Canada’s fourth largest bank. For over two centuries, BMO has maintained a consistent record of dividend payments. It has a well-established commercial banking business that it plans to grow through new product offerings and superior customer experience. BMO conducts its business in the US through its subsidiary, BMO Harris Bank which has over 500 branches.	Financials	3.9%
Canadian Natural Resource Ltd. Canadian Natural Resource is one of the largest independent producers of oil and natural gas in Canada. The company is focused on maximising shareholder value through a combination of organic growth initiatives, dividend payments and share buybacks. It has grown its dividend by approximately 23% per annum over the past 5 years and has never cut its dividend.	Energy	3.8%
Royal Bank of Canada Established in 1864, RBC stands as Canada’s largest bank by market capitalization. With a robust presence globally, RBC excels in providing diverse financial products and services through branches, ATMs, and cutting-edge online platforms. Renowned for its customer-centric approach, RBC’s strategic focus on the Capital Markets division enhances its standing, making the bank a key player in international finance.	Financials	3.7%

TC Energy TC Energy is a leading North American energy infrastructure company, operating natural gas, liquids pipelines, and power generation assets. It owns and operates over 93,300 km of natural gas pipelines across Canada, the U.S, and Mexico, supplying ~25% of North America’s natural gas demand. In addition, it operates power generation assets, including nuclear and renewable energy, contributing to a diversified portfolio. The company generates revenue through long-term take-or-pay contracted agreements which provide stable cash flows with minimal commodity price exposure.	Pipelines	3.5%
CIBC CIBC is one of Canada’s Big Six banks, providing a range of personal, business, and institutional banking services. The bank operates across four key segments, including Personal Banking, Commercial Banking & Wealth Management, as well as Capital Markets. The bank boasts a significant presence in Canada and U.S banking, with a growing U.S commercial lending business.	Financials	3.4%
AGF Management AGF Management is a global asset management firm, providing investment solutions across mutual funds, ETFs, and alternative investments. In recent years, it has expanded into private credit and alternatives, positioning itself for higher-margin growth. As funds flow out of savings accounts and back into equity markets post-rate cutting cycle, the active asset management industry will face meaningful tailwinds.	Financials	3.4%
Manulife Financial Founded in 1887, Manulife Financial is a leading insurance provider in Canada’s financial sector. Offering a comprehensive range of financial solutions, the company operates through a widespread network and digital platforms. With a focus on insurance, wealth management, and investments, Manulife’s commitment to innovation and customer satisfaction cements its prominent position in the global financial landscape.	Financials	3.4%
Pembina Pipelines Corp. Pembina is a well-established and reputable transportation and midstream service provider with over 65 years of operational history. Its assets are diversified across the hydrocarbon value chain, including pipelines, gathering & processing, and NGL midstream operations in Canada and the US. The company is actively investing in low-carbon and sustainability solutions such as carbon capture and storage to offset greenhouse gas emissions.	Pipelines	3.1%

Outlook

Global markets face heightened uncertainty, driven by elevated geopolitical risks, shifting monetary policy, and trade tensions. Despite these challenges, Canada remains well-positioned for outperformance in 2025, underpinned by attractive valuations, strong fundamentals, and structural tailwinds in key sectors, including energy, real estate, and financials. The TSX Composite continues to trade at a 7 turns discount to the S&P 500, representing an attractive entry point for investors seeking dividend growth, capital discipline and resilient earnings.

While trade policies remain unpredictable, the Fund is well-diversified across resilient, high-quality, service-based sectors that are less exposed to tariffs. Canada is benefitting from deregulation, a more pro-business environment, and a shift in fund flows towards value and cyclical sectors as markets continue to broaden. The AI-driven expansion will require vast energy infrastructure to support data centre growth, creating significant opportunities for pipeline and utility companies – sectors where the Fund has substantial exposure.

Canadian corporations continue to prioritize shareholder returns, with record dividend payouts and share buybacks, a trend that is expected to persist. The Fund remains focused on high-quality companies with strong free cash flow generation and ability to grow their dividends. MCT’s portfolio emphasises high dividend paying stocks which have a long track record of consistently increasing dividends. Over the past five years, dividends received by the Fund on its portfolio have increased by 8.2 per cent per annum, exceeding the 7.5 per cent per annum growth rate for the Benchmark.

Middlefield Limited

Date 24 March 2025

ESG

Environment, Social and Governance (“ESG”) Policy and Stewardship Principles: ESG Policy

As Investment Manager, Middlefield Limited (“Middlefield”) has a duty to maximise investment returns for the shareholders of the Fund without undue risk of loss. Middlefield does this within the investment limits of the Fund’s investment mandate. Although the Fund is not an ESG-focused or sustainable fund, Middlefield incorporates ESG considerations into its investment process to aid decision making, identify potential risks and opportunities and to enhance long-term, risk-adjusted returns. Stephen Erlichman, one of the foremost experts on governance in Canada, serves as Chair, ESG for Middlefield to augment its ESG capabilities and processes.

It is Middlefield’s responsibility to employ a disciplined investment process that seeks to identify attractive investment opportunities and evaluate material risks that could impact portfolio returns. Middlefield believes that ESG factors have become an important component of a thorough investment analysis and that the integration of ESG factors will result in a more comprehensive understanding of a company’s strategy, culture and sustainability. Consistent with these objectives, Middlefield integrates ESG considerations into its investment process and these considerations are significant factors in selecting portfolio companies for its ESG-focused mandates. Our current ESG integration process includes the following:

1. Middlefield incorporates ESG scores and other ESG data in its multi-disciplined investment process to evaluate investments. Its methodology includes a qualitative review and assignment of ESG scores to individual holdings. Each company is analysed on an absolute basis and measured relative to its peers. The ESG scores and other ESG data are not the sole factors that govern its investment decisions, however, but rather constitute part of the information it reviews and considers alongside its fundamental, quantitative and qualitative research.

2. The ESG scoring framework considers the average ESG scores from several reputable third-party data providers. In addition, it cross-references potential investments with the constituents of relevant ESG indices to assess their eligibility in ESG-focused mandates. The data providers it has chosen to incorporate into its ESG analysis currently are Sustainalytics, S&P, Bloomberg and Refinitiv.

3. ESG considerations also are integrated into our investment process by, among other things:

• reviewing companies’ public disclosure, including annual reports, proxy circulars, and, if available, sustainability or ESG reports;

conducting research and analysis on companies’ ESG policies and practices;

obtaining third party research on companies;

engaging with companies, including from time to time having discussions with management teams (both before purchasing shares for the portfolios and while our portfolios own such shares) on topics such as what initiatives and strategies have been put in place by the companies to deal with ESG considerations material to such companies; and

monitoring shareholder meetings and voting proxies.

Middlefield’s approach to ESG integration may evolve over time as more ESG and sustainability research and data become available.

In addition to Middlefield’s integration of ESG considerations into its investment process Middlefield has adopted Stewardship Principles and activities which are complementary to its ESG integration process.

Middlefield’s Stewardship Principles

Middlefield, as a Canadian asset manager, understands it has the responsibility to be an effective steward of the assets it manages for its clients in order to enhance the value of those assets for the benefit of its clients. The Canadian Coalition for Good Governance (“CCGG”) has published a set of seven stewardship principles which have become recognised as Canada’s stewardship code for institutional asset owners and asset managers.

Middlefield believes that CCGG’s stewardship principles should be tailored for asset managers depending on various factors, such as the size of the asset manager and the type of assets managed. Set out below are CCGG’s seven stewardship principles and a description of how Middlefield, as an independent Canadian asset manager whose predominant assets are public and private investment funds that invest in Canadian and international equities, carries out or intends to carry out such principles.

Principle 1.

Develop an approach to stewardship: Institutional investors should develop, implement and disclose their approach to stewardship and how they meet their stewardship responsibilities.

Middlefield integrates stewardship into its investment process. Such integration includes:

a procedure for voting proxies (see Principle 3);

monitoring companies (see Principle 2);

engaging with companies (see Principle 4);

• outsourcing stewardship activities (by, inter alia, utilising a proxy advisory firm to assist in monitoring companies and voting proxies);

reporting to its clients (as required by law); and

managing potential conflicts of interest (via Middlefield’s Independent Review Committee mandated by National Instrument 81-107, as well as Middlefield’s Code of Conduct).

Principle 2.

Monitor companies: Institutional investors should monitor the companies in which they invest.

Middlefield monitors the companies in which it invests, including as follows:

it reviews companies’ public disclosures, including annual reports and proxy circulars;

it conducts research and analysis on companies;

it obtains third party research on companies;

it engages with companies (see Principle 4); and

it monitors formal shareholder meetings and, if there is a particularly important matter and it believes it is practical and appropriate to do so, it attends formal shareholder meetings.

Principle 3.

Report on voting activities: Institutional investors should adopt and publicly disclose their proxy voting guidelines and how they exercise voting rights.

Middlefield exercises voting rights attached to the securities held by the funds it manages as follows:

• Middlefield uses the following proxy voting guidelines:

proxies will be voted in a manner that seeks to enhance the long-term sustainable value of the funds it manages; and

proxies will be voted in a manner consistent with leading Canadian and international corporate governance practices.

• on routine matters, Middlefield generally supports management and the board unless there are unusual circumstances; and

Middlefield uses the services of a proxy advisory firm to assist in voting proxies. Middlefield assesses the voting recommendations of the proxy advisory firm but Middlefield also monitors leading Canadian and international corporate governance practices. Middlefield does not automatically follow the recommendations of the proxy advisory firm, but in most cases, it votes as recommended. Middlefield retains ultimate responsibility for all proxy voting decisions.

In addition, the public funds managed by Middlefield follow the proxy voting requirements of Part 10 of National Instrument 81-106 in regard to establishing policies and procedures for proxy voting and in regard to preparing and disclosing their proxy voting records.

Principle 4.

Engage with companies: Institutional investors should engage with portfolio companies.

Middlefield engages with portfolio companies as follows:

Middlefield engages with management of portfolio companies regularly, both before shares are purchased for the funds it manages and also while its funds own shares of the portfolio companies; and

When Middlefield believes it is warranted, it may escalate engagement activities by engaging with directors, by voting against or withholding votes from directors or by voting against companies’ “say on pay” resolutions.

Principle 5.

Collaborate with other institutional investors: Institutional investors should collaborate with other institutional investors where appropriate.

Middlefield collaborates with other institutional investors through investor associations to which Middlefield belongs.

Principle 6.

Work with policy makers: Institutional investors should engage with regulators and other policy makers where appropriate.

Middlefield’s professional advisors, such as the law firms and accounting firms it retains, assist to keep it up to date on developments that are material to it as an asset manager. It utilises its professional advisors, and it also relies on the organisations to which it belongs, to engage on its behalf with regulators and policy makers where appropriate.

Principle 7.

Focus on long-term sustainable value: Institutional investors should focus on promoting the creation of long-term sustainable value.

Middlefield focuses on a portfolio company’s long-term success and sustainable value creation, including as follows:

Middlefield focuses on a company’s management and strategy, as well as its risks (both company specific and systemic); and

Middlefield considers environmental, social and governance factors that are relevant to a company and integrates such factors into its investment activities.

ESG Case Studies

Canadian Imperial Bank (3.41% of the portfolio as at 31 December 2024)

Summary:

Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) is Canada’s 5^th largest bank and serves retail, commercial, wealth management, and capital market clients. The company’s enterprise-wide regulatory program aims to enhance alignment with market practice and regulatory requirements. The company has received various accolades and recognition for its sustainability initiatives and commitment to sustainability.

Highlights:

• Ranked #3 in North American Project Financial Renewables by IJ Global

• Built a leading renewables franchise focused on providing clients with expert guidance and access to the required capital

• CIBC Foundation continues to demonstrate purpose in action and supporting causes that are important to clients and communities

Top ESG Issues:

• Strengthening cybersecurity and anti-money laundering standards remain a key issue for the financial services sector in North America

• Implementing the right policies and procedures to address current and emerging ESG priorities, including artificial intelligence, financed emissions, and sustainable finance

ESG Ranking Relative to the Fund’s Benchmark:

Sources: S&P, Sustainalytics, Bloomberg.

Choice Properties REIT (2.22% of the portfolio as at 31 December 2024)

Summary:

Choice Properties REIT invests in necessity-based retail, commercial, industrial, mixed-use, and residential properties across Canada. The Choice Cares program aims to develop a strong culture of philanthropy, diversity, equity, and inclusion. Choice was also named one of Greater Toronto’s Top Employers (2023 and 2024) in recognition of their mentorship and benefit enhancement programs.

Highlights:

• Achieved the first CAGBC Zero Carbon Building Design certification to be awarded to a retail property

• Maintained GRESB 4-star rating for second year (scored 82 on a 100-point scale), and continued to receive “low” Sustainalytics ESG risk rating

• Developed a Social Impact Framework that aligns with their core business and promotes local economic development and social cohesion at the neighbourhood level

Top ESG Issues:

• Addressing affordability needs by developing mixed-use and community-driven projects

• Implementing green building standards as well as reducing energy and water consumption across its real estate portfolio

ESG Ranking Relative to the Fund’s Benchmark:

Sources: S&P, Sustainalytics, Bloomberg.

Business Model

The Company’s Status

Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC is a protected cell of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC, a Jersey-incorporated protected cell company.

The Fund is a closed-ended fund, whose shares have been admitted to the Official List of the FCA and to trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market for listed securities. The Fund is regulated in Jersey by the Jersey Financial Services Commission (“JFSC”).

JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited acts as the Company’s secretary and administrator. The Fund’s NAV is calculated using the bid prices of the securities held within its portfolio. The Company publishes the NAV of a share in the Fund on a daily basis.

Investment Objective and Policy²

The Fund seeks to provide shareholders with a high level of dividends as well as capital growth over the longer term. The Fund intends to pay dividends on a quarterly basis each year.

Investment Portfolio

The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing predominantly in the securities of companies and REITs domiciled in Canada and listed on a Canadian Stock Exchange that the Investment Manager believes will provide an attractive level of distributions, together with the prospect for capital growth. It is expected that the Fund’s portfolio will generally comprise between 35 and 70 investments.

The Fund may also hold cash or cash equivalents.

The Fund may utilise derivative instruments including index-linked notes, contracts for differences, covered options and other equity-related derivative instruments for the purposes of efficient portfolio management.

The Fund will at all times invest and manage its assets in a manner which is consistent with the objective of spreading investment risk.

Investment restrictions

The Fund will not at the time of making an investment:

have more than 10 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in the securities of any single issuer; or

have more than 50 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets comprised of its ten largest security investments by value; or

have more than 40 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in securities listed on a recognised stock exchange outside Canada; or

(d) have more than 10 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in securities listed on a recognised stock exchange outside Canada and the United States; or

(e) have more than 10 per cent. of the value of its portfolio assets invested in unquoted securities; or

(f) purchase securities on margin or make short sales of securities or maintain short positions in excess of 10 per cent. of the Fund’s NAV.

Hedging

The Board reserves the right to employ currency hedging but, other than in exceptional circumstances, does not intend to hedge.

Gearing

The Fund has the power to borrow up to 25 per cent. of the value of its total assets at the time of drawdown. In the normal course of events, and subject to Board oversight, the Fund is expected to employ gearing in the range of 0 to 20 per cent. of the value of its total assets in order to enhance returns. Net gearing, which represents net borrowings as a percentage of net assets, is the AIC standard measure of gearing. At year end, the Fund’s net gearing was 19.3 per cent.

Promoting the Company’s Success – Section 172 Statement

The AIC Code requires that the Company should understand the views of the Company’s key stakeholders and describe in the annual report how their interests and the matters set out in section 172 of the UK’s Companies Act 2006 have been considered in Board discussions and decision-making.

The Company has no employees and all of the directors are non-executive, so the Board considers that its key stakeholders are its shareholders, its service providers, society, the government, and regulators.

The Board’s engagement with stakeholders is described in the section “Engagement with Stakeholders” below.

The Board considers that the Company, as an externally-managed investment trust, with no employees, premises, nor manufacturing or other physical operations, therefore has no material, direct impact on the community and the environment. However, the Board considers social, community, environmental and human rights matters to be of significant importance and, in this respect, takes soundings from the Investment Manager as to how these matters are taken into consideration in respect of portfolio construction and its ongoing management. The Investment Manager is tasked with assessing how companies deal with and report on social and environmental risks and issues specific to the industry. It aims to incorporate ESG criteria into the Investment Manager’s processes when making stock selection decisions and promoting ESG disclosure.

The Investment Manager is mindful of the impact which it can have upon shaping the consideration given to ESG matters by the Fund’s investee companies. In addition to considering ESG matters in portfolio construction decisions, the Investment Manager conducts ongoing investee company monitoring, and this engagement process may include voting and communication with management and company board members. Although the Company does not take a controlling stake in its investees, the Board also considers the interests of those stakeholders and oversees the activities of the Investment Manager, as explained in this Section 172 Statement. The Board ascribes to the highest standards of business conduct and has policies in place to ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. In this respect, it also interacts with governmental organisations providing public services for society, and financial services regulators (such as the FCA and JFSC). In addition to monitoring the Company’s compliance with its own obligations, the Management Engagement Committee also monitors compliance by its service providers with their own obligations and; the work of the Management Engagement Committee during the year is explained in more detail later in this report on pages 46 and 47.

The Company has an unlimited life and as described in detail in the Company’s viability statement, the Board considers the prospects of the Company for at least the next three years whenever it considers the Company’s long-term sustainability. All strategic decisions are therefore taken with the long-term success of the Company in mind and the Board takes external advice whenever it considers that such would be beneficial to its decision-making process, primarily from its retained service providers (including legal counsel), but also from other external consultants.

The Board encourages openness and transparency and promotes proactive compliance with new regulations. The Company, through its Investment Manager and Administrator, files Jersey regulatory statistics on a quarterly basis and assists the Administrator in collecting data for provision to the JFSC to conduct a national risk assessment of money laundering and terrorist financing threats to Jersey.

Engagement with Stakeholders

As regards the Board’s engagement with shareholders, all shares in issue rank pari passu, all shareholders are treated equally. and no shareholder receives preferential treatment. When making decisions of relevance to shareholders, the Board considers first and foremost the likely consequences of its decisions in light of its duty to act in the best interests of the Company and shareholders as a whole.

In addition to the regular reporting provided by key service providers, the Board’s primary formal engagement with its service providers is via the Management Engagement Committee, which issues questionnaires to all of its service providers and considers the detailed feedback received on an annual basis, reporting to the Board on its conclusions. The services provided by the key third-party service providers are critical to the ongoing operational performance of the Company. The Board believes that fostering constructive and collaborative relationships with the Company’s service providers will assist in their promotion of the success of the Company for the benefit of all shareholders.

Management

The Company is an Alternative Investment Fund (“AIF”) in accordance with the provisions of the AIFMD. For the purposes of the AIFMD, which was implemented into UK law with effect from 22 July 2013, the Company has been classified as a non-EU AIF managed by a non-EU AIFM. As such, the Company is not subject to the full scope of the AIFMD and therefore does not incur additional costs, such as those incurred in having to appoint a depositary, that would have been applicable had it been deemed to be managed by an EU AIFM.

The Board is responsible for setting the Company’s Investment Objective and Investment Policy, subject to shareholders’ approval of any proposed material changes, and has a schedule of investment matters reserved for the directors’ resolution. The Board has contractually delegated to external agencies the management of the investment portfolio, the custodial services and the day-to-day accounting and secretarial requirements. Each of these contracts is only entered into after proper consideration by the Board of the quality of services being offered.

The Board also receives and considers, together with representatives of the Investment Manager, reports in relation to the operational controls of the Investment Manager, Administrator, Custodian and Registrar. These reviews identified no issues of significance.

The Board meets at least quarterly to review the overall business of the Company and to consider matters specifically reserved for its review. At these meetings, the Board monitors the investment performance of the Fund. The directors also review the Fund’s activities every quarter to ensure that it adheres to the Fund’s investment objective and policy or, if appropriate, to consider changes to that policy. Additional ad hoc reports are received as required and directors have access at all times to the advice and services of the Secretary, which is responsible for guiding the Board on procedures and applicable rules and regulations.

Relationship with the Investment Manager and Performance

The Company has no employees, premises, assets other than financial assets or operations. The Board engages reputable third-party suppliers with established track records to deliver day-to-day operations. The most important of these is the Investment Manager, which is responsible for the management of the Company’s assets in accordance with its investment objective and policy. The Board maintains a close working relationship with the Investment Manager and holds it to account for the smooth running of the Company’s day-to-day business. There is continuous engagement and dialogue between Board meetings, with communication channels remaining open and information, ideas and advice flowing freely between the Board and the Investment Manager.

The Board retains responsibility for decisions over corporate strategy, corporate governance, risk and internal control assessment, determining the overall limits and restrictions of the portfolio and in respect of gearing and asset allocation, investment performance monitoring, dividend policy and setting marketing budgets.

The Investment Manager and Investment Advisor promote the Company with the support of the Corporate Broker and the Board makes additional funds available to support marketing activities aimed at raising the profile of the Company among investors in the UK.

As the Investment Manager holds the overall day-to-day relationship with the Company’s other third-party suppliers, the Board places reliance on the Investment Manager in this regard. The Board is confident that the Investment Manager has developed and maintains good working relationships with all of the Company’s third-party suppliers. To ensure the chosen service providers continue to deliver the expected level of service, the Board receives regular reports from them, evaluates the control environments in place at each service provider and formally assesses their appointment annually.

By doing so, the Board seeks to ensure that the key service providers continue to be appropriately remunerated to deliver the level of service that it demands of them.

The Company has appointed the Investment Manager as its AIFM. The Investment Manager is regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission. The Company has a formal schedule of the areas of decision making reserved for the Board and those over which the Investment Manager has discretion, and it is available for inspection on the Company’s website.

A review of the Investment Manager’s performance is included in the Chairman’s Statement and the Investment Manager’s Report. The Board receives formal reports from the Investment Manager at each of its Board meetings, at which meetings representatives of the Investment Manager are present to answer the Board’s questions.

Such reporting and the ensuing discussions cover all areas within the Investment Manager’s remit, including portfolio performance, portfolio risk, asset allocation and gearing, compliance with the Company’s investment objective and policy and investment restrictions and the outlook for the market and the Company’s prospects, as well as a comparison with the Company’s peer group provided by the Company’s corporate broker. In between meetings, the Investment Manager provides updates to the directors on any material events. The Investment Manager’s performance is assessed on an ongoing basis and includes the Fund’s performance relative to appropriate benchmarks and its peer groups.

The Board and Investment Manager also discuss the marketing and investor relations work performed by the Investment Manager and Investment Advisor, which is an affiliate of the Investment Manager, in each quarterly Board meeting. The Investment Advisor and the Investment Manager are paid an additional fee for investor relations services totalling the lesser of 15 basis points of the market value of the Fund or £200,000 per annum, with the fee to be calculated daily based on the closing market value of the Fund and payable quarterly in arrears, and its performance is measured by reference to an agreed set of metrics.

The Board has delegated voting on matters proposed to the Company by its investees and a report on the Investment Manager’s institutional voting policy for the Company is included in the Directors’ Report. The Board and the Investment Manager also consider social, community, environmental and human rights issues to be important and a report on the Investment Manager’s policies for the Company is also included in the Directors’ Report.

As required by the Listing Rules and recommended by the AIC Code, the following additional information is provided:

During the year under review and up to the date of this report, Middlefield Limited has acted as the Company’s discretionary investment manager. Middlefield International Limited (“the Investment Advisor”) provides investment advisory services to the Company and the Investment Manager. The Company pays an annual fee of 0.70 per cent. of NAV to the Investment Manager to cover its services and those provided to it by the Investment Advisor and the agreement can be terminated by either party on 90 days’ written notice. The Investment Manager and Investment Advisor are also paid an additional fee for investor relations services as previously mentioned and disclosed in note 2u.

Having reviewed the investment management and advisory services provided by the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor and having regard to the Fund’s investment performance since the Fund’s launch in May 2006, the directors are of the view that the portfolio should remain managed by the Investment Manager for the foreseeable future.

Biographies

As at 31 December 2024, the Board of Directors comprised five non-executive directors, four of whom were independent of the Investment Manager and its affiliates.

Directors

Michael Phair, Chair

Mr. Phair has over 30 years’ investment banking experience at World Bank Group, Rothschild and UBS with a focus on privatisations, telecoms and media. He has lived and worked in Canada, Latin America, the United States, Europe and is a British citizen and resident in London since 1988. He is the Founder, former CEO and currently director of REG (UK) Ltd. which is a leading software solutions provider for counter-party risk management in the UK and global insurance market. He is the Chair of Children and Families Across Borders, a UK-based charity which is part of the International Social Services Network operating in over 130 countries worldwide. A successful private equity investor, Mr. Phair is the former Managing Member of Boston Capital Management (VP) LLC.

Kate Anderson

Ms Anderson, until 1st April 2025, is a managing partner of Voisin Law in Jersey. Ms Anderson intends to take up a new position in the legal profession in Jersey in due course. Her regulatory and funds practice specialises in the legal, regulatory and corporate governance aspects of investment funds, holding companies and managers. In recent years she has joined a number of working groups related to these areas, including the consultation group for the restatement of the Jersey Law of Contract, the working group tasked with updating the Limited Partnership (Jersey) Law to improve its functionality when used with funds and the Jersey Finance Community of Interest group on sustainable investment. Since 2008 Ms Anderson has sat on a number of collective investment fund and fund manager/ general partner boards.

Janine Fraser

Ms. Fraser, through her company, Harmony Business Partnering in Jersey, provides financial expertise and professional training. She is a member of the Institute of Directors and a Fellow of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants. She also holds a Master’s Degree in E-Commerce from the University of Westminster.

With over a decade of experience as a group financial controller at Triton Partners, an international investment firm, and extensive global experience in various sectors, including retail, merchant banking, travel, manufacturing, and oil, Ms. Fraser brings a wealth of industry knowledge to her role from her previous positions at RBS, Lloyds TSB, Hill Samuel, and British Airways.

Dean Orrico

Mr Orrico, President, Chief Executive Officer of Middlefield Limited and President of Middlefield International Limited, has been employed by the firm since 1996.

Mr Orrico is currently responsible for overseeing the creation and ongoing management of all of Middlefield’s investment funds including mutual funds, Toronto and London Stock Exchange-listed funds and flow-through funds. He graduated with a Bachelor of Commerce degree from the Rotman School of Management (University of Toronto) and holds an MBA from the Schulich School of Business (York University). Mr Orrico is a registered Portfolio Manager.

Mr Orrico has developed expertise in both equity and fixed income securities. Having spent many years managing equity portfolios and meeting with international companies and investors, Mr Orrico has overseen the diversification of Middlefield’s portfolios into global equity income securities.

Andrew Zychowski

Mr Zychowski has over 30 years’ investment banking experience, providing corporate advisory services to investment company boards. Until June 2019, he was the Head of the Investment Companies corporate department at Canaccord Genuity Limited. Prior to that he was the Head of the Investment Companies corporate department at Dresdner Kleinwort. Mr Zychowski is currently a non-executive director of The Ralph Veterinary Referral Centre Plc, a state of the art, multidisciplinary, small animal specialist referral veterinary hospital and Digital 9 Infrastructure plc which is traded on the London Stock Exchange and is in managed wind-down, with the objective to realise all existing assets in the company in an orderly manner. He is a qualified accountant and holds a BSc in Physics from Imperial College.

Corporate Information

Registered Office

28 Esplanade

St Helier

Jersey JE2 3QA

Directors

Michael Phair (Chairman)

Kate Anderson (SID)

Janine Fraser

Dean Orrico

Andrew Zychowski

Service Providers

Administrator and Secretary

JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited

28 Esplanade

St. Helier

Jersey, JE2 3QA

Investment Advisor

Middlefield International Limited

288 Bishopsgate

London, EC2M 4QP

Investment Manager

Middlefield Limited

Suite 3100

8 Spadina Ave

Toronto, Ontario

Canada, M5V 0S8

Legal Advisers

In Jersey

Carey Olsen Jersey LLP

47 Esplanade

St. Helier

Jersey, JE1 0BD

In Canada

Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP

Bay Adelaide Centre

Box 20, Suite 2400

333 Bay Street

Toronto, Ontario

Canada, M5H 2T6

Broker and Corporate Advisor

Investec Bank plc

30 Gresham Street

London, EC2V 7QP

Custodian

RBC Investor Services Trust

155 Wellington Street West 2nd Floor

Toronto, Ontario

Canada, M5V 3L3

Registrar

MUFG Corporate Markets (Jersey) Limited

12 Castle Street

St. Helier

Jersey, JE2 3RT

CREST Agent, UK Paying Agent and Transfer Agent

MUFG Corporate Markets

Central Square

29 Wellington Street

Leeds, LS1 4DL

Independent Auditor

RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

13-14 Esplanade

St Helier

Jersey, JE4 9RJ

Marketing Agent

Kepler Partners LLP

70 Conduit Street

London

W1S 2GF

Financial Calendar

Annual Results

Announced March 2025

Dividend Payment Dates

Last Business Day of January, April, July and October

Annual General Meetings

19 June 2025

Half-Yearly Results

Announced September 2025

Information Sources

For more information about the Company and Fund, visit the website www.middlefield.co.uk

Managing Risks

The Company’s risk assessment and the way in which significant risks are managed is a key focus for the Board. It is guided by the Board’s assessment of the risks arising in the Company’s operations and identification and oversight of the controls exercised by the Board and its delegates, the Investment Manager and other service providers. This information is documented in the Company’s business risk matrix, a valuable tool for identifying and monitoring principal risks.

The directors consider the primary risks facing the Company as those that could substantially jeopardise its capacity to achieve its investment objectives, maintain solvency, liquidity, or viability. In evaluating these key risks, the directors analyse the Company’s vulnerability to various factors that could lead to significant devaluation, such as potential recession, geopolitical instability, commodity price shocks, persistent inflation, supply chain interruptions, the effects of climate risk on investee firms, foreign exchange fluctuations, the consequences of restrictive monetary policies, and the influence of increased interest rates on both the Company and investor sentiment.

At the time of this report, trade policy uncertainty and geopolitical tensions are having an impact at both macro and micro levels. While the long-term severity and the impact on the Company’s principal risks and viability cannot currently be predicted with any accuracy, it is expected that an escalation in ongoing geopolitical conflicts and severe trade restrictions would have detrimental effects.

Strategy Risks

Risk	Mitigants	Change from 2024
Macroeconomic and political environment Unfavourable changes to the macro political and economic environment including global trade tensions, and climate risk pressures, causes the investment objective to become obsolete with reduced investor demand.	The Board has established guidelines to ensure that the investment policy is pursued by the Investment Manager. The Board reviews the Investment Manager’s compliance with the agreed investment restrictions, investment performance and risk against investment objectives and strategy, the portfolio’s risk profile and appropriate strategies employed to mitigate any negative impact of substantial changes in markets.	Trade policy uncertainty
Inflation and Interest Rates Inflation has been trending lower but has the potential to re-accelerate. Central banks have been loosening monetary policy after obtaining evidence that inflation continues trending downwards.	The Investment Manager monitors the portfolio daily and considers the portfolio’s sensitivity to interest rates. The Investment Manager also monitors the borrowing rates and weighs the benefits of gearing against its costs.	Inflation outlook has improved Rates continue their downward trend
Share price discount to NAV Continued trading of the Fund’s share price at a level below that of its NAV reflects a lack of liquidity and/or lack of investor interest in the Fund’s shares. A share price discount to NAV will prevent the Fund from growing via the issue of additional shares and may cause a persistent discount to widen further. The Fund’s level of discount has been significant for a prolonged period and a lack of demand for the Fund’s shares has provided the opportunity for an activist investor to acquire a significant stake in the Fund over a relatively short period of time.	The Board, the Investment Manager and Broker monitor the share price and level of discount on a regular basis. During the year, the Board, the Investment Manager and Broker have spent considerable time engaging with existing and potential shareholders to understand investors’ needs and best interests and to help improve investor interest in the Fund’s shares. This included liaising directly with Saba, as the Fund’s largest shareholder, and holding constructive talks with Saba and existing shareholders to address investor concerns and adapt to shareholder needs. In assessing whether to conduct buybacks, the directors take into account market factors, the discounts of comparable funds and the size of the Fund and the shrinkage in its asset base which would necessarily result from the Fund repurchasing its own shares.	Saba becoming the largest shareholder of the Fund.
Gearing The utilisation of gearing increases the impacts of adverse movements in equity prices or interest rates and may require the Company to liquidate positions at inopportune times in order to maintain the correct levels of gearing.	The Company maintains a prudent level of gearing and the loan to value ratio is monitored on a daily basis as part of the valuation process, so that in falling markets the Company will be able to take proactive steps to reduce gearing to avoid breaching its investment policy and any loan to value covenants.	Unchanged
Shareholder Activism A failure to adapt to changes in the market and investor demand might leave the Company exposed to the risk of further shareholder dissatisfaction, activism, and influence.	The Board, Investment Manager and Broker engage directly with shareholders to understand investors’ needs and best interests. The Investment Manager and Broker regularly monitor movements in the Fund’s share register.	Saba becoming the largest shareholder of the Fund

Portfolio Risks

Risk

Mitigants

Change from 2024

Regulatory & Legal Risks

The Company is primarily focused on Canadian companies that may have operations in, or be exposed to, regulatory risks in many other countries. These have the potential of negatively impacting the efficiency and structure of the Company.

The Investment Manager and the Board are kept abreast of changes to all relevant laws by the Company’s legal and tax advisers, secretary, Administrator and Auditor.

Unchanged

Income/Dividend

The Company sets its target dividend at a rate it expects to earn from the dividends received from its underlying equity investments based upon robust modelling and assumptions.

Failure by those investments to meet expectations due to, for example, decreased operating margins, changes in tax treatment of dividends, increased borrowing costs or poor underlying performance, may prevent the Company from being able to meet its target dividend.

The Investment Manager’s allocation process seeks to select investments capable of producing strong reliable dividends and future capital growth across a diverse range of sectors. Day to day risk management techniques seek to diversify risk and monitor high levels of volatility. The Board monitors the income received on investments and available for distribution prior to the declaration of each dividend.

Unchanged

Operational Risks

Risk

Mitigants

Change from 2024

Key man Risks

The Company is reliant on key individuals of the Investment Manager to meet its investment objective and for growing the Company’s shareholder base.

The Company’s portfolio is managed by a team of investment professionals led by Dean Orrico and Rob Lauzon.

Unchanged

Service provider performance

The Company is reliant on the performance, safe custody of assets and data and internal controls of its service providers for its day-to-day activities. Poor performance or failure to meet their contractual obligations, including the absence of adequate business continuity plans and data and cyber security, could negatively impact the operations, reputation, governance and cost efficiency of the Company.

Due diligence is carried out on all service providers prior to their appointment, with their level of service monitored continually and assessed formally by the Management Engagement Committee on an annual basis.

The Board monitors the performance of the Investment Manager at every Board meeting and otherwise as appropriate.

Unchanged

Financial Risks

Risk

Mitigants

Change from 2024

Market Risks

The Company may generate a loss on its investments at realisation due to adverse movements in their share prices, currency or interest rate movements.

The directors monitor the Investment Manager’s compliance with the Company’s stated investment policy and review the investment performance.

Unchanged

Liquidity Risk

The Company may hold positions, long or short, in securities that may not be able to be sold or bought quickly enough so as to prevent or minimise a loss.

The Fund primarily invests in securities that are readily realisable, mainly issued by Canadian companies and REITS listed on a Canadian Stock Exchange and are actively traded.

Unchanged

Emerging Risks

Tensions in the Middle East remain a key geopolitical risk, impacting global markets and supply chains. The events have led to regional instability, with concerns of a broader conflict involving the US, Iran, and other regional powers. Although there are current diplomatic efforts to reach a ceasefire in both Ukraine and Israel, these conflicts have the potential to disrupt global trade routes, commodity prices, and investor sentiment. The US has increased sanctions on Iranian-linked groups while also seeking to prevent direct conflict with Iran. As we’re currently witnessing, long-term stability will require diplomatic engagement, economic incentives, and security assurances to prevent further escalation. A resolution could help tame commodity price volatility, restore trade flows, and ease investor concerns over prolonged geopolitical uncertainty.

In July 2024, the unwinding of the FX carry trade triggered a sharp selloff in global markets. Investors had been borrowing in low-yielding currencies, particularly the Japanese Yen, to fund investments in higher-yielding assets, taking advantage of Japan’s ultra-low-interest rate environment. However, speculation that the Bank of Japan (BOJ) would tighten monetary policy and allow interest rates to rise led to a sudden surge in the Yen. As a result, investors were forced to unwind their positions, causing widespread deleveraging and significant volatility across asset classes. The BOJ’s measured approach to adjust policies prevented further panic, but investors remain cautious of further FX-driven volatility.

The 2024 election cycle was one of the most consequential in recent history and reshaped global trade policies, leadership dynamics, and economic strategies, driving market volatility. While some elections reinforced political continuity, others led to major shifts in international relations, trade agreements, and economic policies. In the US, Trump’s return to office signalled a shift toward protectionist trade policies, deregulation, and energy independence, with renewed emphasis on tariffs, border security, and reshoring manufacturing. His administration’s approach to China, Mexico, and Canada has already introduced trade policy uncertainty, including the temporary threat of 25% tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports. Markets reacted with heightened volatility, particularly in trade-exposed sectors, as investors assessed the long-term impact of potential USMCA renegotiations and increased trade restrictions. Looking ahead, the 2025 Canadian federal election could reshape economic policies and business sentiment. A pro-business environment, conservative leadership shift could accelerate deregulation and foster a more investment-friendly environment. With rising protectionist rhetoric in the US, Canada’s focus may shift towards strengthening non-US trade relationships. As global political landscapes evolve, markets will continue to navigate shifting policies, impacting investment strategies in the year ahead.

Emerging risks, along with all other risks the directors have identified the Company to be exposed to, are monitored via the Company’s risk register. During the year, as part of their regular review and assessment of risk, the directors have considered the ongoing discussions with Saba and the potential impact of the requisition on the Fund’s future structure. The fund is a closed-ended investment fund and thus is not required to comply with LR 6.6.1R(13) or LR 6.6.8R due to LR11.4.22R.

Going Concern and Viability

The performance of the investments held by the Fund over the reporting year is reflected in the Statement of Comprehensive Income and in notes 3 and 22 to the financial statements and the outlook for the future is described in the Chairman’s Report and the Investment Manager’s Report. The Company’s financial position, its cash flows and liquidity position are set out in the financial statements and the Company’s financial risk management objectives and policies, details of its financial instruments and its exposures to market price risk, credit risk, liquidity risk, interest rate risk, currency risk and country risk are set out at note 16 to the financial statements. The Company’s long-term viability and assessment of longer-term risks to which the Company is exposed are also reported upon in the Company’s long-term viability statement included below.

The financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, supported by the directors’ current assessment of the Company’s position based on the following factors:

• ongoing shareholder interest in the continuation of the Fund;

• the Fund has sufficient liquidity in the form of cash assets to meet all on-going expenses;

• should the need arise, the directors have the option to reduce dividend payments in order to positively affect the Fund’s cash flows;

• the Fund’s investments in Canadian and U.S. securities are readily realisable to meet liquidity requirements, if necessary; and

• assuming the Fund’s trading in a security represented 30% of the average daily trading volume of that security, 100% of portfolio’s holdings can be liquidated in under 5 working days.

Based on the above, in the opinion of the directors, there is a reasonable expectation that the Company has adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future.

The directors have also considered the application of the SORP for Financial Statements of Investment Trust Companies and Venture Capital Trusts, whereby the going concern basis of preparation of the financial statements is considered appropriate until a vote is passed to discontinue the Fund or Company. There is no requirement under the Company’s and Fund’s articles of association to propose any continuation vote in respect of either the Company as a whole or the Fund itself and the directors have no intention of proposing any continuation vote in the foreseeable future, subject to unforeseen future events. For these reasons, the financial statements have been prepared using the going concern basis.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which assumes the Company will continue to operate and meet its obligations as they fall due. However, the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is subject to material uncertainty. Since the Company’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Company, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba. The requisition notice received by the Company on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Company. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Company’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates. Following consultation with a number of the Company’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Company announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Company and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders. At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Company may put to shareholders will be made in due course. Although the Board is confident that the Company will have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations due within twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements, the uncertain future outcome of the Board’s deliberations indicates the existence of a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Nevertheless, the Board believes that it is appropriate to continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the financial statements.

Viability Statement

Provision 36 of the AIC Code includes a recommendation that the directors publish a long-term viability statement and this statement is intended to meet that requirement.

The Board of directors regularly assesses the viability of the Company for at least the three years following the date of that review. The Board believes that this three-year period remains the appropriate period over which to assess the Company’s viability because the Company’s shareholders and other stakeholders desire long-term certainty as to the Company’s viability. The Board does not consider it feasible to anticipate with any reasonable degree of certainty the viability of the Company for a period longer than three years. In considering the Company’s viability, the Board considers the Company’s current position and the principal and emerging risks to which it is exposed, as set out on pages 30 to 33, the viability of its investment objective and policy, market risks, the ongoing charges ratio, the liquidity of its investments, the ability to use hedging as a portfolio management tool, gearing and the reduction in reliance of the Canadian economy on energy as it diversifies into promising growth industries, such as healthcare and technology.

The Board considers the impacts on the Company’s business plan and viability if severe principal and emerging risks are applied. Certain financial risks were considered under a scenario analysis that stress tests the portfolio against historic market shocks, including the 2008 Lehman Default, the 2011 Debt Ceiling Crisis and the 2015 Greece Financial Crisis. It is expected that the value of the Fund’s total investments as at 31 December 2024 would have experienced drawdowns of 22.7 per cent, 13.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent, respectively. Strategy, portfolio and market risks were also considered under a stress tested scenario where adverse movements in currency of 15 per cent are experienced, operating expenses increase by 20 per cent and gearing is reduced to zero due to higher interest rates. Under this scenario, the Fund’s revenue is expected to decline by approximately £1,629,698, its net profit is expected to decline by £1,161,351 and the dividend coverage of the Fund is expected to decline to 84 per cent. This analysis is relative to fiscal 2024 results and incorporates the dividend increase announced in January 2025.

The directors have made a robust assessment of principal risks and, together with the Company’s Investment Manager, have adopted procedures and strategies to mitigate these risks. The Fund has an established Investment Policy, which has been approved and is monitored by the directors. The Investment Manager regularly updates the directors on the Company’s portfolio and the overall status of the market. The directors engage tax accountants to perform an investment trust test (for compliance with the requirement to distribute at least 85% of investment income received) on an annual basis). A solvency test is also undertaken (in compliance with Jersey company law) before any dividend is declared.

Notwithstanding the ongoing uncertainty caused by geopolitical events, higher interest rates and inflation, if the Company’s income, expenses and dividends remain substantially unchanged in 2024 and 2025, the Company will hold sufficient cash to pay all of its expenses and the current rate of dividends for at least the next 12 months following the date of approval of this annual financial report. In addition, the Board reviews the liquidity of the Company’s investments on a quarterly basis and the Company’s investment portfolio remains extremely liquid. The Board is confident, based on its regular monitoring of liquidity, that additional cash can be raised very quickly if needed through sale of investments.

The Fund has a credit facility agreement with RBC whereby RBC provides the credit facility, with a maximum principal amount of the lesser of CAD 75,000,000 and 25 per cent. of the total asset value of the Fund. Based on the Fund’s total assets of GBP 172,062,473 as at 31 December 2024, a decrease in total assets of GBP 56,481,233, or 32.83 per cent of assets, would be required for the principal amount to exceed 25 per cent of the total asset value of the fund.

In 2024, the level of net gearing was kept relatively consistent at an average level of 15.9 per cent. At the year -end it stood at 16.2 percent on a gross basis and 19.3 per cent net.

Following careful consideration and analysis of all material risk factors, the Board acknowledged the ongoing uncertainty as set out under the going concern and viability statement on page 33 and believes that the Company remains viable for the foreseeable future.

Key Performance Indicators At each Board meeting, the Board considers several performance measures to assess the Company’s success in achieving its objectives. The key performance indicators (KPIs) used to measure the progress and performance of the Company, and which are comparable to other investment trusts, are set out below.

In addition, the Board regularly reviews the performance of the portfolio from both a net asset value and share price perspective and compares this against various companies and indices. The Board also reviews the performance of the portfolio against its benchmark; the S&P TSX High Dividend Index. Information on the Company’s performance is given in the Chairman’s Statement and Investment Manager’s Report.

Key performance indicator	2024 Value	2023 Value
NAV per share	134.05 pence	121.55 pence
NAV total return performance for the year	15.1%	(1.4%)
Benchmark Index*	7.6%	3.9%
Share price	116 pence	101.10 pence
Discount to NAV	(13.47%)	(16.84%)
Dividend paid in the year	5.3 pence	5.2 pence
Ongoing charges**	1.30%	1.33%

* S&P/TSX High Dividend Index, total return basis.

** refer to page 42.

Borrowings

At 31 December 2024, the amount drawn down under the credit facility was CAD 52 million (GBP equivalent at amortised cost of £28,884,872). For further details, please refer to Note 14. Loan Payable on page 71.

Future Developments

Details of the main trends and factors likely to affect the future development, performance and position of the Company’s business can be found in the Investment Manager’s Report on pages 11 to 15. Further details as to the risks affecting the Company are set out on pages 30 to 33.

Environmental, Social and Governance Matters (‘ESG’)

The Board and the Investment Manager believe that companies should operate in a socially responsible manner. Day-to-day decisions regarding the Company’s investment portfolio have been delegated to the Investment Manager. While MCT is not explicitly focused on ESG or sustainability, it acknowledges the increasing importance that non-financial factors including social and environmental issues can have on the share price, as well as the reputation of companies. Specialists at the Investment Manager are responsible for evaluating how companies address and report on social and environmental risks specific to their industries. Their goal is to integrate ESG criteria into the Investment Manager’s decision-making processes for stock selection and to promote ESG disclosure. The Investment Manager is mindful of its influence on the consideration of ESG matters by the Fund’s investee companies. Alongside portfolio construction decisions, the Investment Manager continuously monitors investee companies for ESG compliance. Company monitoring, including engagement processes such as voting and communication with management and Company board members, is part of the Investment Manager’s responsibilities. The Investment Manager’s ESG policy can be found on pages 16 to 18.

Institutional Voting Policy

The Company’s policy is that a decision on whether to vote on matters proposed by its investees is to be based on the nature of the matter being proposed. In the ordinary course of business, voting decisions have been delegated to the Investment Manager.

The Investment Manager’s proxy voting policies are designed to be general in nature and the Investment Manager aims to exercise its proxy voting on all securities held. When exercising voting rights, the Investment Manager will generally vote with management of the issuer. For each proxy, the Investment Manager incorporates research and considers the recommendations provided by Glass Lewis, the Investment Manager’s proxy advisor, in exercising its voting rights. All proxy UK voting is conducted through Glass Lewis Viewpoint and /proxy voting is a key element of the Investment Manager’s stewardship of the assets it manages, which is adjunct to the integration of ESG factors into its investment process.

On a monthly basis, the Investment Manager’s portfolio managers generate a list of issuers whose weightings represent more than 3% of the Fund’s net assets at the month-end preceding the voting date. For each of these issuers, the Investment Manager will record comments which support the rationale for the proxy decision made. For example, comments would be registered in Glass Lewis Viewpoint if the Investment Manager’s proxy voting decision differs from the recommendation from management or Jersey Glass Lewis. Copies of all proxy records are retained and available in Glass Lewis Viewpoint.

Board Diversity and Experience

The Company’s affairs are overseen by a Board comprised of five non-executive directors, two of whom are female. The directors’ biographies are included on pages 26 to 27 above, demonstrating the diversity of their experience including, but not limited to, investment management, corporate governance, corporate law, banking, accounting and audit and ESG matters.

The directors regularly consider the leadership needs and specific skills required to manage the Company’s affairs in the best interests of its shareholders and other stakeholders and take account of diversity recommendations in their succession planning. The Board is cognisant of the requirements of listing rule 6.6.6R (9) and the tables below provide the relevant data required by listing rules 6.6.6R (9) to (11) and annex 1R to listing rule 6. The Board is not yet fully compliant with these rules, because none of the directors is from a minority ethnic background, but will continue to work towards compliance in a structured and orderly manner. The directors have decided that in future, in order to reach a broader range of diverse candidates, they will consider using one or more UK external search agents to assist with the search for new directors.

The following table represents the gender identity of the Board as of the date of approval of this annual financial report and includes the information required by Listing Rule 6.6.6(9) and Annex 1 to Listing Rule 6, this data having been obtained by polling the directors:

	Number of Board Members	Percentage of the Board	Number of Senior Positions on the Board (CEO, CFO, SID and Chair)	Number in Executive Management	Percentage of Executive Management
Men	3	60%	1	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management
Women	2	40%	1	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management
Not specified/prefer not to say	0	0%	0	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management

The following table represents the ethnic background of the Board as of the date of approval of this annual financial report and includes the information required by Listing Rule 6.6.6(10) and Annex 1 to Listing Rule 6, this data having been obtained by polling the directors:

	Number of Board Members	Percentage of the Board	Number of Senior Positions on the Board (CEO, CFO, SID and Chair)	Number in Executive Management	Percentage of Executive Management
White British or other White (including minority-white groups)	5	100%	2	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management
Mixed/Multiple Ethnic Groups	0	0%	0	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management
Asian/Asian British	0	0%	0	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management
Black/African/ Caribbean/ Black British	0	0%	0	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management
Other ethnic group, including Arab	0	0%	0	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management
Not specified/prefer not to say	0	0%	0	N/A – No executive Management	N/A – No executive Management

REPORT OF DIRECTORS

The Directors present their report and the audited financial statements of the Company for the year ended 31 December 2024.

Results and Dividend Policy

The results for the year are shown in the Statement of Comprehensive Income on page 61 and related notes on pages 64 to 80. Four interim dividends of 1.325 pence per share were declared and paid on account during the year ended 31 December 2024. In early 2025, a dividend of 1.375 pence per share was paid on 31 January 2025.

The Board is aware of the current circumstances surrounding inflation, higher interest rates and the evolving geopolitical landscape and their significant impact on economies and financial markets. As a result, we will be keeping the future level of dividends under close review.

Currently, we remain confident that our dividend can be paid based on the solvency and future viability of the Fund.

In light of the excess revenue earnings generated by the Fund this year, together with the prospect of dividend growth from the underlying portfolio, the board approved a 0.2p increase to the total dividends payable in 2025. This results in a new dividend rate of 5.5 pence per share per annum payable in 2025 on a quarterly basis in equal instalments. These figures are targets only and do not constitute, nor should they be interpreted as, a profit forecast.

In addition, this is a target only and should not be treated as an assurance or guarantee of performance. If the Company’s results permit it, the Board may consider further increases to the rate of dividends paid to shareholders at the appropriate time.

The current dividend rate of 1.375 pence per share per quarter is expected to be supported by dividend and interest income earned by the Fund.

Directors’ Conflicts of Interest

A director must avoid a situation where he or she has or might have a direct or indirect interest that either conflicts with or has the potential to conflict with the Company’s interests. The Company’s and Fund’s Articles of Association give the directors authority to authorise potential conflicts of interest and there are safeguards in place which will apply whenever the directors decide that such are necessary or desirable. Firstly, only directors who have no interest in the matter being considered are able to vote upon the relevant decision, and secondly, in voting on the decision, the directors must act in a way they consider, in good faith, will be in the best interests of the Company. The directors can impose limits or conditions when giving authorisation if they consider this to be appropriate.

The directors declare any potential conflicts of interest to the Board at each Board meeting. Any actual or potential conflicts of interest are entered into the Company’s register of such conflicts, which register is reviewed regularly by the Board. The register of conflicts of interest is kept at the Company’s registered office. The directors advise the Secretary as soon as they become aware of any new actual or potential conflicts of interest or any material changes to an existing conflict.

Share Capital

The Fund has the power to issue an unlimited number of shares of no par value which may be issued as redeemable participating preference shares or otherwise and which may be denominated in Sterling or any other currency.

There are currently 2 Management Shares of no par value in the Company (issued on incorporation) and 124,682,250 Fund Shares in issue. As at 31 December 2024, 18,235,000 (2023: 18,195,000) Fund Shares were held in treasury. Since the financial year end and up to the date of this report, no Fund Shares had been sold out of or repurchased into treasury, and there remain 18,235,000 Fund Shares held in treasury, which may in future be sold out of treasury to satisfy market demand. Accordingly, the number of Fund Shares in issue and with voting rights attached is currently 106,447,250 (2023: 106,487,250) and this figure may be used by shareholders as the denominator for calculations by which they will determine if they are required to notify their interest in, or a change to their interest in, the Company under FCA’s Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules.

Further issues and Repurchases of Fund Shares

The Fund’s Articles of Association provide the Board of directors with authority to issue further Fund Shares without seeking shareholders’ approval, although, unless otherwise authorised by shareholders, such Fund Shares must be issued on a pre-emptive basis. However, at the Cell AGM held on 13 June 2024, the Fund’s shareholders authorised the issue or sale out of treasury of Fund Shares representing up to 10 per cent. of the Fund’s issued share capital as at the date of the Cell AGM on a non-pre-emptive basis. Such issues or sales will only be effected in the event of investor demand which cannot be met through the market and will only be conducted at a price equal to or above the prevailing NAV.

The aforementioned authority expires on the earlier of 30 September 2025 or the conclusion of the next Cell AGM.

The Fund’s Articles of Association also provide the Board of directors with authority to repurchase Fund Shares, provided that such repurchases are made with shareholders’ prior approval.

At the Cell AGM held on 13 June 2024, the Fund’s shareholders authorised the Board to make market purchases of up to 15,962,438 Fund Shares (representing 14.99 per cent. of the Fund’s issued share capital as at the date of the Cell AGM), provided that no such purchases may be made at a price above the prevailing net asset value per Fund Share on the date of any such purchase.

The aforementioned authority also expires on the earlier of 30 September 2025 or the conclusion of the next Cell AGM.

At the next Cell AGM, the Board will be seeking renewal of its authority to issue or sell out of treasury additional Fund Shares and to make market acquisitions of Fund Shares. The Fund conducted two share buybacks during 2024, The Board believes that it is important to retain the authority to buyback where appropriate (which, in turn is likely to depend on, inter alia, the prevailing discount rating of the Fund Shares, the financial resources that the Company has at its disposal, liquidity levels in the Fund Shares and the size of the Company). Buybacks can confer several benefits on remaining shareholders: they are accretive to NAV and can provide additional useful liquidity.

Holdings in the Company’s Shares

As at the year end and as at 28 February 2025, being the most recent practicable date prior to the publication of this Annual Financial Report, the Company had received notification in accordance with the Financial Conduct Authority’s Disclosure and Transparency Rule 5 of the following interests in 5 per cent or more of the Fund’s issued share capital with voting rights attached, where the Board has been advised that the holder retains a holding in excess of 5 per cent.

Name	Redeemable Participating Preference Shares 31 December 2024 31 31 December 2024	Redeemable Participating Preference Shares 31 December 2024	Redeemable Participating Preference Shares 28 February 2025
	Number of Shares	% of Shares in issue	Number of Shares
Saba Capital Management, L.P.*	31,048,865	29.12%	31,048,865
M&G PLC	9,794,162	9.20%	9,794,162
JP Morgan Chase & Co	NIL	NIL	5,479,118

* Of the 29.1% holding disclosed by Saba Capital Management L.P. 17.6% interest is held via total return swaps and the counterparty to such swaps may be separately disclosed in the table and result in double disclosure of such shares

Fund Shares are redeemable at the sole option of the directors and therefore classified as equity in the Statement of Financial Position.

Reappointment of Auditor

RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited has expressed its willingness to continue in office as auditor and a resolution to re-appoint it will be proposed at the Company’s and Fund’s forthcoming AGMs.

Related Party Transactions

Annual General Meetings (‘AGMs’)

This year’s AGMs will be held on 19 June 2025. Shareholders are welcome to attend the AGMs in person. The AGM Notices and details of the resolutions to be proposed are being sent to shareholders with this annual financial report. Shareholders can also write to the Company for further details at its registered office or by e-mail to the Secretary at Middlefield.Cosec@JTCGroup.com.

Directors’ Statement as to Disclosure of Information to the Auditor

Each of the persons who is a director at the date of approval of this annual financial report confirms that:

• so far as the director is aware, there is no relevant audit information of which the Company’s auditor is unaware; and

• the director has taken all steps that he should have taken as a director in order to make himself aware of any relevant audit information and to establish that the Company’s auditor is aware of that information.

Approval

This Strategic Report was approved by the Board on 24 March 2025 and is signed on their behalf by:

Michael Phair Andrew Zychowski

Director Director

Corporate Governance

Statement of Directors Responsibilities

Directors’ Responsibility Statement

The directors are responsible for preparing the annual financial report in accordance with applicable law and regulations. The Companies (Jersey) Law 1991, as amended (the “Companies Law”) requires the directors to prepare financial statements for each financial year which gives a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the Company and Fund as at the end of the financial year and of the profit or loss for that year. The directors have elected to prepare the financial statements under UK-adopted IFRS.

International Accounting Standard 1 requires that financial statements present fairly for each financial period the Company’s and Fund’s financial position, financial performance and cash flows. This requires the faithful representation of the effects of transactions, other events and conditions in accordance with the definitions and recognition criteria for assets, liabilities, income and expenses set out in the International Accounting Standards Board’s ‘Framework for the preparation and presentation of financial statements’. In virtually all circumstances, a fair presentation will be achieved by compliance with all applicable IFRS. However, directors are also required to:

• properly select and apply accounting policies;

• present information, including accounting policies, in a manner that provides relevant, reliable, comparable and understandable information;

• provide additional disclosures when compliance with the specific requirements in IFRS are insufficient to enable users to understand the impact of particular transactions, other events and conditions on the Company’s and Fund’s financial position and performance; and

• make an assessment on the Company’s and Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern.

The directors are responsible for keeping proper accounting records that disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the Company and enable them to ensure that the financial statements comply with the Companies Law. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the Company and Fund, and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.

The directors are responsible for the maintenance and integrity of the corporate and financial information included on the Company’s website www.middlefield.co.uk.

Legislation in Jersey and the United Kingdom governing the preparation and dissemination of financial statements may differ from legislation in other jurisdictions. Having taken advice from the Audit Committee, the Board considers the report and accounts, taken as a whole, as fair, balanced and understandable and that it provides the information necessary for shareholders to assess the Company’s and Fund’s performance, business model and strategy.

We confirm that to the best of our knowledge:

1. the financial statements, prepared in accordance with under UK-adopted IFRS, give a true and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and profit or loss of the Company and Fund;

2. the Chairman’s Statement, Investment Manager’s Report and notes to the financial statements incorporated herein by reference include a fair review of the development, performance and position of the Company and Fund, together with a description of the principal risks and uncertainties that it faces; and

3. the annual report and financial statements, taken as a whole, are fair, balanced and understandable and provide the information necessary for shareholders to assess the Company’s and Fund’s position and performance, business model and strategy.

By order of the Board:

Michael Phair Andrew Zychowski

Director Director

Date: 24 March 2025

Directors’ Remuneration Report

Remuneration Report

Remuneration policy

The Company’s remuneration policy is designed to ensure that the remuneration of directors is set at a reasonable level commensurate with the duties and responsibilities of each director and the time commitment required to carry out their roles effectively. Remuneration will be such that the Company and Fund are able to attract and retain directors of appropriate experience and quality. The fees paid to directors will reflect the experience of the Board as a whole, will be fair, and will take account of the responsibilities attaching to each role given the nature of the Company’s interests, as well as the level of fees paid by comparable investment trusts and companies.

Directors will be reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses incurred in attending meetings or in carrying out any other duties incumbent upon them as directors of the Company or Fund. The level of directors’ fees paid will not exceed the limit set out in the Company’s and Fund’s Articles of Association.

Directors’ Remuneration

No director has a service contract with the Company or Fund and details of the directors’ fees are disclosed in note 13. The non-executive directors each earned the following fees in the 2024 and 2023 financial years:

Director	2024 Fees	2023 Fees
Philip Bisson (Resigned 1 June 2023)	–	£10,440
Dean Orrico	–	–
Richard Hughes (Resigned 1 June 2023)	–	£11,275
Michael Phair	£36,000	£33,500
Kate Anderson	£29,000	£27,000
Janine Fraser	£29,000	£27,000
Andrew Zychowski (Appointed 30 June 2023)	£32,000	£16,000

Mr Orrico has waived his entitlement for remuneration for acting as a director, because of his employment by the Investment Manager. The directors receive no other remuneration or benefits from the Company other than the fees stated above. The directors are paid out of pocket expenses for attendance at Board meetings and for any other expenditure they incur when acting on the Company’s behalf.

The remuneration of each director is determined by the Nomination and Remuneration Committee, with each director abstaining from discussion of and voting upon their own remuneration. When the directors’ remuneration is being considered, the Nomination and Remuneration Committee takes into account various factors including, but not limited to, the Company’s and individual directors’ performance, as well as each director’s time commitment to their role. To date, no external remuneration consultant has been appointed.

For the year under review, the directors’ remuneration was set at £36,000 per annum for the chairman of the Board, £32,000 per annum for the chairman of the audit committee and £29,000 for all other directors bar Mr Orrico, who has waived his entitlement to remuneration for acting as a director.

Shareholders’ Views

The Board welcomes the opportunity to discuss matters of remuneration with shareholders at the Company’s and Fund’s AGMs or at any investor forum that may be held during the year.

Letters of Appointment

All directors are non-executive. Every director has a letter of appointment and the letters of appointment are available for inspection on the Company’s website.

Directors’ Interests in Shares

The interests as at 28 February 2025, 31 December 2024 and 2023 of the directors who served on the Board and their connected persons during the year were as follows:

	28 February 2025 Fund Shares	31 December 2024 Fund Shares	31 December 2023 Fund Shares
Dean Orrico	220,000	220,000	220,000
Middlefield Limited (a company connected with Dean Orrico)	170,000	170,000	–
Michael Phair (current Chairman)	70,000	70,000	70,000
Andrew Zychowski (appointed 30 June 2023)	50,000	50,000	50,000
Danuta Zychowska (a person connected to Andrew Zychowski)	83,000	83,000	83,000
Kate Anderson	–	–	–
Janine Fraser	–	–	–

Directors’ dividends

The following dividends were paid to Directors during the year as well as persons connected to the Directors.

	31 December 2024 Dividend GBP	31 December 2023 Dividend GBP
Philip Bisson (resigned 1 June 2023)	–	–
Philean Trust Company Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023)	–	11,731
Probitas Trust Company Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023)	–	3,900
Beg Kaleh Services Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023)	–	3,848
Beg Kaleh Pension Limited (a company connected with Philip Bisson until 1 June 2023)	–	28,418
Dean Orrico	11,660	11,440
Middlefield Limited (A PCA of Mr Orrico and the Manager of the Company)	6,758	–
Richard Hughes (resigned 1 June 2023)	–	2,637
Cheng Sim Hughes (a person connected to Richard Hughes until 1 June 2023)	–	650
Michael Phair (current Chairman)	3,710	3,640
Andrew Zychowski (appointed 30 June 2023)	2,650	2,600
Danuta Zychowska (a person connected to Andrew Zychowski)	4,399	4,316
Kate Anderson	–	–
Janine Fraser	–	–

Ongoing Charges

The below table shows the annualised ongoing charges that relate to the management of the Fund as a single percentage of the average NAV over the same year. In terms of the AIC’s methodology, ongoing charges are those expenses of a type which are likely to recur in the foreseeable future, whether charged to capital or revenue, and which relate to the operation of the Fund as a collective investment fund, excluding the costs of acquisition/disposal of investments, financing charges and gains/losses arising on investments.

	Ongoing charges (%)
31 December 2024	1.30
31 December 2023	1.33

Applicable Corporate Governance Codes

The Board is committed to achieving and demonstrating high standards of corporate governance. The Board is advised on all governance matters by the Secretary and has access to independent professional advice at the Company’s expense where it is judged necessary.

As an overseas closed-ended investment fund which has been admitted to the Official List of the FCA and to trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market for Listed Securities, the Company is required by listing rule 6.6.6R (5) and (6), as modified by listing rule 11.7.7R, to report how the Company has applied the Principles set out in the UK Corporate Governance Code (the “UK Code”) and whether the Company has complied throughout the accounting period with all relevant provisions of the UK Code and, if it has not complied with all provisions, those provisions with which it has not complied and its reasons for non-compliance.

The AIC, of which the Company is a member, has published the AIC Code, which has been endorsed by the FRC and supported by the JFSC. The FRC has confirmed that, by following the AIC Code, investment company boards should fully meet their obligations in relation to the UK Code and paragraph LR 6.6.6 of the Listing Rules.

The UK Code is available for download from the FRC’s web-site www.frc.org.uk and the AIC Code is available for download from the AIC’s website www.theaic.co.uk. Both of these documents can also be provided by the Secretary by e-mail upon request.

Statement of Compliance

The Board has considered the principles and recommendations of the AIC Code. The AIC Code addresses all the principles set out in the UK Code, as well as setting out additional principles and recommendations on issues that are of specific relevance to the Company. The Board considers that reporting against the principles and recommendations of the AIC Code provides better information to shareholders.

The directors believe that the Company has complied with the provisions of the AIC Code, where appropriate, and that it has complied throughout the year with the provisions where the requirements are of a continuing nature.

Responsibilities of the Board

Internal Controls

The directors are responsible for overseeing the effectiveness of the Company’s risk management and internal control systems, which are designed to ensure that proper accounting records are maintained, that the financial information on which business decisions are made and which is issued for publication is reliable, and that the assets of the Company are safeguarded. However, such a system can only be designed to manage rather than eliminate the risk of failure to achieve business objectives and therefore can only provide reasonable and not absolute assurance against material misstatement or loss.

Having reviewed the Company’s risk management and internal control systems and on the advice of the Audit Committee, the Board believes that they continue to be effective and that no changes thereto are necessary or desirable at this juncture. Because the Company delegates its day-to-day operations to third parties and has no employees, having reviewed the effectiveness of the internal control systems of the Administrator on a quarterly basis and having regard to the role of its external auditor, the Board does not consider that there is a need for the Company to establish its own internal audit function. The Administrator does however provide the Company’s compliance officer, who monitors the Company’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations and reports directly to the Board of directors on a quarterly basis.

The Company receives reports from the Secretary and Administrator relating to its activities. Documented contractual arrangements are in place with the Secretary and Administrator, which define the areas where the Company has delegated authority to it. The Secretary ensures that the directors receive accurate, timely and clear information from all service providers.

Directors

Appointment, Retirement and Tenure

As Mr Orrico is not independent of the Investment Manager, he is required by the FCA’s Listing Rules to submit himself for re-election annually. In addition, in accordance with the provisions of the AIC Code, and PIRC’s published guidance, all directors will continue to offer themselves for annual re-election for the foreseeable future.

As the Company is a Jersey-regulated entity, the appointment of any new director is subject to the JFSC’s confirmation that they have no objection to such director’s appointment. It is also a regulatory requirement that the Company have at least two Jersey resident directors. Therefore, for so long as there are only two Jersey resident directors in office, any Jersey resident director who retires or whose re-election is not approved at a Company and Cell AGM will therefore remain in office until such time as a replacement Jersey-resident director acceptable to the JFSC has been appointed.

The Board is of the view that length of service does not automatically compromise the independence or contribution of directors of an investment company, where continuity and experience can be a benefit to the Board. Furthermore, the Board agrees with the view expressed in the AIC Code that long-serving directors should not be prevented from forming part of an independent majority or from acting as Chairman. Consequently, no limit had previously been imposed on the directors’ overall length of service.

However, the Board has noted that the AIC considers that directors who have served on the Board for more than nine years may not be independent and that certain corporate governance advisory bodies believe that directors should not serve more than nine years on an investment company’s Board. Therefore, in the spirit of best corporate governance, the Board has decided that any remunerated, independent director appointed in 2018 or thereafter shall only serve for a maximum of nine years before being required to retire from office.

As stated in previous annual financial reports, the Board has recognised the merits of refreshing its composition as well as planning for future succession. The Board intends to continue evolving its composition on a periodic basis and has agreed a succession plan for the directors with over nine years of service. The Board’s advance planning for the retirement of directors ensures an orderly transition process that maintains an appropriate balance of skills and relevant experience. The Board has used open advertising in the past. The directors have decided that in future, in order to reach a broader range of diverse candidates, it will also consider using one or more UK external search agents to assist with the search for new directors.

As required by the FCA’s Listing Rules, full biographical details of any additional directors appointed will be announced and he or she will stand for re-election at the next subsequent Company and Cell Meeting convened after their appointment and annually thereafter.

Independence

For the period 1 January 2024 to the date of this report, the Board consisted of five members, all of whom were non-executive. Mr Orrico is a director of Middlefield Limited, the Investment Manager and President of the Investment Advisor. All the directors, apart from Mr Orrico, are considered to be independent of the Investment Manager and free of any business or other relationship that could influence their ability to exercise independent judgement. The Board believes that Mr Orrico’s investment management experience as well as his first-hand knowledge of the Canadian economic and investment sector adds considerable value to the Company.

The Board believes that Ms Anderson, Ms Fraser, Mr Phair and Mr Zychowski are independent in character and judgement and that their experience and knowledge of the specialised sector in which the Company operates adds significant strength to the Board. M Phair was also considered to be independent upon his appointment as Chairman. The directors believe that the Board has a balance of skills and experience which enable it to provide effective strategic leadership and proper governance of the Company. Information about the directors, including their relevant experience, can be found on pages 26 to 27.

In accordance with the recommendations of the AIC Code, Ms Kate Anderson acted as Senior Independent Director. In-line with the AIC’s recommendation, Ms Anderson provides a sounding board for the chair and serves as an intermediary for the other directors and shareholders. She is responsible for coordinating a regular meeting, at least annually and on other occasions as necessary, of the non-executive directors (excluding the chair), to appraise the chair’s performance.

Induction and Ongoing Training

Although no formal training in corporate governance is given to directors, the directors are kept appraised of corporate governance issues through bulletins and training materials provided from time to time by the Secretary and the AIC.

Directors’ Insurance

The Company purchases directors’ and officers’ liability insurance cover at a level which is considered appropriate for the Company.

Meeting Attendance

The table below summarises the directors’ attendance at each type of meeting held during the year.

	Quarterly Board	Ad hoc Board	Audit Committee	Nomination and Remuneration Committee	Management Engagement Committee	Dividend Committee**
No. of meetings in the Year	4	2	4	2	1	4
Dean Orrico*	4	2	4	2	1	0
Janine Fraser***	4	2	4	2	1	3
Michael Phair	4	2	4	2	1	1
Kate Anderson***	4	2	4	2	1	0
Andrew Zychowski	4	2	4	2	1	3

* Mr Orrico attended meetings of the Committees as an observer, not a member or participant.

** The quorum for a meeting of the Dividend Committee is one director physically present in the UK.

*** Ms Anderson and Ms Fraser attended as observers at the ad hoc Board meeting on 7 May 2024.

The Board’s Committees

Performance Evaluation

The directors recognise the importance of the AIC Code in terms of evaluating the performance of the Board as a whole, its respective Committees and individual directors. After the year end, the performance of the Board, Committees of the Board and individual directors was assessed in terms of:

• attendance at Board and Committee Meetings;

• the independence of individual directors;

• the ability of individual directors to make an effective contribution to the Board and Committees of the Board, together with the diversity of skills and experience each director brings to meetings;

• the Board’s ability to effectively challenge the Investment Manager’s recommendations, suggest areas of debate and fix timetables for debates on the future strategy of the Company; and

• the Board’s diversity in terms of gender, social and ethnic backgrounds and cognitive and personal strengths and weaknesses.

The directors concluded that the performance evaluation process had proven successful, with the Board, the Chairman, the Committees of the Board and the individual directors scoring well in all areas. The Board and the Committees of the Board continued to be effective, each director’s behaviour continued to be aligned to the Company’s purpose, values and strategy and the individual directors continued to demonstrate commitment to their respective roles and responsibilities. Although the Board did not procure an externally facilitated Board evaluation during the year under review, the directors will consider doing so at the appropriate time in the future.

The Board also reviews its own policies and procedures on a periodic basis, as well as the terms of reference of its committees, to ensure that they serve to further the Company’s purpose and that they are aligned with the Company’s values and strategy. The Board with the support of the Secretary reviewed all of their policies, procedures and the terms of reference, all of which were updated (as applicable) to meet the recommendations of the AIC Code and concluded that they continued to be in a satisfactory form.

Committees of the Board

Audit Committee

On 26 May 2010 an Audit Committee was established. The current members are Andrew Zychowski (Chairman), Michael Phair, Kate Anderson and Janine Fraser. Notwithstanding that Mr Phair is Chairman of the Board, he was independent on appointment and the Board considers that his experience and knowledge is of great value to the Audit Committee. A separate report from the Audit Committee is included at pages 48 to 50.

Nomination and Remuneration Committee

The Board has also established a Nomination and Remuneration Committee, which meets when necessary. At the present time, the current members are all the directors of the Company bar Mr Orrico, and their summary biographical details are set out on pages 26 to 27.

The Chairman of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee is Andrew Zychowski or, failing him, any member of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee present within the United Kingdom other than the Chairman of the Company. The Board believes it is appropriate for all members of the Board (excluding Mr Orrico) to be on the Nomination and Remuneration Committee, because the directors work together collegiately, and each brings a different perspective to the Nomination and Remuneration Committee’s discussions.

The key terms of reference of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee are set out below.

• The Committee oversees the process of identifying and nominating prospective directors.

• The Committee considers and monitors the level and structure of remuneration of the directors of the Company and the Fund.

• The Committee considers the need to appoint external remuneration consultants.

• The Committee is authorised, in consultation with the Secretary, where necessary to fulfil its duties, to obtain outside legal or other professional advice, including the advice of independent remuneration consultants, to secure the attendance of external advisors at its meetings, if it considers this necessary, and to obtain reliable up-to-date information about remuneration in other companies, all at the expense of the Fund.

• The Committee considers the overall levels of insurance cover for the Company, including directors’ and officers’ liability insurance.

• The Committee conducts a process annually to evaluate the performance of the Board and its individual directors.

• The Committee considers such other topics as directed by the Board.

The Board believes that, subject to any exception explained in this report and the nature of the Company as an investment fund, it has complied with the applicable provisions of the AIC Code throughout the year. The Board has noted the recommendations of the AIC relating to Board diversity. Although the Board does not have a formal written policy on diversity and inclusion, the Board, advised by the Nomination and Remuneration Committee, considers diversity, including the balance of skills, knowledge, diversity (including gender) and experience amongst other factors when reviewing the composition of the Board and appointing new directors, but does not consider it appropriate to establish targets or quotas in this regard. Board diversity is carefully considered and will continue to be considered in the future.

When considering the proposed appointment of new directors, the Nomination and Remuneration Committee receives full biographical information on all candidates and considers all matters which it considers relevant, including their experience and ability to devote sufficient time to the Company’s business. The process also takes into account numerous other factors including, but not limited to, each candidate’s experience, gender, social and ethnic background and personal strengths and weaknesses. Each director is interviewed by the Nomination and Remuneration Committee as part of the Board’s evaluation of prospective candidates. After their appointment, each director seeks the Board’s consent before taking on any other significant external appointments.

Management Engagement Committee

The Board established a Management Engagement Committee at its meeting held on 20 November 2013. In addition to regular reporting and engagement at Board meetings with its service providers, the Board formally reviews all service providers via the Management Engagement Committee. At the present time, the Management Engagement Committee’s members are all the directors of the Company bar Mr Orrico, who does not sit on the Management Engagement Committee because of the perceived conflict that his role as President of the Investment Advisor could present.

The Chairman of the Management Engagement Committee is Andrew Zychowski or, failing him, any member of the Management Engagement Committee present within the United Kingdom other than the Chairman of the Company. For the purposes of transacting business, a quorum of the Management Engagement Committee is not less than two members of the Management Engagement Committee and all meetings must take place in the UK.

The Board believes it is appropriate for all independent members of the Board to be on the Management Engagement Committee, because the directors work together collegiately and each brings a different perspective to the Management Engagement Committee’s discussions.

Duties

The Management Engagement Committee’s key duty is to review the performance by service providers of their duties and the terms of all agreements for the provision of services that the Company has entered into or will in future enter into.

The Management Engagement Committee meets at least annually to specifically consider the ongoing management, administrative and secretarial and investment management requirements of the Company. The Management Engagement Committee receives self- evaluation questionnaires provided by all service providers, which include reporting on each service provider’s opinion of the quality of services provided by the Company’s other service providers, and the Board also receives detailed compliance reporting from the Company’s compliance officer, which the Management Engagement Committee takes into account when reviewing the services provided. The quality and timeliness of reports to the Board are also taken into account and the overall management of the Company’s affairs by the Investment Manager is considered. Based on its recent review of activities, and taking into account the performance of the portfolio, the other services provided by the key service providers, and the risk and governance environment in which the Company operates, the Board believes that the retention of the current key service providers on the current terms of their appointment remains in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders.

The Board regularly reviews the performance of the services provided by these companies. A summary of the terms of the agreements with the Secretary, the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor are set out in note 1 to the financial statements. After due consideration of the resources and reputations of those parties, the Board believes it is in the interests of shareholders to retain the services of all three providers for the foreseeable future.

Terms of Reference of Committees

The Terms of Reference of the Audit Committee, the Nomination and Remuneration Committee and the Management Engagement Committee are all available on the Company’s website and are also available for inspection at the Company’s registered office during normal business hours.

Bribery Act 2010

The Company has no employees. The Board has considered the Bribery Act 2010 and confirmed its zero tolerance of bribery and corruption in its business activities. It has received assurances from the Company’s main service providers that they will maintain adequate safeguards to protect against any form of bribery and corruption by their employees and agents.

Criminal Finances Act 2017

The Board has also considered the Criminal Finances Act 2017 and has received assurances from the Company’s main service providers that they will maintain adequate safeguards to protect against any form of illegal activities under this legislation, including the facilitation of tax evasion.

Relations with Shareholders

Shareholder relations are given a high priority by the Board, Investment Manager and Secretary. The primary medium through which the Company communicates with its shareholders is through the annual and half-yearly financial reports, which aim to provide shareholders with a full understanding of the Company’s activities and results. The information is supplemented by the daily publication of the NAV of the Fund Shares, monthly factsheets and information on the Company’s website operated by the Investment Manager. Shareholders have the opportunity to address questions to the Chairman and the Committees of the Board at the AGMs each year. Shareholders can also write to the Company at its registered office or by e-mail to the Secretary at Middlefield.Cosec@JTCGroup.com

The Chairman is available and meets with major shareholders to discuss aspects of investment performance, governance and strategy and to listen to shareholders’ views, in order to help develop a balanced understanding of their issues and concerns. General presentations are given by the Investment Manager to both shareholders and analysts follow the publication of the annual financial results. In addition, the Investment Manager maintains a regular schedule of meetings throughout the year with major shareholders and keeps the Board updated with the outcome of such meetings.

Report of the Audit Committee

This report of the Audit Committee has been prepared with reference to the AIC Code. Established in 2010, the Audit Committee reports formally to the main Board at least twice each year. In accordance with written terms of reference, its delegated duties and responsibilities are reviewed and reapproved annually. The function of the Audit Committee is to ensure that the Company maintains high standards of integrity, financial reporting and internal controls.

The members do not have any links with the Company’s Auditor. They are also independent of the management teams of the Investment Manager, the Administrator and all other service providers. The Audit Committee meets formally no less than twice a year in London and on an ad hoc basis if required.

The Audit Committee considers the financial reporting by the Company and the Fund, the internal controls, and relations with the Company’s and the Fund’s Auditor. In addition, the Audit Committee reviews the independence and objectivity of the Auditor. The Committee meets at least twice a year to review the internal financial and non-financial controls, to approve the contents of the interim and annual reports and financial statements and to review accounting policies. Representatives of the Auditor attend the Committee meeting at which the draft Annual Financial Reports are reviewed and can speak to Committee members without the presence of representatives of the Investment Manager. The audit program and timetable are drawn up and agreed with the Auditor in advance of the financial year end. Items for audit focus are discussed, agreed and given particular attention during the audit process. The Auditor reports to the Committee on these items, among other matters. This report is considered by the Committee and discussed with the Auditor and the Investment Manager prior to approval and signature of the Annual Financial Report.

The Audit Committee is authorised by the Board to investigate any activity within its terms of reference and to consult with outside legal or other independent professional advisers when deemed necessary in order to adequately discharge their duties and responsibilities, which include:

• Considering the appointment, resignation or dismissal of the Auditor and their independence and objectivity, particularly in circumstances where non-audit services have been provided.

• Reviewing the cost effectiveness of the external audit from time to time.

• Reviewing and challenging the half-yearly and Annual Financial Reports, focusing particularly on changes in accounting policies and practice, areas of accounting judgement and estimation, significant adjustments arising from audit or other review and the going concern assumption.

• Providing advice to the Board on whether the Annual Financial Report, taken as a whole, is fair balanced and understandable and provides the information necessary for shareholders to assess the company’s position and performance, business model and strategy.

• Reviewing compliance with accounting standards and law and regulations including the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 and the FCA’s Listing and Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules.

• Completing regular risk management reviews of internal controls, which include the review of the Fund’s Risk Register.

• Reviewing the effectiveness of the Company’s system of internal controls, including financial, operating, compliance, fraud and risk management controls and making and reporting to the Board any recommendations that may arise.

• Considering the major findings of internal investigations and making recommendations to the Board on appropriate action.

• Ensuring that arrangements exist whereby service providers and management may raise concerns over irregularities in financial reporting or other matters in confidence and that such concerns are independently investigated and remediated with appropriate action.

The Audit Committee, having reviewed the effectiveness of the internal control systems of the Administrator on a quarterly basis, and having regard to the role of the Auditor, does not consider that there is a need for the Company or Fund to establish its own internal audit function. The Administrator does however provide the Company’s compliance officer, who monitors the Company’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations and reports directly to the Board of directors on a quarterly basis.

Some of the principal duties of the Audit Committee are to consider the appointment of the Auditor, to discuss and agree with the Auditor the nature and scope of the audit, to review the scope of and to discuss the results and the effectiveness of the audit and the independence and objectivity of the Auditor, to review the Auditor’s letter of engagement and management letter and to analyse the key procedures adopted by the Company’s outsourced service providers including the Administrator and Custodian. The Audit Committee is responsible for monitoring the financial reporting process and the effectiveness of the Company’s and its service provider’s internal control and risk management systems. The Company’s risk assessment focus and the way in which significant risks are managed is a key area for the Committee. Work here was driven by the Committee’s assessment of the risks arising in the Company’s operations and identification of the controls exercised by the Board and its delegates, the Investment Manager and other service providers. These are recorded in the Company’s business risk matrix which continues to serve as an effective tool to highlight and monitor the principal risks.

The Board also received and considered, together with representatives of the Investment Manager, reports in relation to the operational controls of the Investment Manager, Administrator, Custodian and Registrar. These reviews identified no issues of significance. The risks relating to the Company (including the Fund) are discussed by the directors and documented in detail in the minutes of each meeting.

The Audit Committee is also responsible for overseeing the Company’s relationship with the Auditor, including making recommendations to the Board on the appointment and re-appointment of the Auditor and its remuneration.

Significant Matters

The significant matters that were subject to specific consideration in 2024 by the Committee and consultation with the Auditor where necessary were as follows:

Valuation and ownership of securities

There is a risk that the securities are incorrectly valued due to factors including low volume traded securities and errors in third party prices.

Valuation of securities – at each valuation point, a price tolerance check is run.

The following exceptions require further investigation:

• Prices outside the stated tolerance levels: Price movements need to be justified to underlying support.

• Stale prices: These need to be traced and agreed to support to ensure prices are not stale. Stale prices are escalated as per the pricing policy after being static for more than 7 days.

• Zero prices: Prices for these securities need to be investigated and added if applicable.

There is also the risk that the securities are not directly owned by the Fund, which may be caused by errors in the recording of trade transactions.

Ownership of securities – at each valuation point a stock reconciliation is performed, which entails tracing and agreeing the stock holding at valuation point to the Custodian records.

Any differences are investigated.

All new trades are traced and agreed to the contract note.

Allocation to Capital and Revenue

The Directors have made the critical judgement to allocate a proportion of management fees and finance to capital. This has been allocated 60% to capital and 40% to revenue.

This has been done in accordance with the Association of Investment Companies’ Statement of Recommended Practice for Investment Trusts Companies.

The Audit Committee challenged the allocation of charges between capital and revenue by comparing it with the policies of other companies in the AIC North American sector who allocate charges to both capital and revenue. MCT has a somewhat higher allocation to revenue than the peer group. Since MCT is the highest yielding fund in the sector, the Audit Committee considered the allocation to be appropriate following this review and discussion of the separate analysis provided by the Investment Manager.

Compliance with Regulatory Requirements

JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited as administrator works with the Board of directors to ensure that the Fund complies with its obligations under all applicable laws and regulations including, but not limited to:

• The Companies (Jersey) Law 1991

• The FCA’s listing rules, prospectus and disclosure guidance and transparency rules

• The AIC Code of Corporate Governance and

• The JFSC’s Codes of Practice for Certified Funds

• The Jersey Listed Fund Guide

Going Concern

The financial statements are prepared using the going concern basis based on the directors’ assessment that:

• The investment portfolio consists of listed investments that are highly realizable

• The Fund has sufficient liquidity in cash to meet all on-going expenses and repayments of external borrowings

• The directors have the option to reduce dividend payments if the need arises

The Investment Manager monitors the Fund’s investment portfolio daily and invests in listed securities that can be liquidated in a relatively short period of time. The Board monitors the Fund’s portfolio on a quarterly basis.

Auditor and Audit

The Auditor was first appointed on 1 October 2020 following a detailed tender process and the Auditor is subject to annual reappointment by shareholders at each Company AGM and Cell AGM. The Audit Committee considers the nature, scope and results of the Auditor’s work and monitors the independence of the Auditor. Formal reports are received at Board meetings from the Auditor on an interim and annual basis relating to the extent of their work. The work of the Auditor in respect of any significant audit issues and consideration of the adequacy of that work is discussed. The Audit Committee is pleased to report there have been no concerns regarding their performance or independence.

The Audit Committee assesses the effectiveness of the audit process. The Audit Committee receives a report from the Auditor which covers the principal matters that have arisen from the audit.

The Audit Committee meets with the Investment Manager and Administrator to discuss the extent of audit work completed to ensure all matters of risk are covered and assesses the quality of the draft financial statements prepared by the Administrator and examines the interaction between the Investment Manager and the Auditor to resolve any potential audit issues.

The Audit Committee has an active involvement and oversight of the preparation of both half yearly and annual financial reports and recommends for the purposes of the production of these financial reports that valuations are prepared by the management team of the Administrator. These valuations are a critical element in the Company’s financial reporting and the Audit Committee questions them thoroughly.

Ultimate responsibility for reviewing and approving the annual financial report remains with the Board.

Andrew Zychowski

Director

Date: 24 March 2025

General Shareholder Information

AIFMD Disclosures

In accordance with the AIFMD, the AIFM is required to disclose specific information in relation to the following aspects of the Company’s management:

Leverage and borrowing

Leverage is defined as any method by which the Company increases its exposure through borrowing or the use of derivatives. ‘Exposure’ is defined in two ways – ‘gross method’ and ‘commitment method’ – and the Company must not exceed maximum exposures under both methods. ‘Gross method’ exposure is calculated as the sum of all positions of the Company (both positive and negative), that is, all eligible assets, liabilities and derivatives, including derivatives held for risk reduction purposes. ‘Commitment method’ exposure is also calculated as the sum of all positions of the Company (both positive and negative), but after netting off derivative and security positions as specified by the Directive.

For the gross method, the following has been excluded:

• the value of any cash and cash equivalents which are highly liquid investments held in the base currency of the AIF that are readily convertible to a known amount of cash, subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value;

• that remain in cash or cash equivalent as defined above and where the amounts of that payable are known. The total amount of leverage calculated as at 31 December 2024 is as follows:

Gross method: 139.35% (31 December 2023: 130.13%)

Commitment method: 139.35% (31 December 2023: 130.13%)

Liquidity

The Investment Manager’s policy is that the Company should normally be close to fully invested (i.e. with liquidity of 5% or less) but this is subject to the need to retain liquidity for the purpose of the efficient management of the Company in accordance with its objectives. There may therefore be occasions when there will be higher levels of liquidity, for example following the issue of shares or the realisation of investments. This policy has been applied consistently throughout the review period and as a result the Investment Manager has not introduced any new arrangements for managing the Company’s liquidity.

Risk management policy note

Please refer to note 16, Financial instruments, in the Notes to the financial statements on pages 72 to 76 for risk management policies, where the current risk profile of the Company and the risk management systems employed by the Investment Manager to manage those risks are set out.

AIFM Remuneration

A total of 8 staff employed by the AIFM are engaged in managing the Fund. The compensation paid to these beneficiaries during the year under review was £275,000, split roughly equally between fixed and variable compensation. The Fund has no agreement to pay any carried interest to the AIFM.

General Data Key Investor

åDocument and Related Data

The Company has produced an EU Key Information Document (the “KID”), as required by the Packaged Retail and Insurance-Based Investment Products Regulations (the “PRIIPs Regulations”) and a UK KID under the UK’s amended version of the PRIIPs Regulations, together with a European PRIIPs Template and a European MiFID Template, all of which are available on the Company’s website.

The PRIIPs Regulations require the preparation and publication of the KID. Investors should note that the methodology for calculating the risks, costs and potential returns cited in the KID are prescribed by the PRIIPs Regulations. However, the methodology is considered by many market participants, including the AIC, to be flawed and future risks and returns may not transpire to be as cited in the KID. The Board therefore recommends that investors not make any investment or divestment decision based on the information contained in the KID.

Non-Mainstream Pooled Investment (‘NMPI’) Status

The Company currently conducts its affairs to maintain its status as an “excluded security” for the purposes of the FCA’s rules on “non-mainstream pooled investments” and intends to continue to do so. The Fund Shares are therefore excluded from the FCA’s restrictions which apply to non-mainstream pooled investments.

Performance Details/Share Price Information

Details of the Company’s share price and the net asset value per Fund Share can be found on the London Stock Exchange’s website. The net asset value is calculated and published daily, on the basis of the bid price of securities at closing.

Consumer Duty Value Assessment

Middlefield International Limited (“MIL”), as advisor to Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (“MCT”), has prepared an assessment of fair value based on the FCA’s guidelines which includes consideration of the fund’s relative performance, investment process, costs and charges, quality of service, comparable market rates and economies of scale. Based on this assessment, MIL has concluded that MCT is providing value to its investors. The assessment of value can be found on the website under Other Reports and Filings www.middlefield.co.uk.

Independent Auditor’s Report

TO THE MEMBERS OF MIDDLEFIELD CANADIAN INCOME – GBP PC, A CELL OF MIDDLEFIELD CANADIAN INCOME PCC

Opinion

We have audited the financial statements of Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC (the “Fund”), which comprise the Statement of Financial Position as at 31 December 2024, and the Statement of Comprehensive Income, Statement of Changes in Redeemable Participating Preference Shareholder’s Equity and Statement of Cash Flows for the year then ended, and notes 1 to 22 to the financial statements, including a summary of significant accounting policies. The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is applicable law and UK-adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (‘IFRS’).

In our opinion the financial statements of Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC, a cell of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC:

give a true and fair view of the state of the Fund’s affairs as at 31 December 2024 and of its profit for the year then ended;

have been properly prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS; and

have been prepared in accordance with the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.

Separate opinion in relation to IFRS as adopted by the European Union

As explained in note 2a, in addition to complying with the Listing Rules obligation to apply UK-adopted IFRS, the Fund has also applied IFRSs as adopted by the European Union.

In our opinion the financial statements give a true and fair view of the financial position of the Fund as at 31 December 2024 and of its financial performance and cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with IFRS as adopted by the European Union.

Basis for opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (‘ISAs (UK)’) and applicable law. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of our report. We are independent of the Fund in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in Jersey, including the FRC’s Ethical Standard as applied to listed public interest entities, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

Our approach to the audit

Our audit was scoped by obtaining an understanding of the Fund and its environment, including internal control, and assessing the risks of material misstatement. Audit work to respond to the risks of material misstatement was performed directly by the audit engagement team.

Our consideration of the control environment

The Fund has appointed JTC Fund Solution (Jersey) Limited to provide the accounting function. The accounting function has been subcontracted to JTC Fund Solutions (RSA) Pty Ltd (“JTC SA”). We have obtained JTC SA’s ISAE 3402 controls assurance report for the period 1 April 2023 to 31 March 2024 which summarises the suitability of design and implementation and operating effectiveness of controls. We have reviewed the report and considered the controls relevant to the accounting functions undertaken by JTC SA for the Fund in order to rely on controls. As the reporting date of the Fund is 31 December 2024, we have obtained correspondence issued by JTC SA confirming that there have not been any material changes to the internal control environment nor any material deficiencies in the internal controls to this date.

Key audit matters

Key audit matters are those matters that, in our professional judgment, were of most significance in the audit of the financial statements and include the most significant assessed risks of material misstatement (whether or not due to fraud) identified by us, including those which had the greatest effect on: the overall audit strategy; the allocation of resources in the audit; and directing the efforts of the engagement team. These matters were addressed in the context of our audit of the financial statements as a whole, and in forming our opinion thereon, and we do not provide a separate opinion on these matters.

In addition to the matter described in the ‘material uncertainty related to going concern’ below, in arriving at our audit opinion, the key audit matter was as follows:

Key Audit Matter

How our scope addressed this matter

Ownership and valuation of Securities

The Fund’s securities (see note 3 and the schedule of securities) are included at fair value of £169,952,944 (2023: £146,643,502). The portfolio is made up of securities actively traded on recognised markets which are measured at fair value based on market prices and other prices determined with reference to observable inputs.

Although all of the securities are listed and have quoted market pricing data available which is used to value the securities, there is a risk of material misstatement that the securities may be incorrectly valued due to stale prices, low trading volumes or errors reported in third party prices. Where securities are not regularly traded there is a greater risk of material misstatement that the quoted price is not reflective of fair value and this should be taken into consideration in management’s assessment. Valuation has a significant impact on the net asset value of the Fund.

There is a risk that securities, a record of which is maintained by a third-party custodian, are not directly owned by the Fund.

Securities are held by the custodian. Ensuring that the custodian records all the securities correctly under the Fund’s name is critical since the investment portfolio represents the principal element of the financial statements, being the single largest asset on the Statement of Financial Position.

Our procedures on the valuation of securities included:

understanding the relevant controls around valuation;

testing 100% of the valuations of securities by agreeing the prices directly to independent third-party sources;

considering the trading history of securities to determine whether they have been frequently traded, and values at which they have been traded to consider whether the year-end prices are stale.

Our procedures on ownership of securities included:

obtaining an understanding of the relevant controls around custody of securities;

agreeing the holdings to independent third-party confirmations provided by the Fund’s custodian;

reviewing the ISAE 3402 controls assurance report of the custodian to consider the controls relevant to the custodial function.

Key observations
Based on the procedures, we concluded that the ownership and valuation of securities are appropriate.

Our application of materiality

We define materiality as the magnitude of misstatement in the financial statements that makes it probable that the economic decisions of a reasonably knowledgeable person would be changed or influenced. We use materiality both in planning the scope of our audit work and in evaluating the results of our work.

Based on our professional judgement, we determined materiality for the financial statements as a whole as follows:

Materiality £2,870,000 (2023: £2,470,000).

Basis for determining materiality – Approximately 1.6% of the Fund’s total assets (2023: 1.6%).

Rationale for the benchmark applied – The reason for using total assets is that the key users of the financial statements are primarily focused on the valuation of the Fund’s assets. This approach remains consistent with the prior year.

Performance materiality

We set performance materiality at a level lower than materiality to reduce the probability that, in aggregate, uncorrected and undetected misstatements exceed the materiality for the financial statements as a whole. Performance materiality was set at 75% of materiality for the 2024 audit (2023: 75%). In determining performance materiality, we considered our understanding of the entity, including our assessment of the overall control environment.

Independent Auditor’s Report continued

Our application of materiality (continued)

Error reporting threshold

We agreed with the Audit Committee that we would report to them all audit differences in excess of £140,000 (2023: £120,000), as well as differences below that threshold that, in our view, warranted reporting on qualitative grounds. We also report to the Audit Committee on disclosure matters that we identified when assessing the overall presentation of the financial statements.

Material uncertainty relating to going concern

We draw attention to note 2n to the financial statements which indicates that the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on the outcome of the directors review of a number of strategic options for the future of the Fund, as described in note 2n. As stated in note 2n, these events presented by the directors indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern. Our opinion is not qualified in respect of this matter.

Given the material uncertainty identified by the directors, we considered going concern to be a key audit matter.

In auditing the financial statements, we have concluded that the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

Our evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Fund’s ability to continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting, and in response to the key audit matter, included:

Considering the appropriateness of the directors’ conclusion in relation to the matters described in 2n and discussing this with the board;

Review of the directors’ statement in note 2n and their identification of any material uncertainties to the Fund’s ability to continue over a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements;

Consideration as part of our risk assessment of the nature of the Fund, its business model and related risks including where relevant the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework and the system of internal control; and

Evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern, including challenging the underlying data and key assumptions used to make the assessment, and evaluation of the directors’ plans for future actions in relation to their going concern assessment.

Other than the above, based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties, other than as disclosed in note 2n, relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements.

In relation to the Fund’s reporting on how it has applied Listing Rule 6.6.6R and Listing rule 11.7.7R, we have nothing material to add or draw attention to in relation to the director’ statement in the financial statements about whether the directors considered it appropriate to adopt the going concern basis of accounting.

Our responsibilities and the responsibilities of the directors with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this report.

Other information

The other information comprises the information included in the annual report, other than the financial statements and our auditor’s report thereon. The directors are responsible for the other information contained within the annual report. Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and, except to the extent otherwise explicitly stated in our report, we do not express any form of assurance conclusion thereon. Our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements or our knowledge obtained in the audit or otherwise appears to be materially misstated. If we identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements, we are required to determine whether there is a material misstatement in the financial statements or a material misstatement of the other information. If, based on the work we have performed, we conclude that there is a material misstatement of this other information, we are required to report that fact.

We have nothing to report in respect of these matters.

Independent Auditor’s Report continued

Matters on which we are required to report by exception

We have nothing to report in respect of the following matters where the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 requires us to report to you if, in our opinion;

adequate accounting records have not been kept; or

the financial statements are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or

proper returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited by us; or

we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit.

Corporate governance statement

The Listing Rules require us to review the directors’ statement in relation to going concern, longer-term viability and that part of the Corporate Governance Statement relating to the Fund’s compliance with the provisions of the Listing Rule 6.6.6R specified for our review.

Based on the work undertaken as part of our audit, we have concluded that each of the following elements of the Corporate Governance Statement and Corporate Information is materially consistent with the financial statements or our knowledge obtained during the audit:

Directors’ statement with regards the appropriateness of adopting the going concern basis of accounting and any material uncertainties identified set out on pages 33 to 34;

Directors’ explanation as to its assessment of the entity’s prospects, the period this assessment covers and why the period is appropriate set out on pages 33 to 34;

Directors’ statement on fair, balanced and understandable set out on page 48;

Board’s confirmation that it has carried out a robust assessment of the emerging and principal risks set out on pages 30 to 34;

The section of the annual report that describes the review of effectiveness of risk management and internal control systems set out on page 48; and

The section describing the work of the audit committee set out on pages 48 to 50.

Responsibilities of directors

As explained more fully in the directors’ responsibilities statement, the directors are responsible for the preparation of the financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for such internal control as the directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

In preparing the financial statements, the directors are responsible for assessing the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the directors either intend to liquidate the Fund or to cease operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so.

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

Independent Auditor’s Report continued

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements (continued)

As part of an audit in accordance with ISAs (UK), we exercise professional judgement and maintain professional scepticism throughout the audit. We also:

Identify and assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, design and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks, and obtain audit evidence that is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulting from fraud is higher than the one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal control.

Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Fund’s internal control.

Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by the directors.

Conclude on the appropriateness of the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the Fund’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our auditors’ report to the related disclosures in the financial statements or, if such disclosures are inadequate, to modify our opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditors’ report. However, future events or conditions may cause the Fund to cease to continue as a going concern.

Evaluate the overall presentation, structure and content of the financial statements, including the disclosures, and whether the financial statements represent the underlying transactions and events in a manner that achieves fair presentation.

We communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit and significant audit findings, including any significant deficiencies in internal control that we identify during our audit.

The extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud

Irregularities, including fraud, are instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations. We design procedures in line with our responsibilities, outlined above, to detect material misstatements in respect of irregularities, including fraud. The extent to which our procedures are capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud is explained below.

The objectives of our audit are to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding compliance with laws and regulations that have a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, to perform audit procedures to help identify instances of non-compliance with other laws and regulations that may have a material effect on the financial statements, and to respond appropriately to identified or suspected non-compliance with laws and regulations identified during the audit.

In relation to fraud, the objectives of our audit are to identify and assess the risk of material misstatement of the financial statements due to fraud, to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence regarding the assessed risks of material misstatement due to fraud through designing and implementing appropriate responses and to respond appropriately to fraud or suspected fraud identified during the audit.

However, it is the primary responsibility of management, with the oversight of those charged with governance, to ensure that the entity’s operations are conducted in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations and for the prevention and detection of fraud.

In identifying and assessing risks of material misstatement in respect of irregularities, including fraud, we:

obtained an understanding of the nature of the industry and sector, including the legal and regulatory frameworks that the Fund operates in and how the Fund is complying with the legal and regulatory frameworks;

inquired of management, and those charged with governance, about their own identification and assessment of the risks of irregularities, including any known actual, suspected, or alleged instances of fraud;

discussed matters about non-compliance with laws and regulations and how fraud might occur including assessment of how and where the financial statements may be susceptible to fraud having obtained an understanding of the effectiveness of the control environment; and

reviewed minutes of the Board and other Committees.

Independent Auditor’s Report continued

The extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud (continued)

We also obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks that the Fund operates in, focusing on provisions of those laws and regulations that had a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. The key laws and regulations we considered in this context included UK-adopted IFRS, Companies (Jersey) Law 1991, Codes of Practice for Certified Funds, Listing and Disclosure Transparency Rules and the AIC Code of Corporate Governance. The audit procedures performed included:

a review of the financial statement disclosures and testing to supporting documentation;

completion of disclosure checklists to identify areas of non-compliance; and

review of the financial statement disclosures by a specialist in the Listing and Disclosure Transparency Rules.

The area that we identified as being susceptible to material misstatement due to fraud was management override of controls. The audit procedures performed included:

testing the appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments;

undertaking analytical procedures to identify unusual or unexpected relationships;

assessing whether the judgements made in determining accounting estimates, in particular in respect of the fair value of securities and the split between capital and revenue, are indicative of a potential bias; and

evaluation of the business rationale of any significant transactions that are unusual or outside the normal course of business.

Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit there is an unavoidable risk that some material misstatement of the financial statements may not be detected, even though the audit is properly planned and performed in accordance with ISAs (UK). However, the principal responsibility for ensuring that the financial statements are free from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error, rests with the directors who should not rely on the audit to discharge those functions.

In addition, as with any audit, there remains a higher risk of non-detection of fraud, as this may involve collusion, forgery, intentional omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal controls. Our audit procedures are designed to detect material misstatement. We are not responsible for preventing non-compliance or fraud and cannot be expected to detect non-compliance with all laws and regulations.

Other matters which we are required to address

Following the recommendation of the audit committee, we were appointed by the Board of directors on 1 October 2020 to audit the financial statements for the year ending 31 December 2020 and subsequent financial periods. The period of total uninterrupted engagement is 5 years, covering the years ended 31 December 2020 to 2024.

No non-audit services have been provided to the Fund and we remain independent of the Fund in conducting our audit.

Our audit opinion is consistent with our reporting to the audit committee we are required to provide in accordance with ISAs (UK).

Use of our report

This report is made solely to the Fund’s members, as a body, in accordance with Article 113A of the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991. Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the Fund’s members those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the Fund and the Fund’s members as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.

Philip Crosby

For & on behalf of

RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

Chartered Accountants and Recognized Auditors

Jersey, C.I.

Date: 24 March 2025

Financial Statements

Statement of Financial Position of the Fund

As at 31 December 2024

	Notes	2024 GBP	2023 GBP
Current assets
Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	3 & 22	169,952,944	146,643,502
Accrued dividend income		743,674	632,412
Prepayments		20,324	21,787
Cash and cash equivalents	4	1,345,531	4,433,118
		172,062,473	151,730,819
Current liabilities
Other payables and accruals	5	(434,929)	(388,493)
Interest payable		(48,282)	(71,270)
Loan payable	14	(28,884,872)	(21,831,966)
		(29,368,083)	(22,291,729)
Net assets		142,694,390	129,439,090
Equity attributable to equity holders
Stated capital	6	49,661,314	49,704,414
Retained earnings		93,033,076	79,734,676
Total Shareholders’ equity		142,694,390	129,439,090
Net asset value per redeemable participating preference share (pence)	7	134.05	121.55

The financial statements and notes on pages 60 to 80 were approved by the directors on 24 March 2025 and signed on behalf of the Board by:

Michael Phair Andrew Zychowski

Director Director

The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

Statement of Comprehensive Income of the Fund

For the year ended 31 December 2024

	Notes	Revenue GBP	Capital GBP	2024 Total GBP	2023 Total GBP
Revenue
Dividend income	8	9,017,257	–	9,017,257	9,004,249
Interest income	8	85,246	–	85,246	91,389
Net movement in the fair value of securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	9	–	12,852,158	12,852,158	(6,799,595)
Net movement on foreign exchange		–	1,579,028	1,579,028	698,809
Total revenue		9,102,503	14,431,186	23,533,689	2,994,852
Expenditure
Investment management fees	2o	375,146	562,719	937,865	916,770
Custodian fees	2l	16,316	–	16,316	15,323
Corporate Broker’s fees	2m	67,175	–	67,175	65,483
Directors’ fees and expenses		146,631	–	146,631	154,809
Legal and professional fees		11,697	–	11,697	6,558
Audit fees		39,000	–	39,000	39,000
Tax fees		6,948	–	6,948	7,560
Registrar’s fees		49,496	–	49,496	44,779
Administration and secretarial fees	2k	133,981	–	133,981	130,967
General expenses		160,156	–	160,156	190,771
Investor relations fee	2u	173,211	–	173,211	170,748
Operating expenses		1,179,757	562,719	1,742,476	1,742,768
Net operating profit before finance costs		7,922,746	13,868,467	21,791,213	1,252,084
Finance costs	2r	(602,287)	(903,431)	(1,505,718)	(1,570,018)
Profit/(loss) before tax		7,320,459	12,965,036	20,285,495	(317,934)
Withholding tax expense	12	(1,343,801)	–	(1,343,801)	(1,341,655)
Net profit/(loss) after taxation		5,976,658	12,965,036	18,941,694	(1,659,589)
Profit/(loss) per redeemable participating preference share – basic and diluted (pence)	10	5.61	12.18	17.79	(1.56)

The total column of this statement represents the Fund’s Statement of Comprehensive Income, prepared in accordance with UK- adopted IFRS. There are no items of other comprehensive income, therefore net profit/(loss) after taxation is the total comprehensive income. The supplementary revenue and capital columns are both prepared in accordance with the Statement of Recommended Practice issued by the AIC as disclosed in note 2a. All items in the above statement derive from continuing operations. No operations were acquired or discontinued in the year.

There are £nil (2023: £nil) earnings attributable to the management shares.

The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

Statement of Changes in Redeemable Participating Preference Shareholders’ Equity of the Fund

For the year ended 31 December 2024

	Notes	Stated Capital Account GBP	Retained Income GBP	Total GBP
At 1 January 2023		49,704,414	86,931,602	136,636,016
Loss for the year		–	(1,659,589)	(1,659,589)
Dividends	11	–	(5,537,337)	(5,537,337)
At 31 December 2023		49,704,414	79,734,676	129,439,090
Buyback of shares during year	6	(43,100)	–	(43,100)
Profit for the year		–	18,941,694	18,941,694
Dividends	11	–	(5,643,294)	(5,643,294)
At 31 December 2024		49,661,314	93,033,076	142,694,390

The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

Statement of Cash Flows of the Fund

For the year ended 31 December 2024

		2024	2023
	Notes	GBP	GBP
Cash flows from operating activities
Net profit/(loss) after taxation		18,941,694	(1,659,589)
Adjustments for:
Net movement in the fair value of securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	9	(12,852,158)	6,799,595
Realised gains on foreign exchange	2p	(1,401,441)	(1,345,395)
Unrealised (gains)/losses on foreign exchange	2p	(177,587)	646,586
Payment for purchases of securities		(64,019,103)	(46,058,637)
Proceeds from sale of securities		53,561,820	55,587,931
Operating cash flows before movements in working capital		(5,946,775)	13,970,491
Increase in receivables		(109,799)	(24,452)
Increase/(decrease) in payables and accruals		23,448	(152,089)
Net generated (used in)/from operating activities		(6,033,126)	13,793,950
Cash flows generated used in financing activities
Repayments of borrowings		(352,730,557)	(236,205,147)
Buyback of shares	6	(43,100)	–
New bank loans raised		361,474,806	230,999,895
Dividends paid	11	(5,643,294)	(5,537,337)
Net cash generated from/(used in) financing activities		3,057,855	(10,742,589)
Net (decrease)/increase in cash and cash equivalents		(2,975,271)	3,051,361
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year		4,433,118	1,523,392
Effect of foreign exchange rate changes		(112,316)	(141,635)
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the year		1,345,531	4,433,118
Cash and cash equivalents made up of:
Cash at bank	4	1,345,531	4,433,118

The accompanying notes on pages 64 to 80 form an integral part of these financial statements.

Notes to the Financial Statements of the Fund

For the year ended 31 December 2024

1. General Information

The Company is a closed-ended investment company incorporated in Jersey on 24 May 2006 and is regulated for Financial Services Business by the JFSC. The Company has one closed-ended cell, Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC, also referred to as the “Fund”. The Fund seeks to provide shareholders with a high level of dividends as well as capital growth over the longer term. The Fund intends to pay dividends on a quarterly basis each year. The Fund seeks to achieve its investment objective by investing predominantly in the securities of companies and REITs domiciled in Canada and the U.S. that the Investment Manager believes will provide an attractive level of distributions, together with the prospect for capital growth. In 2015, shareholders also approved an amendment to the Investment Policy to increase the percentage of the value of portfolio assets which may be invested in securities listed on recognised stock exchanges outside Canada to up to 40 per cent.

The address of the Company’s registered office is 28 Esplanade, St. Helier, Jersey JE2 3QA, Channel Islands.

The Fund’s shares have been admitted to the Official List of the FCA and to trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market for listed securities.

The Company and Fund have no employees.

The functional and presentational currency of the Company and the Fund is Pounds Sterling (‘GBP’) as the Fund is trading on the London Stock Exchange’s Main Market.

2. Summary of Material Accounting Policy Information

a. Basis of preparation

The financial statements of the Fund have been prepared on the historical cost basis, except for the measurement at fair value of investments and derivatives, and in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS and interpretations issued by the IFRSIC. The preparation of the Financial Statements in conformity with IFRS requires the directors to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the Financial Statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting year. Although these estimates are based on management’s best knowledge of current events and actions, actual results may ultimately differ from those estimates.

Where presentational guidance set out in the SORP Financial Statements of Investment Trust Companies and Venture Capital Trusts (July 2022) issued by the AIC is consistent with the requirements of IFRS, the directors have prepared the Financial Statements on a basis compliant with the recommendations of the SORP. The supplementary information which analyses the Statement of Comprehensive Income between items of a revenue and a capital nature is presented in accordance with the SORP.

The financial statements are prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS as required by the UK Listing and the Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules. Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 prescribes which generally accepted accounting principles are allowed to be adopted by Jersey market traded companies in the preparation of their annual financial statements.

Critical accounting estimates and judgements

The preparation of the Financial Statements in conformity with IFRS requires the use of certain critical accounting estimates. It also requires management to exercise its judgement in the process of applying the accounting policies.

The following are the critical judgements that the directors have made in the process of applying the accounting policies that have the most significant effect on the amounts recognised in the financial statements.

Expenses have been charged to the Statement of Comprehensive Income and shown in the revenue column. Management fees and finance costs have been allocated 60% to capital and 40% to revenue. This is in accordance with the Board’s expected long-term split of returns, in the form of capital gains and income respectively, from the investment portfolio.

There were no judgements made in relation to the fair value of the investments, as all investments are quoted.

Adoption of new standards and amendments

The following amendments to existing standards that are effective for the first time for the financial period beginning 1 January 2024 that have had an immaterial impact on the Company and the Fund:

Disclosure of Accounting Policies (Amendments to IAS 1 and IFRS Practice Statement 2)

The Company has adopted the amendments to IAS 1 for the first time in the current period. The amendments change the requirements in IAS 1 regarding disclosure of accounting policies. The amendments replace all instances of the term ‘significant accounting policies’ with ‘material accounting policy information’. Accounting policy information is material if, when considered together with other information included in an entity’s financial statements, it can reasonably be expected to influence decisions that the primary users of general purpose financial statements make on the basis of those financial statements.

The supporting paragraphs in IAS 1 are also amended to clarify that accounting policy information that relates to immaterial transactions, other events or conditions is immaterial and need not be disclosed. Accounting policy information may be material because of the nature of the related transactions, other events or conditions, even if the amounts are immaterial. However, not all accounting policy information relating to material transactions, other events or conditions is itself material.

The IASB has also developed guidance and examples to explain and demonstrate the application of the ‘four-step materiality process’ described in IFRS Practice Statement 2.

Amendments to IAS 1 Classification of Liabilities as Current or Non-current

The group has adopted the amendments to IAS 1, published in January 2020, for the first time in the current year.

The amendments affect only the presentation of liabilities as current or non-current in the statement of financial position and not the amount or timing of recognition of any asset, liability, income or expenses, or the information disclosed about those items.

The amendments clarify that the classification of liabilities as current or non-current is based on rights that are in existence at the end of the reporting period, specify that classification is unaffected by expectations about whether an entity will exercise its right to defer settlement of a liability, explain that rights are in existence if covenants are complied with at the end of the reporting period, and introduce a definition of ‘settlement’ to make clear that settlement refers to the transfer to the counterparty of cash, equity instruments, other assets or services.

Amendments to IAS 1 Presentation of Financial Statements Non-current Liabilities with Covenants

The group has adopted the amendments to IAS 1, published in November 2022, for the first time in the current year. The amendments specify that only covenants that an entity is required to comply with on or before the end of the reporting period affect the entity’s right to defer settlement of a liability for at least twelve months after the reporting date (and therefore must be considered in assessing the classification of the liability as current or non-current). Such covenants affect whether the right exists at the end of the reporting period, even if compliance with the covenant is assessed only after the reporting date (e.g. a covenant based on the entity’s financial position at the reporting date that is assessed for compliance only after the reporting date). The IASB also specifies that the right to defer settlement of a liability for at least twelve months after the reporting date is not affected if an entity only has to comply with a covenant after the reporting period. However, if the entity’s right to defer settlement of a liability is subject to the entity complying with covenants within twelve months after the reporting period, an entity discloses information that enables users of financial statements to understand the risk of the liabilities becoming repayable within twelve months after the reporting period. This would include information about the covenants (including the nature of the covenants and when the entity is required to comply with them), the carrying amount of related liabilities and facts and circumstances, if any, that indicate that the entity may have difficulties complying with the covenants.

The Company has adopted the amendments to IAS 8 for the first time in the current year. The amendments replace the definition of a change in accounting estimates with a definition of accounting estimates. Under the new definition, accounting estimates are “monetary amounts in financial statements that are subject to measurement uncertainty”. The definition of a change in accounting estimates was deleted.

There are no other standards, interpretations or amendments to the existing standards that are not yet effective that would be expected to have a significant impact on the Company.

New standards and interpretations not yet effective and have not been adopted early by the Company

• Amendments to IAS 21, ‘The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates: Lack of exchangeability’. (effective periods commencing on or after 1 January 2025 for IFRS).

• Amendments to IFRS 9 and IFRS 7 ‘Amendments to the Classification and Measurement of Financial Instruments’. (effective periods commencing on or after 1 January 2026 for IFRS).

• IFRS 18 ‘Presentation and Disclosure in Financial Statements’. (effective periods commencing on or after 1 January 2027 for IFRS).

There are no other standards, interpretations or amendments to existing standards that are not yet effective that would be expected to have a significant impact on the Company.

b. Financial instruments

Financial instruments carried on the Statement of Financial Position include securities, accrued dividend income, cash at bank, loan payable, other payables and accruals. The particular recognition methods adopted are disclosed in the individual policy statements associated with each item.

Disclosures about financial instruments to which the Fund is a party are provided in Note 16.

c. Securities

Investments in listed securities have been classified as fair value through profit or loss securities and are those securities intended to be held for a short period of time but which may be sold in response to needs for liquidity or changes in interest rates. These are held at fair value through profit or loss, as they are managed and the performance evaluated on a fair value basis.

Fair value through profit or loss securities are initially recognised as at fair value, which is taken to be the cost. The securities are subsequently re-measured at fair value based on quoted bid prices on the stock exchange at the reporting date. Gains and losses arising from changes in the fair value of these securities are recognised in profit or loss as they arise.

All purchases and sales of investments and trading securities that require delivery within the time frame established by regulation or market convention (“regular way” purchases and sales) are recognised at the trade date, which is the date on which the Fund commits to purchase or sell the asset. In cases which are not within the time frame established by regulation or market convention, such transactions are recognised on the settlement date. Any change in fair value of the asset to be received is recognised between the trade date and the settlement date.

d. Receivables

Trade and other receivables are recognised when the Fund becomes a party to the contractual provisions of the receivables. They are measured, at initial recognition, at fair value plus transaction costs, if any. They are subsequently measured at amortised cost. The amortised cost is the amount recognised on the receivable initially, minus principal repayments, plus cumulative amortisation (interest) using the effective interest method (except for short term receivables where the recognition of interest would be immaterial) of any difference between the initial amount and the maturity amount, adjusted for any loss allowance.

e. Cash and cash equivalents

Cash includes amounts held in interest bearing accounts. Cash and cash equivalents comprise bank balances and cash held by the Fund. The carrying value of these assets approximates their fair value.

f. Prepayments

Prepayments comprise amounts paid in advance including, but not limited to, payments for insurance, listing fees and AIC membership fees. Payments are expensed to the Statement of Comprehensive Income over the period for which the Fund is receiving the benefit of these expenditures.

g. Provisions

A provision is recognised when the Fund has a legal or constructive obligation as a result of a past event, and it is probable that an outflow of economic benefits will be required to settle the obligations.

h. Share capital

Redeemable participating preference shares are only redeemable at the sole option of the directors, participate in the net income of the Fund during its life and are classified as equity in line with IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation (see Note 6). Buyback shares are measured at cost and deducted from equity. Transaction costs relating to buyback shares do not form part of cost of the buyback shares.

i. Net asset value per redeemable participating preference share

The NAV per redeemable participating preference share is calculated by dividing the net assets attributable to redeemable participating preference shareholders included in the Statement of Financial Position by the number of redeemable participating preference shares in issue at the year end.

j. Issue costs

The expenditure directly attributable to the launch of the Fund’s shares and all other costs incurred on the launch and subsequent issues of the Fund’s shares are written off immediately against proceeds raised.

k. Administration and secretarial fees

Under the provisions of the Administration Agreement dated 18 August 2011 between the Fund and JTC Fund Solutions (Jersey) Limited as Administrator, the Administrator is entitled to a fee for administrative and secretarial services payable by the Fund quarterly in arrears at a rate of 0.10 per cent. per annum of the average NAV of the Fund calculated over the relevant quarterly period.

l. Custodian fees

The Custodian was appointed as Custodian of the Fund’s assets on 6 October 2011. The Fund pays the Custodian 0.01 per cent. per annum of the Fund’s NAV, accrued for at each valuation date.

m. Corporate Broker’s fees

The Fund pays the Corporate Broker quarterly in arrears at a rate of 0.05 per cent. per annum of the average NAV of the Fund calculated over the relevant period.

n. Going concern

In the opinion of the directors, the Company and the Fund have adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future being at least the next twelve months from the approval of these financial statements. For this reason, the Financial Statements have been prepared using the going concern basis.

The directors considered, inter alia, the following factors:

• ongoing shareholder interest in the continuation of the Fund;

• the Fund has sufficient liquidity in the form of cash assets to meet all on-going expenses;

• should the need arise, the directors have the option to reduce dividend payments in order to positively affect the Fund’s cash flows; and

• the Fund’s investments in Canadian and U.S. securities are readily realisable to meet liquidity requirements, if necessary.

The directors appreciate the severity of the current economic environment and continue to assess, in conjunction with the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor, the situation and how it may impact the Company in the short and long term. The directors consider the Company to be well placed to withstand any significant adverse shocks and assume the going concern basis to be appropriate.

The requisition notice received by the Company on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Company. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Company’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates.

Following consultation with a number of the Company’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Company announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Company and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders.

At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Company may put to shareholders will be made in due course. Although the Board is confident that the Company will have sufficient financial resources to meet its obligations due within twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements, the uncertain future outcome of the Board’s deliberations indicates the existence of a material uncertainty that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Nevertheless, the Board believes that it is appropriate to continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the financial statements.

o. Investment management fees

The Investment Manager is entitled to a management fee payable by the Fund quarterly in arrears at a rate of 0.70 per cent. per annum of the average NAV of the Fund calculated over the relevant quarterly period.

Investment management fees for the year ended 31 December 2024 total £937,865 (31 December 2023: £916,770). The fee is split between the Investment Manager and the Investment Advisor at a ratio of 0.60 per cent: 0.10 per cent of the 0.70 per cent fee.

Investment management fees have been split 60% to capital and 40% to revenue (see note 2a for further details regarding the allocation of the management fees).

p. Foreign currency translation

Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated into Pound Sterling at exchange rates in effect at the reporting date. Realised and unrealised gains and losses on foreign currency transactions are charged or credited to the Statement of Comprehensive Income as foreign currency gains and losses. The cost of investments, and income and expenditure are translated into Pound Sterling based on exchange rates on the date of the transaction. Realised gains on foreign exchange currency transactions totalled £1,401,441 for the year (2023: gains of £1,309,333). Realised gains on forward exchange contracts totalled £ nil (2023: gains of £36,062). Unrealised gains on foreign currency translations totalled £177,587 (2023: losses of £646,586).

q. Revenue recognition

Dividend income arises from equity investments held and is recognised on the date investments are marked ‘ex-dividend’. Where the Company elects to receive dividends in the form of additional shares rather than cash, the equivalent to the cash dividend is recognised as income in revenue and any excess in value of the shares received over this is recognised in capital. Dividend income is shown gross of withholding tax. Interest income arises from cash and cash equivalents and quoted bonds and is recognised in the Statement of Comprehensive Income using the effective interest method.

Special dividends are reviewed on a case by case basis in determining whether the dividend is to be treated as revenue or capital. Amounts recognised as revenue will form part of the distributable revenue. Amounts recognised as capital are included in realised gains. The tax accounting treatment follows the treatment of the principal amount.

r. Loan payable and finance costs

Loan payable is initially measured at fair value and is subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest rate method. The effective interest rate method is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a ﬁnancial liability and of allocating interest expense over the relevant period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash payments through the expected life of the ﬁnancial liability or, where appropriate, a shorter period, to the net carrying amount on initial recognition.

s. Related parties

Related parties are individuals and companies who have the ability, directly or indirectly, to control the other party or exercise significant influence over the other party in making financial and operating decisions (see Note 13).

t. Business and geographical segments

The directors are of the opinion that the Fund is engaged in a single segment of business investing predominantly in securities and REITs domiciled in Canada and the U.S. to which the Fund is solely exposed and therefore no segmental reporting is provided.

u. Investor relations fee

The Investment Advisor and Investment Manager are paid an additional fee for investor relations services totalling as the lesser of 15 basis points of the market value of the Fund or £200,000 per annum, with the fee to be calculated daily based on the closing market value of the Fund and payable quarterly in arrears.

Investor relations fee for the year ended 31 December 2024 total £173,211 (31 December 2023: £170,748).

3. Securities (at fair value through profit and loss)

	2024	2023
	GBP	GBP
Quoted/listed Equities	169,952,944	146,643,502

Please refer to Note 22 for the Schedule of Investments.

4. Cash and cash equivalents

	2024	2023
	GBP	GBP
Cash at bank	1,345,531	4,433,118

Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash held by the Fund and bank balances with an original maturity of three months or less. The carrying value of these assets approximates their fair value.

5. Other payables and accruals

	2024	2023
	GBP	GBP
Investment management fees (Note 13)	254,113	220,372
Corporate Broker’s fees	18,151	15,741
Audit fees	39,000	39,000
Administration fees	36,302	31,481
General expenses	17,970	22,334
Registrar’s fees	10,286	9,466
Tax service fees	6,894	6,840
Custodian fees	3,560	3,148
Investor relations fee (Note 13)	48,653	40,111
	434,929	388,493

6. Stated capital

The authorised share capital of the Fund is split into two management shares of no par value and an unlimited number of redeemable participating preference shares of no par value, the latter of which are attributable solely to the Fund.

	No. of shares	GBP
Management shares issued
2 management shares of no par value issued at 100.00 pence each	2	2
At 31 December 2024 and 2023	2	2
Redeemable participating preference shares issued (excluding shares held in treasury)
At 31 December 2023	106,487,250	49,704,412
28 August 2024, 20,000 shares of no par value repurchased at £ 1.075 each	(20,000)	(21,500)
30 August 2024, 20,000 shares of no par value repurchased at £ 1.08 each	(20,000)	(21,600)
At 31 December 2024	106,447,250	49,661,312
Total		49,661,314

The holders of redeemable participating preference shares are entitled to receive in proportion to their holdings, all of the revenue profits of the Fund (including accumulated revenue reserves).

Each redeemable participating preference shareholder is entitled to one vote for each share held, provided all amounts payable in respect of that share have been paid.

Management shares are non-redeemable, have no right in respect of the accrued entitlement, and have no right to participate in the assets of the Fund on a winding-up. In all other respects, the management shares have the same rights and restrictions as redeemable participating preference shares. Each management share entitles the holder to one vote for each share held.

Redeemable participating preference shares are redeemed at the absolute discretion of the directors. Since redemption is at the discretion of the directors, in accordance with the provisions of IAS 32, the redeemable participating preference shares are classified as equity. The Fund will not give effect to redemption requests in respect of more than 25 per cent. of the shares then in issue, or such lesser percentage as the directors may decide.

At the year end, there were 18,235,000 (31 December 2023: 18,195,000) treasury shares in issue. Treasury shares have no value and no voting rights.

FCA regulation of ‘non-mainstream pooled investments’

On 1 January 2014, the FCA introduced rules relating to the restrictions on the retail distribution of unregulated collective investment schemes and close substitutes (non-mainstream pooled investments). UK investment trusts are excluded from these restrictions, as are other “excluded securities” as defined by the FCA.

As reported in last year’s annual report, the Board believes that the Company’s shares are “excluded securities” under the FCA’s definitions of such and, as a result, the FCA’s restrictions on retail distribution do not apply. This status is reviewed annually and the Board intends to conduct the Company’s affairs to retain such status for the foreseeable future.

Retained Earnings

This reserve records all net gains and losses and transactions with owners not recorded elsewhere. This reserve is available for distribution to the shareholders. Dividends paid to shareholders are recognised directly in this reserve.

7. Net asset value per redeemable participating preference share

The NAV per share of 134.05p (31 December 2023: 121.55p) is based on the net assets at the year end of £142,694,390 (31 December 2023: £129,439,090) and on 106,447,250 redeemable participating preference shares, being the number of redeemable participating preference shares in issue at the year end (31 December 2023: 106,487,250 shares).

8. Dividend and interest income

			2024
	Revenue	Capital	Total	2023
	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Interest Income	85,246	–	85,246	91,389
Dividend income	9,017,257	–	9,017,257	9,004,249
	9,102,503	–	9,102,503	9,095,638

9. Net movement in the fair value of securities

			2024
	Revenue	Capital	Total	2023
	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Gains on sale of securities	–	5,635,000	5,635,000	608,988
Gains/(losses) on the revaluation of securities at year end	–	7,217,158	7,217,158	(7,408,583)
Net movement in the fair value of securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	–	12,852,158	12,852,158	(6,799,595)

10. Profit/(loss) per redeemable participating preference share – basic and diluted

Basic profit/(loss) per redeemable participating preference share is calculated by dividing the net profit attributable to redeemable participating preference shares of £18,941,694 (31 December 2023: £1,659,589 loss) by the weighted average number of redeemable participating preference shares outstanding during the year of 106,473,698 shares (31 December 2023: 106,487,250 shares). The allocation between revenue and capital can be found on the Statement of Comprehensive Income of the Fund on page 61.

11. Dividends

Dividends of 1.325 pence per share were paid on a quarterly basis during the year in the months of January, April, July and October being 5.3 pence per share for the year and totalling £5,643,294 (31 December 2023: £5,537,337). On 31 January 2025 a dividend of £1,463,650 was paid of 1.375 pence per share. In accordance with the requirements of IFRS, as this was approved on 2 January 2025, being after the reporting date, no accrual was reflected in the 2024 Financial Statements for this amount of £1,463,650 (31 December 2023: £1,410,956).

Dividends payable in respect of the financial year, which is the basis on which the requirements of Section 1158/1159 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 are considered (see note 12) comprise the dividends paid in April, July and October of the financial year together with the dividend paid in January following the financial year end. For 2024 these dividends amounted to 5.35 pence per share (for 2023: 5.225 pence per share)

12. Taxation

The Fund is subject to UK corporation tax at a rate of 25% (2023: 19% for three months and 25% for nine months of the year). The Company adopted UK tax residency on 11 October 2011. Since that date the Company has been managed in such a way as to be able to meet the conditions for approval as an investment trust under Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010. As an investment trust, all capital gains are exempt from UK corporation tax. On 7 December 2012, the Company received approval from HM Revenue & Customs to be treated as an investment trust in accordance with Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 and will seek to remain so approved.

The Fund incurred £1,343,801 (2023: £1,341,655) of withholding tax on foreign dividends during the year and this expense has been included in the Statement of Comprehensive Income.

13. Related party transactions

The directors are regarded as related parties and key management personnel. Total directors’ fees earned during the year amounted to £126,000 of which £Nil was due at year end (2023: £125,215 of which £Nil was due at the year end). Each non-executive director, other than Mr. Orrico, earned a fee of £29,000 in respect of the financial year (2023: £29,000), the Chairman earned a fee of £36,000 (2023: £36,000) and the Chairman of the Audit Committee £32,000 (2023: £32,000). Mr Orrico waived any right to charge a fee in 2024 and 2023.

The directors held an interest in shares and received dividends during the year. Their interest in shares and the dividends received during the year are disclosed within the Directors’ Remuneration Report.

The Investment Advisor and Investment Manager are also regarded as a related party due to common ownership. Total management fees paid during the year amounted to £937,865 (2023: £916,770), of which £254,113 (2023: £220,372) was outstanding at 31 December 2024.

The Investment Advisor and Investment Manager are also paid an additional fee for investor relations services. The fee for the year ended 31 December 2024 amounted to £173,211 (31 December 2023: £170,748), of which £48,653 (2023: £40,111) was outstanding at 31 December 2024.

The fees for the above are all arm’s length transactions.

14. Loan payable

The Fund has a credit facility agreement with RBC whereby RBC provides a credit facility, with a maximum principal amount of the lesser of CAD 75,000,000 and 25 per cent. of the total asset value of the Fund. The credit facility was amended on 3 April, 2024 to replace Banker’s Acceptances with CORRA (Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average administered and published by the Bank of Canada) loans.

At 31 December 2024, the amount drawn down under the credit facility was CAD 52,000,000 (GBP equivalent at amortised cost of £28,884,872) (31 December 2023: CAD 37,000,000 (GBP equivalent at amortised cost of £21,831,966)). The loan value of CAD 52,000,000 was made up of three loans as follows:

Issue date	Maturity date	Loan amount
12 December 2024	13 January 2025	CAD10,000,000
16 December 2024	15 January 2025	CAD10,000,000
18 December 2024	18 February 2025	CAD32,000,000

As at 31 December 2024, the interest paid on the Banker’s Acceptance and Term CORRA loans totalled £1,458,822 (year ended 31 December 2023 [Banker’s Acceptance only]: £1,388,175) with £48,282 accrued at year end.

Interest on Prime Loans is Prime Rate minus 0.35 per cent. In the case of Term CORRA loans, the Term CORRA rate plus 0.60 per cent. per annum is payable.

15. Security agreement

In connection with entry into the credit facility agreement, the Fund has entered into a general security agreement with RBC, pursuant to which the Fund has granted RBC interests in respect of collateral, being all present and future personal property, including the securities portfolio, as security for the Fund’s obligations under the credit facility agreement.

16. Financial instruments

Fair values

The carrying amounts of the investments, accrued income, other receivables, cash and cash equivalents, loan payable and other payables approximate their fair values.

Management of capital

The Investment Manager manages the capital of the Fund in accordance with the Fund’s Investment Objectives and Policy.

The capital structure of the Fund consists of proceeds from the issue of preference shares, loans and reserve accounts. The Investment Manager manages and adjusts its capital in response to general economic conditions, the risk characteristics of the underlying assets and working capital requirements. Generally speaking, the Fund will reduce leverage when investments are likely to decrease in value and will increase leverage when investment appreciation is anticipated. In order to maintain or adjust its capital structure, the Fund may borrow or repay debt under its Credit Facility or undertake other activities deemed appropriate under the specific circumstances. The Fund and the Company do not have any externally imposed capital requirements. However, the Fund is subject to bank covenants in respect of leverage and complied with those covenants for the whole of both 2024 and 2023.

Investment and trading activities

It is intended that the Fund will continue throughout its life to be primarily invested in a Canadian and U.S. equities portfolio. In 2015, the percentage of the value of portfolio assets which may be invested in securities listed on a recognised stock exchange outside Canada was increased to up to 40 per cent. At year end, 4.36% of the portfolio was invested in securities outside of Canada.

The Fund’s investing activities expose it to various types of risk that are associated with the financial instruments and markets in which it invests. The most important types of financial risk to which the Fund is exposed are market price risk, interest rate risk and currency risk.

Credit risk

Credit risk is the risk that an issuer or counterparty may be unable or unwilling to meet a commitment that it has entered into with the Fund.

The Fund’s principal financial assets are bank balances and cash, other receivables and investments as set out in the Statement of Financial Position which represents the Fund’s maximum exposure to credit risk in relation to the financial assets. The credit risk on bank balances is limited because the counterparties are banks with high credit ratings of A, A- and BBB+ assigned by Standard and Poor’s rating agency. All transactions in listed securities are settled upon delivery using approved brokers.

The risk of default is considered minimal as delivery of securities sold is only made once the broker has received payment. Payment is made on a purchase once the securities have been received by the broker. The trade will fail if either party fails to meet its obligations. Where the Investment Manager makes an investment in debt or corporate securities, the credit rating of the issuer is taken into account to manage the Company’s exposure to risk of default. Investments in debt or corporate securities are across a variety of sectors and geographical markets, to avoid concentration of credit risk.

The Fund’s maximum exposure to credit risk is the carrying value of the assets on the Statement of Financial Position.

Market price risk

Market price risk is the risk that the fair value or future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in market prices (other than those arising from interest rate risk or currency risk), whether those changes are caused by factors specific to the individual financial instrument or its issuer, or factors affecting similar financial instruments traded in the market. The Fund’s exposure to market price risk is comprised mainly of movements in the value of the Fund’s investments.

It is the business of the Investment Manager to manage the portfolio and borrowings to achieve the best returns. The directors manage the risk inherent in the portfolio by monitoring, on a formal basis, the Investment Manager’s compliance with the Company’s stated Investment Policy and reviewing investment performance.

Country risk

On 17 January 2012, the FRC released “Responding to the increased country and currency risk in financial reports”. This update from the FRC included guidance on responding to the increased country and currency risk as a result of funding pressures on certain European countries, the curtailment of capital spending programs (austerity measures) and regime changes in the Middle East.

The Fund invests primarily in Canadian and U.S. securities. The Investment Manager monitors the Company’s exposure to foreign currencies on a daily basis. The Board has reviewed the disclosures and believes that no additional disclosures are required because the Canadian and U.S. economies are stable.

Fair value measurements

IFRS 13 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy under IFRS 13 are as follows:

• Level 1 fair value measurements are those derived from quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities; or

• Level 2 fair value measurements are those derived from inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly (that is, as prices) or indirectly (that is, derived from prices); or

• Level 3 fair value measurements are those derived from valuation techniques that include inputs for the asset or liability that are not based on observable market data (that is, unobservable inputs).

The level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement is determined on the basis of the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. For this purpose, the significance of an input is assessed against the fair value measurement in its entirety. If a fair value measurement uses observable inputs that require significant adjustment based on unobservable inputs, that measurement is a level 3 measurement. Assessing the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, considering factors specific to the asset or liability.

The determination of what constitutes ‘observable’ requires significant judgment by the Directors. The Directors consider observable data to be that market data that is readily available, regularly distributed or updated, reliable and verifiable, not proprietary, and provided by independent sources that are actively involved in the relevant market.

The following tables present the Fund’s financial instruments by level within the valuation hierarchy as of 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2023:

	Level 1	Level 2	Level 3	Total
31 December 2024	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Financial assets
Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	169,952,944	–	–	169,952,944

	Level 1	Level 2	Level 3	Total
31 December 2023	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Financial assets
Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	146,643,502	–	–	146,643,502

The Fund holds securities that are traded in active markets. Such financial instruments are classified as Level 1 of the IFRS 13 fair value hierarchy. There were no transfers between Level 1, 2 and 3 in the year.

Market Price sensitivity

At 31 December 2024, if the market prices of the securities had been 30% higher with all other variables held constant, the increase in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable participating preference shares for the year would have been £50,985,883 (2023: £43,993,051) higher, arising due to the increase in the fair value of financial assets at fair value through profit or loss.

At 31 December 2024, if the market prices of the securities had been 30% lower with all other variables held constant, the decrease in net assets attributable to holders of redeemable shares for the year would have been equal, but opposite, to the figures stated above.

Interest rate risk

Interest rate risk is the risk that the fair value or future cash flows of a financial instrument will fluctuate because of changes in market interest rates.

The Fund’s interest rate sensitive assets and liabilities mainly comprise cash and cash equivalents, debt securities and loan payable. The cash and cash equivalents are subject to floating rates and are considered to be part of the investment strategy of the Fund. No other hedging is undertaken in respect of this interest rate risk.

There were no fixed rate assets or liabilities at 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2023.

The following table details the Fund’s exposure to interest rate risk at 31 December 2024 and 31 December 2023:

	Floating rate assets
	Weighted		Weighted
	average interest	2024	average interest	2023
	at year end	GBP	at year end	GBP
Assets
Floating rate assets
Cash and cash equivalents	*	1,345,531	*	4,433,118
		1,345,531		4,433,118

* Interest on bank balances is not material to the financial statements and are based on prevailing bank base rates.

	Floating rate liabilities
	2024	2023
	GBP	GBP
Liabilities
Floating rate liabilities
Loan payable (See Note 14)	28,884,872	21,831,966
	28,884,872	27,831,966

The above analysis excludes short-term debtors and creditors as all material amounts are non-interest bearing.

Interest rate sensitivity analysis

At 31 December 2024, had interest rates been 50 basis points higher and all other variables were held constant, the Company’s net assets attributable to redeemable participating preference shares for the year would have decreased by £137,697 (31 December 2023: £86,994) due to an increase in interest payable on the loan and to a lesser extent an increase in interest earnings on cash and cash equivalents.

Liquidity risk

Liquidity risk is the risk that the Fund cannot meet its liabilities as they fall due. The Fund’s primary source of liquidity consists of cash and cash equivalents, securities at fair value through profit or loss and the credit facility.

The Fund’s investments are considered to be readily realisable, predominantly issued by Canadian and U.S. companies and REITs listed on a Canadian Stock Exchange and actively traded.

As at 31 December 2024, the Fund’s ability to manage liquidity risk was as follows:

	Less than		3 months to	More than
	1 month	1-3 months	1 year	1 year	Total
	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Assets
Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	169,952,944	–	–	–	169,952,944
Accrued dividend income	719,453	24,221	–	–	743,674
Cash and cash equivalents	1,345,531	–	–	–	1,345,531
	172,017,928	24,221	–	–	172,042,149
Liabilities
Other payables and accruals	(434,929)	–	–	–	(434,929)
Interest payable	(21,788)	(26,494)	–	–	(48,282)
Loan payable	(11,109,566)	(17,775,306)	–	–	(28,884,872)
	(11,566,283)	(17,801,800)	–	–	(29,368,083)
	160,451,645	(17,777,579)	–	–	142,674,066

As at 31 December 2023, the Fund’s ability to manage liquidity risk was as follows:

	Less than		3 months to	More than
	1 month	1-3 months	1 year	1 year	Total
	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Assets
Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	146,643,502	–	–	–	146,643,502
Other receivables	557,895	74,517	–	–	632,412
Cash and cash equivalents	4,433,118	–	–	–	4,433,118
	151,634,515	74,517	–	–	151,709,032
Liabilities
Other payables and accruals	(388,493)	–	–	–	(388,493)
Interest payable	(71,270)	–	–	–	(71,270)
Loan payable	(21,831,966)	–	–	–	(21,831,966)
	(22,291,729)	–	–	–	(22,291,729)
	129,342,786	74,517	–	–	129,417,303

Currency risk

The Fund is denominated in GBP, whereas the Fund’s principal investments are denominated in CAD and USD. Consequently, the Fund is exposed to currency risk. The Fund’s policy is therefore to actively monitor exposure to currency risk. The Board reserves the right to employ currency hedging but, other than in exceptional circumstances, does not intend to hedge. The Board considers that exposure was significant at the year end. The fund does not employ any derivative contracts to hedge against exposure to currency risk in line with the decision of the board of directors.

The Fund’s net exposure to CAD currency at the year end was as follows:

	2024	2023
	GBP	GBP
Assets
Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	169,952,944	146,643,502
Cash and cash equivalents	757,724	4,193,885
Accrued income	743,674	632,412
	171,454,342	151,469,799

	2024	2023
	GBP	GBP
Liabilities
Loan payable	28,884,872	21,831,966
Interest payable	48,282	71,270
General expenses	–	–
	28,933,154	21,903,236

The Fund’s net exposure to USD currency at the year end was as follows:

	2024	2023
	GBP	GBP
Assets
Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)	–	–
Cash and cash equivalents	101,771	82,692
	101,771	82,692

Sensitivity analysis

At 31 December 2024, had GBP strengthened against the CAD by 5%, with all other variables held constant, the decrease in net assets attributable to shareholders would amount to approximately £7,126,059 (31 December 2023: £6,478,328). Had GBP weakened against the CAD by 5%, this would amount to an increase in net assets attributable to shareholders of approximately £7,126,059 (31 December 2023: £6,478,328).

At 31 December 2024, had GBP strengthened against the USD by 5%, with all other variables held constant, the decrease in net assets attributable to shareholders would amount to approximately £5,088 (31 December 2023: £4,135). Had GBP weakened against the USD by 5%, this would amount to an increase in net assets attributable to shareholders of approximately £5,088 (31 December 2023: £4,135).

17. Cash Flow statement reconciliation of financing activities

			Non-cash changes
				Foreign
	1 January			exchange	Fair value	31 December
	2024	Cash flows	Acquisition	movements	changes	2024
	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Financial liabilities held at amortized cost	21,831,966	8,744,249	–	(1,691,343)	–	28,884,872
Total	21,831,966	8,744,249	–	(1,691,343)	–	28,884,872

			Non-cash changes
				Foreign
	1 January			exchange	Fair value	31 December
	2023	Cash flows	Acquisition	movements	changes	2023
	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP	GBP
Financial liabilities held at amortized cost	27,877,663	(5,205,252)	–	(840,445)	–	21,831,966
Total	27,877,663	(5,205,252)	–	(840,444)	–	21,831,966

18. Post year end events

On 2 January 2025, the Company declared a quarterly dividend of 1.375 pence per share. The ex-dividend date was 9 January 2025 and the record date was 10 January 2025. On 31 January 2025, the dividend of £1,463,650 was paid.

No redeemable preference shares were purchased by the Company subsequent to year end.

The loan of CAD 10,000,000 maturing on 13 January 2025, was renewed with a current maturity date of 14 April 2025.

The loan of CAD 10,000,000 maturing on 15 January 2025, was renewed with a current maturity date of 14 April 2025.

The loan of CAD 32,000,000 maturing on 18 February 2025, was renewed with a maturity date of 18 March 2025. On 18 March 2025, CAD 2,000,000 was paid down, and CAD 30,000,000 was renewed with a maturity date of 17 April 2025.

These loans are expected to be renewed for another 30-60 days upon their respective maturities.

Since the Company’s year end, on 10 February 2025 the Company, together with three other UK-listed closed-end funds, received a requisition notice from Saba, marking the second phase of Saba’s recent activist campaign in the UK-listed closed-end fund sector. The first phase commenced on 18 December 2024 with Saba requisitioning general meetings at seven UK-listed closed-end funds, proposing resolutions (each of which later failed) to remove the current independent directors of those seven funds and replace them with Saba’s own appointees, with a view to also terminating the management contracts and, in due course, replacing the investment managers with Saba. The requisition notice received by the Fund on 10 February 2025 was for the approval by shareholders of the taking of all necessary steps to implement a scheme or process by which shareholders would become (or have the option to become) shareholders of a UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle) implementing a substantially similar strategy to the Company. Such scheme or process could entail shareholders rolling into an existing or newly established UK-listed open-ended investment company (or similar open-ended investment vehicle), in either case managed by the Company’s existing investment manager or one of its affiliates. Following consultation with a number of the Company’s largest shareholders including Saba, and following constructive discussions with Saba, on 21 February 2025 the Company announced that Saba had agreed to withdraw its requisition notice for a period of 60 days to enable the Company and its advisers to formulate proposals that are in the best interests of all shareholders. At the current time, the Board is in the process of considering a number of strategic options in the best interests of shareholders as a whole. A further announcement regarding future proposals which the Fund may put to shareholders will be made in due course.

19. Controlling party

In the directors’ opinion there is no ultimate controlling party.

20. Contingent Liabilities

At 31 December 2024 there were no contingent liabilities, guarantees or financial commitments (2023: £nil)

21. Going Concern and Material Uncertainty

22. Schedule of Investments – Securities (at fair value through profit or loss)

As at 31 December 2024

			Bid-Market
		Book Cost	Value	% of	% of
Description	Shares/Units	GBP	GBP	Net Assets	Portfolio
Equities
Bermuda – Quoted Investments 4.36%
(2023: 0%)
Utilities:
Brookfield Infrastructure
Partners L.P.	180,000	4,337,056	4,523,371	3.17%	2.66%
Brookfield Renewable Partners L.P.	160,000	3,079,282	2,890,265	2.03%	1.70%
		7,416,338	7,413,636	5.20%	4.36%
Canada – Quoted Investments 95.64%
(2023: 100%)
Materials:
Nutrien Ltd.	135,000	5,334,935	4,814,331	3.37%	2.83%
Energy:
ARC Resources Ltd.	160,000	2,043,557	2,311,679	1.62%	1.36%
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd.	265,000	3,505,545	6,521,038	4.57%	3.84%
Cenovus Energy Inc.	140,000	1,724,436	1,694,542	1.19%	1.00%
Paramount Resources Ltd.	160,000	2,419,480	2,812,942	1.97%	1.66%
Parkland Corporation	120,000	2,301,990	2,164,366	1.52%	1.27%
Peyto Exploration & Development Corp.	365,000	2,684,145	3,467,018	2.43%	2.04%
Suncor Energy Inc.	100,000	2,432,647	2,844,049	1.99%	1.67%
Topaz Energy Corp.	315,000	2,923,886	4,852,075	3.40%	2.85%
Tourmaline Oil Corp.	220,000	8,765,732	8,103,429	5.68%	4.77%
Whitecap Resources Inc.	575,000	3,149,422	3,251,492	2.28%	1.91%
		31,950,840	38,022,630	26.65%	22.37%
Financials:
AGF Management Limited Class B	975,000	4,654,905	5,762,532	4.04%	3.39%
Bank of Montreal	85,000	5,280,172	6,576,197	4.61%	3.87%
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce	115,000	3,533,767	5,794,555	4.06%	3.41%
Manulife Financial Corporation	235,000	3,183,396	5,759,310	4.04%	3.39%
National Bank of Canada	45,000	2,113,561	3,269,295	2.29%	1.92%
Power Corporation of Canada	155,000	3,483,393	3,852,936	2.70%	2.27%
Royal Bank of Canada	65,000	4,915,407	6,256,102	4.38%	3.68%
The Bank of Nova Scotia	105,000	4,189,715	4,499,791	3.15%	2.65%
The Toronto-Dominion Bank	108,000	4,803,184	4,591,162	3.22%	2.70%
		36,157,500	46,361,880	32.49%	27.28%
Pipelines:
Enbridge Inc.	235,000	6,421,061	7,956,255	5.58%	4.68%
Gibson Energy Inc.	385,000	5,489,785	5,220,302	3.66%	3.07%
Keyera Corp.	150,000	1,980,830	3,648,659	2.56%	2.15%
Pembina Pipeline Corporation	180,000	3,827,050	5,310,262	3.72%	3.12%
South Bow Corporation	35,000	516,704	658,492	0.46%	0.39%
TC Energy Corporation	160,000	4,921,769	5,941,396	4.16%	3.50%
		23,157,199	28,735,366	20.14%	16.91%
Power and Utilities:
Alta gas Ltd.	200,000	2,877,589	3,711,706	2.60%	2.18%
Capital Power Corporation	140,000	2,463,033	4,943,646	3.46%	2.91%
		5,340,622	8,655,352	6.06%	5.09%
Real Estate:
Allied Properties Real Estate Investment Trust	165,000	1,741,388	1,567,282	1.10%	0.92%
Chartwell Retirement Residences	525,000	3,300,753	4,388,973	3.08%	2.58%
Choice Properties Real Estate Investment Trust	510,000	3,933,239	3,767,809	2.64%	2.22%
Dream Industrial Real Estate Investment Trust	480,000	3,416,733	3,143,563	2.20%	1.85%
First Capital Real Estate Investment Trust	400,000	4,133,660	3,755,033	2.63%	2.21%
Granite Real Estate Investment Trust	50,000	1,901,782	1,915,011	1.34%	1.13%
Nexus Industrial Real Estate Investment Trust	510,000	2,422,787	2,175,697	1.52%	1.28%
RioCan Real Estate Investment Trust	390,000	3,566,552	3,947,118	2.77%	2.32%
Sienna Senior Living Inc.	360,000	3,065,893	3,119,566	2.19%	1.84%
SmartCentres Real Estate Investment Trust	275,000	3,609,356	3,730,315	2.61%	2.19%
		31,092,143	31,510,367	22.08%	18.54%
Telecommunications:
BCE Inc.	240,000	8,116,899	4,439,382	3.11%	2.62%
Total Equities		148,566,476	169,952,944	119.10%	100.00%
Total investments (2024)		148,566,473	169,952,944	119.10%	100.00%
Total investments (2023)		132,440,939	146,643,502	113.28%	100.00%

Independent Auditors’ Report

To the Shareholders of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (The “Company”)

Opinion

We have audited the financial statements of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (the “Company”), which comprise the Statement of Financial Position as at 31 December 2024, and notes 1 to 4 to the financial statements, including a summary of significant accounting policies. The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is applicable law and UK-adopted International Financial Reporting Standards (‘IFRS’).

In our opinion the financial statements:

give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the Company as at 31 December 2024 and of its results for the year then ended;

have been properly prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS; and

have been prepared in accordance with the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.

Separate opinion in relation to IFRS as adopted by the European Union

As explained in note 1, in addition to complying with the Listing Rules obligation to apply UK-adopted IFRS, the Fund has also applied IFRS as adopted by the European Union.

Basis for opinion

We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (‘ISAs (UK)’) and applicable law. Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of this report. We are independent of the Company in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to our audit of the financial statements in Jersey, including the FRC’s Ethical Standard, and we have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our opinion.

Material uncertainty relating to going concern

We draw attention to note 2n to the financial statements of the Fund which indicates that the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern is dependent on the outcome of the directors review of a number of strategic options for the future of the Fund and Company as described in note 2n. As stated in note 2n these events presented by the directors indicate that a material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Our opinion is not qualified in respect of this matter.

In auditing the financial statements, we have concluded that the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

Our evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Company’s ability to continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting, included:

Considering the appropriateness of the directors’ conclusion in relation to the matters described in 2n and discussing this with the board;

Review of the directors’ statement in note 2n and their identification of any material uncertainties to the Company’s ability to continue over a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements;

Consideration as part of our risk assessment of the nature of the Company, its business model and related risks including where relevant the requirements of the applicable financial reporting framework and the system of internal control; and

Evaluation of the directors’ assessment of the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, including challenging the underlying data and key assumptions used to make the assessment, and evaluation of the directors’ plans for future actions in relation to their going concern assessment.

Other than the above, based on the work we have performed, we have not identified any material uncertainties, other than as disclosed in note 2n to the financial statements of the Fund, relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from the date of approval of the financial statements.

Our responsibilities and the responsibilities of the directors with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this report.

Other information

The directors are responsible for the other information. Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and we do not express any form of assurance conclusions thereon.

In connection with our audit of the financial statements, our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements or our knowledge obtained in the audit or otherwise appears to be materially misstated. If we identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements of this other information, we are required to report that fact.

Independent Auditors’ Report continued

Other information (continued)

We have nothing to report in this regard.

Matters on which we are required to report by exception

We have nothing to report in respect of the following matters where the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991 requires us to report to you if, in our opinion;

adequate accounting records have not been kept; or

the financial statements are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or

proper returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not visited by us; or

we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit.

Responsibilities of directors

As explained more fully in the Statement of Directors’ Responsibilities set out on page 40, the directors are responsible for the preparation of the financial statements in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view, and for such internal control as the directors determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

In preparing the financial statements, the directors are responsible for assessing the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the directors either intend to liquidate the Company or to cease operations, or have no realistic alternative but to do so.

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

As part of an audit in accordance with ISAs (UK), we exercise professional judgement and maintain professional scepticism throughout the audit. We also:

Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of accounting estimates and related disclosures made by the directors.

Conclude on the appropriateness of the directors’ use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our auditors’ report to the related disclosures in the financial statements or, if such disclosures are inadequate, to modify our opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditors’ report. However, future events or conditions may cause the Company to cease to continue as a going concern.

Independent Auditors’ Report continued

To the Shareholders of Middlefield Canadian Income PCC (The “Company”)

The extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting irregularities, including fraud

However, it is the primary responsibility of the directors to ensure that the entity’s operations are conducted in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations and for the prevention and detection of fraud.

We obtained an understanding of the legal and regulatory frameworks that the entity operates in, focusing on provisions of those laws and regulations that had a direct effect on the determination of material amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. This included compliance with Companies (Jersey) Law 1991.

Our testing included:

enquiries of the directors regarding known or suspect instances of non-compliance with laws and regulations;

enquiries of the directors regarding known or suspect instances of irregularities, including fraud;

undertaking analytical procedures to identify unusual or unexpected relationships;

review of minutes of meetings throughout the year;

testing the appropriateness of journal entries and other adjustments; and

agreement of the financial statement disclosures to underlying supporting documentation.

Use of our report

This report is made solely to the Company’s shareholders as a body, in accordance with Article 113A of the Companies (Jersey) Law 1991. Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the Company’s shareholders those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the Company and the Company’s shareholders as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.

Philip Crosby

For & on behalf of

RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

Chartered Accountants and Recognised Auditors

Jersey, C.I.

Date 24 March 2025

Statement of Financial Position of the Company

As at 31 December 2024

		2024	2023
	Notes	GBP	GBP
Current assets
Other receivables		2	2
Net assets		2	2
Equity attributable to equity holders
Stated capital	2	2	2
Total Shareholders’ equity		2	2

The financial statements and notes on pages 84 to 85 were approved by the directors on 24 March 2025 and signed on behalf of the Board by:

Michael Phair Andrew Zychowski

Director Director

Notes to the Financial Statements of the Company

For the year ended 31 December 2024

1. Basis of accounting

The separate financial statements of the Company have been prepared showing results of the Company only. They have been prepared in accordance with UK-adopted IFRS in accordance with the accounting policies set out in Note 2 to the financial statements of the Fund.

A separate Statement of Comprehensive Income, Statement of Changes in Equity and Cash Flow Statement have not been prepared as there have been no results or cash flows for the Company for this year or the preceding year.

There are no standards and interpretations in issue but not effective that the directors believe would or might have a material impact on the financial statements of the Company.

Judgements and estimates used by the directors

The preparation of financial statements in compliance with IFRS requires the directors to make judgements, estimates and assumptions that affect the application of policies and reported amount of assets and liabilities, income and expenses. The estimates and associated liabilities are based on historical experience and various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis of making the judgements about carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent. For the purposes of these financial statements, there were no specific areas in which judgement was exercised and no estimation was required by the directors.

2. The Company’s stated capital

The authorised share capital of the Company is split into two management shares of no par value.

	No. of shares	GBP
Management shares issued
At 31 December 2024 and 2023	2	2

3. Taxation

The Company adopted UK tax residency on 11 October 2011. Since that date, the Company has been managed in such a way as to be able to meet the conditions for approval as an investment trust under Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010. Accordingly, no UK tax has been provided for. On 7 December 2012, the Company received approval from HM Revenue & Customs to be treated as an investment trust in accordance with Section 1158 of the Corporation Tax Act 2010 and will seek to remain so approved.

4. Ultimate holding company

The ultimate holding company is Middlefield Limited.

Definitions

AGM Annual General Meeting

AIC The Association of Investment Companies

AIC Code The AIC Code of Corporate Governance published in February, 2019

AIF Alternative investment fund

AIFM Alternative investment fund manager

AIFMD Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive

Annual Financial Report Annual report and financial statements

Auditor RSM Channel Islands (Audit) Limited

Benchmark The S&P TSX Composite High Dividend Index

CAD Canadian Dollar

Cell or Fund Middlefield Canadian Income – GBP PC

Cell AGM An annual general meeting of the holders of Fund Shares

Company or MCT Middlefield Canadian Income PCC

CORRA Canadian Overnight Repo Rate Average administered and published by the Bank of Canada

Credit Facility The on-demand credit facility with RBC

ESG Environmental, Social and Governance

EU European Union

FCA Financial Conduct Authority

FRC Financial Reporting Council

Fund Shares The redeemable participating preference shares of no par value in the Fund

GBP Great British Pounds or Sterling

IFRSIC International Financial Reporting Standards Interpretations Committee

IFRS International Financial Reporting Standards

JFSC Jersey Financial Services Commission

Listing Rules The listing rules made by the FCA under Part VI of the Financial Services and Market Authority

NAV Net Asset Value of the Company in GBP

Prime Loan Loans to which the Prime Rate can be applied

Prime Rate Annual interest rate set by Canada’s major banks and financial institutions

RBC Royal Bank of Canada

REIT Real estate investment trust

SID Senior Independent Director

SORP Statement of recommended practice

Term CORRA loan The amount drawn under the Credit Facility

UK Code The 2019 UK Corporate Governance Code published by the FRC in July 2018

USMCA Free trade agreement between the United States, Mexico and Canada

2 LR.11.2.6: No more than 10% of the Company’s total assets may be invested in other listed closed-ended investment companies unless such investment companies themselves have published investment policies to invest no more than 15% of their total assets in other closed-ended investment companies, in which case the limit is 15%.

Alternative Performance Measures

An APM is a measure of performance or financial position that is not defined in applicable accounting standards and cannot be directly derived from the financial statements. The Company’s APMs are set out below and are cross-referenced where relevant to the financial inputs used to derive them as contained in other sections of the Annual Report.

Benchmark

The Company’s Benchmark index, used for performance comparative purposes, is the S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index. Prior to 31 October 2024, the Benchmark was calculated gross of withholding tax. Beginning 31 October 2024, the Benchmark is calculated net of a 15% withholding tax in sterling terms with dividends reinvested.

Discount or Premium

Investment trust shares can frequently trade at a discount to NAV. This occurs when the share price (based on the mid-market share price) is less than the NAV and investors may therefore buy shares at less than the value attributable to them by reference to the underlying assets. The discount is the difference between the share price and the NAV, expressed as a percentage of the NAV.

Net Asset Value (NAV) per Redeemable Participating Preference Share

This is the value of the Company’s assets attributable to one redeemable participating preference share. It is calculated by dividing ‘equity shareholders’ funds’ by the total number of redeemable participating preference shares in issue (excluding treasury shares).

Gearing/(Net Cash)

Investment companies can borrow to purchase additional investments. This is called ‘gearing’. It allows investment companies to take advantage of a long-term view on a sector or to take advantage of a favourable situation or a particularly attractive stock without having to sell existing investments. Gearing works by magnifying a company’s performance. If a company ‘gears up’ and then markets rise and returns on the investments outstrip the costs of borrowing, the overall returns to investors will be even greater. But if markets fall and the performance of the assets in the portfolio is poor, then losses suffered by the investor will also be magnified. The Company may achieve gearing through borrowings or the effect of gearing through an appropriate balance of equity capital and borrowings.

Ongoing Charges

Ongoing charges are those expenses of a type which are likely to recur in the foreseeable future, whether charged to capital or revenue, and which relate to the operation of the investment company as a collective fund. Ongoing charges are based on costs incurred in the year as being the best estimate of future costs and include the annual management charge.

Yield

The yield is the amount of cash (in percentage terms) that is returned to the owners of the security, in the form of interest or dividends received from it. Normally, it does not include price variations, distinguishing it from performance (with dividends reinvested).

LONDON, ENGLAND

Middlefield International Limited

288 Bishopsgate

London, England

EC2M 4QP

Telephone +44 (0) 20 7814 6644

Fax +44 (0) 20 7814 66 11

TORONTO, CANADA

Middlefield Group

Suite 3100

8 Spadina Ave

Toronto, Ontario

Canada M5V 0S8

Telephone 001 (416) 362-0714

www.middlefield.co.uk

The MIL Network –

March 25, 2025

MIL-Evening Report: A budget splash to conserve 30% of Australia’s lands will save species – if we choose the right 30%

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By James Watson, Professor in Conservation Science, School of the Environment, The University of Queensland

Hans Wismeijer/Shutterstock

In 2022, Australia and many other nations agreed to protect 30% of their lands and waters by 2030 to arrest the rapid decline in biodiversity.

Since then, the Albanese government has protected large new areas of ocean, taking the total up to 52% of territorial waters. In tonight’s federal budget, the government is expected to announce A$250 million in funding to protect an additional 30 million hectares of land over the next five years. At present, Australia protects 22% of its lands through its National Reserve System. This would take the total to 30%.

You might expect conservationists to be ecstatic. But we’re not. Large new areas of desert and arid areas are likely to be protected under this scheme, because these areas have minimal population and are not sought after by farming. But these ecosystems are already well protected.

We have to come back to the point of the 30 by 30 agreement: protect biodiversity. That means the government has to protect representative samples of all ecosystems – including in areas sought for farming or other human uses.

This cropped map shows Australia’s protected lands and waters as of 2022. Subantarctic islands are not included.
Australian Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, CC BY

Buying land is only a fraction of the task

For years, Australia’s National Reserve System of national parks, state parks and Indigenous Protected Areas has languished. The last big infusion of funding and political interest came between 2007 and 2010 under a previous Labor government, when Peter Garrett was environment minister. Then, the government expanded the reserve system, grew Indigenous Protected Areas and ensured new reserves would preserve a representative sample of Australia’s ecosystems.

Since then, conservation efforts have largely not been up to scratch. Funding has stagnated. National parks are riddled with invasive species and other environmental problems.

On funding grounds alone, the $250m announced by Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek is welcome. It is, however, just a fraction of what’s needed to properly protect the right areas.

In 2023, environmental organisations called for a $5 billion fund to buy and protect important habitat – and to pay for maintenance.

The purchase of land represents perhaps 10% of the overall cost of conservation. If you buy land and do nothing, it can be overrun by invasive species. Australia’s ever-larger number of threatened species are often threatened because of these species, as well as the growing threat of land clearing in Queensland and the Northern Territory. Fire management is another cost.

Feral pigs and other invasive species place pressure on many ecosystems.
Russ Jenkins/Shutterstock

Which lands actually need protection?

As successive governments have backed away from conservation, non-government organisations such as the Australian Land Conservation Alliance, Bush Heritage Australia and Australian Wildlife Conservancy have stepped up. These organisations are doing fine work in protecting land and doing the necessary on-ground land management to safeguard threatened species and ecosystems, but they do not have access to resources at a government scale.

So how will this government funding be used? It’s likely we will see further growth in Indigenous Protected Areas – areas managed by Traditional Owners alongside authorities to protect biodiversity.

These areas are often located where low rainfall often means they are not viable for farming. This means there’s less conflict over what to do with the land. If our government is determined to meet the 30% target as quickly and cheaply as possible, we may well see more arid lands and desert protected.

When you set a target of 30% protected land by 2030, governments often see the top-line figure and aim for that alone. But the text of the international agreement stresses the need to prioritise “areas of particular importance for biodiversity”.

Governments have a choice: the easy, less effective way or the hard but effective way. The recent growth in marine protected areas suggests the government is taking the easy path. Even though the science is clear that marine parks bolster fish stocks in and outside the park, they are still controversial among fishers who believe they are being locked out.

As a result, Australia’s marine park system has made greatest gains where there are very few humans who might protest, such as quadrupling the protected areas around the very remote Heard and McDonald Islands in the sub-Antarctic region. (The government has expanded marine parks at a smaller scale closer to population centres too.)

This same story may well play out on land.

What would it look like if our government was willing to do what was necessary? It would involve actively seeking out the ecological communities in clear decline, such as native grasslands, brigalow woodlands and swamps, and buying up remaining habitat.

The oceans off Heard and McDonald Islands are now better protected – but was this the easy option? Pictured: Heard Island from satellite.
zelvan/Shutterstock

Saving here, clearing there

On the one hand, 22% of Australia’s land and 52% of seas come under some form of protection. But on the other, over the last two decades an area the size of Tasmania has been cleared – largely for livestock farming and mining. Satellite analyses show land clearing is actually increasing in many parts of the country.

Land clearing places further pressure on threatened species. In fact, most species considered threatened with extinction are largely in this situation because the land they live on has attributes prized by farmers or graziers, such as grass and water.

Australia’s environment faces real challenges in the next few years. Intensified land clearing, worsening climate change and whiplash drought-flood cycles, to say nothing of ballooning feral populations.

If we protect the right 30% of Australia, we have a chance to ensure most of our ecosystems have areas protected. But if we protect the wrong 30% and leave the rest open to bulldozers, we will only lock in more extinctions.

James Watson has received funding from the Australian Research Council, National Environmental Science Program, South Australia’s Department of Environment and Water, Queensland’s Department of Environment, Science and Innovation as well as from Bush Heritage Australia, Queensland Conservation Council, Australian Conservation Foundation, The Wilderness Society and Birdlife Australia. He serves on the scientific committee of BirdLife Australia and has a long-term scientific relationship with Bush Heritage Australia and Wildlife Conservation Society. He serves on the Queensland government’s Land Restoration Fund’s Investment Panel as the Deputy Chair.

– ref. A budget splash to conserve 30% of Australia’s lands will save species – if we choose the right 30% – https://theconversation.com/a-budget-splash-to-conserve-30-of-australias-lands-will-save-species-if-we-choose-the-right-30-252918

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI Australia: Prescribed ecological burn in Whitlam

Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

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

Skip to content

Released 25/02/2025

A prescribed ecological burn will commence in the Kama Section of the Molonglo River Reserve today in Whitlam, subject to suitable weather and fuel moisture conditions.

The prescribed ecological burn is being conducted to reduce exotic plants and strengthen the habitat for threatened native species.

See the location map of the burn site.

Experienced ACT Parks and Conservation Service fire managers will conduct and oversee the burning operations. Every effort is made to conduct burns in weather conditions that will minimise the impact of smoke, but temporary smoke cover is possible and may be visible across parts of Canberra.

Fire crews will be on the ground monitoring and patrolling the prescribed burn to its conclusion.

Smoke, flame, and glowing embers may be seen at this site, which is normal for these types of operations. The public are asked not to call emergency triple-zero unless they see any unattended fire.

Prescribed burns are an important part of the ACT’s annual Bushfire Operations Plan to enhance ecological quality, reduce the risk of bushfires and help keep Canberrans safe.

More information about prescribed hazard reduction burns is available on the ACT Environment website.

– Statement ends –

ACT Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate | Media Releases

Media Contacts

«ACT Government Media Releases | «Directorate Media Releases

MIL OSI News –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI Australia: Prescribed ecological burn in Crace

Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

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

Skip to content

Released 13/03/2025

A prescribed ecological burn in Crace Grasslands Nature Reserve will commence today, subject to suitable weather and fuel moisture conditions.

The prescribed ecological burn is being conducted to reduce exotic grass and weeds, as well as improve the habitat for threatened native species.

See the location map of the burn site.

Experienced ACT Parks and Conservation Service fire managers will conduct and oversee the burning operations. Every effort is made to conduct burns in weather conditions that will minimise the impact of smoke, but temporary smoke cover is possible and may be visible across parts of Canberra.

Fire crews will be on the ground monitoring and patrolling the prescribed burn to its conclusion.

Smoke, flame, and glowing embers may be seen at this site, which is normal for these types of operations. The public are asked not to call emergency triple-zero unless they see any unattended fire.

Prescribed burns are an important part of the ACT’s annual Bushfire Operations Plan to enhance ecological quality, reduce the risk of bushfires and help keep Canberrans safe.

More information about prescribed hazard reduction burns is available on the Parks ACT website.

– Statement ends –

ACT Environment, Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate | Media Releases

Media Contacts

«ACT Government Media Releases | «Directorate Media Releases

MIL OSI News –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI New Zealand: Science – Marine biosecurity watch at Port Taranaki – NIWA

Source: NIWA

A biosecurity survey of the waters of Port Taranaki was recently conducted as part of regular monitoring of a dozen New Zealand ports and marinas deemed high-risk biosecurity areas. The port has been part of MPI’s National Marine High Risk Site Surveillance (NMHRSS) programme since 2009, with marine surveys undertaken each summer and winter.

The surveillance surveys identify potential seasonal changes in the abundance and distribution of marine non-indigenous species, says NIWA Principal Technician Marine Ecology Louis Olsen, who has led the team surveying Port Taranaki for the last seven years, the only west coast port in the programme. “The main aim of the surveys is to detect five primary target species: Pacific sea star, European shore crab, Aquarium caulerpa (alga), Chinese mitten crab and Asian clam. These species have not yet been detected within our waters but are identified as high-risk to our economy, environment, and societal values, based on how much damage they could cause and their history of invasive traits within other countries.”

The NMHRSS programme also looks out for specific secondary target pest species that have been detected around New Zealand but with restricted distributions, as well as marine species not previously recorded within our waters. “From our work at other surveillance sites we are familiar with the native and introduced species, but if something different is found, we get it formally identified and notify MPI. Sometimes we get interesting fish coming across the Tasman Sea from Australia.”

The data that our surveys collect on species not only assists MPI’s marine biosecurity management, but also helps Taranaki Regional Council and other territorial authorities, Māori partners, industry, and the many stakeholders who benefit from a port free from invasive species, he says.

The survey, which takes three or four days, involves divers, boat skippers, scientists and technicians, with dives, seafloor sampling, shoreline searches, and trapping, including using crab ‘condo’ habitat traps. “The surveys are a significant part of NIWA’s marine biosecurity work. It’s a really important part of the science that we do to ensure our coasts remain safe from invasive species.”

Once the taxonomic identity of any suspect samples taken are confirmed, MPI can inform Taranaki Regional Council, Māori partners, industry, and the many stakeholders with a vested interest of the survey results. Survey results from across all NMHRSS programme surveys are also uploaded to the open access Marine Biosecurity Porthole ( Home » Marine Biosecurity Porthole ), a collaboration between Biosecurity New Zealand and NIWA to provide greater access to information and data on marine non-indigenous species in New Zealand.

MIL OSI New Zealand News –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Markey Joins Peters, Senate Committee Ranking Members in Demanding Immediate Review by Agency Inspectors General of Trump Administration’s Mass Dismissals of Federal Employees

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey

Senators Question Trump Administration Claims and Whether Actions Will Increase Waste and Abuse

Washington (March 21, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee joined Senator Gary Peters (D-MI), Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, and 15 Senate Committee Ranking Members in sending a letter to the Inspectors General of 23 federal agencies, pressing for details on the impact of President Trump’s sweeping and unprecedented dismissal of tens of thousands of federal employees. The senators asked the Inspectors General to review the Trump Administration’s actions, citing potential violations of federal laws and procedures, which the senators warn could harm Americans’ access to vital government services and increase waste and abuse of taxpayer dollars.
“The decision to terminate thousands of employees across multiple federal agencies will impose undue hardship on millions of Americans who rely on their services,” wrote the Senators. “The loss of experienced agency staff may risk causing serious disruptions to nearly 73 million Americans who rely on the Social Security Administration (SSA) to administer retiree and disability benefits and 9.1 million veterans who depend on the Department of Veteran Affairs (V.A.), many of which rely on the V.A. for life saving medical treatments and care.”
Highlighting the devastating consequences of these mass firings, the senators underscored the Trump Administration’s layoffs have already disrupted critical operations at agencies that millions of Americans depend on for survival.
“Among the 2,400 employees fired from the V.A. since Mr. Trump’s inauguration are workers who purchase medical supplies, schedule appointments and arrange rides for patients to see their doctors,” wrote the Senators, citing a NY Times report. “Additionally, taxpayers seeking in-person assistance as they navigate the 2025 filing season may find the support centers they previously relied on completely relocated or shuttered. That risk is a direct consequence of the Administration’s mass dismissals and decision to terminate over 100 IRS offices with Tax Assistance Centers (TAC) – which provide free, in-person assistance for those seeking it.”
The senators are requesting that IGs examine whether these dismissals violated agency policies and assess the damage to agency missions, public safety, and national security, calling for an initial review to be completed within 60 days, with findings made available to the public to ensure transparency and accountability.
The letter was signed by U.S. Senators and Ranking Members Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Special Committee on Aging, Patty Murray (D-WA), Committee on Appropriations, Jack Reed (D-RI), Committee on Armed Services, Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Committee on Environment and Public Works, Ron Wyden (D-OR), Committee on Finance, Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Committee on Foreign Relations, Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, Dick Durbin (D-IL), Committee on the Judiciary, Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Committee on Veterans’ Affairs, Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, and Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Committee on the Budget.
The full text of the letter can be found here.

MIL OSI USA News –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Course charted for carbon free shipping by 2050
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 2

Press release

Course charted for carbon free shipping by 2050

Our maritime decarbonisation strategy will help us build a cleaner, more resilient maritime nation.
vessels will soon use future fuels and plug into shipping ‘chargeports’ as part of UK’s new goals for shipping operators to reach net zero by 2050, part of the government’s Plan for Change to make the UK a clean energy superpower

worst polluting vessels will decarbonise first as government sets out new plans to deliver energy security and build a clean maritime future

news comes ahead of the UN’s maritime meeting where the UK mission will push for global greenhouse gas reductions across the industry

Fuels of the future and shipping charge points in harbours are at the centre of a major new strategy to make Britain’s shipping fleet net zero by 2050 and drive growth in coastal communities.

The Maritime Minister has today (25 March 2025) revealed the government’s new goals for all vessels that operate in UK waters and dock at UK ports to be carbon free and help vessel owners, operators and scientists make emission-free voyages a reality.

Part of the government’s Plan for Change to propel the UK towards becoming a green energy superpower and drive growth, the new Maritime decarbonisation strategy sets out goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 30% by 2030, 80% by 2040 and to zero by 2050. This will see the UK match the highest level of the ambitious goals agreed at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in their 2023 strategy on reduction of greenhouse gas emission from ships.

Investment in green technologies and fuels will cement the UK as a clean energy superpower and encourage a green economic revival at the local level, helping to build high-skilled jobs in coastal communities and delivering a local boon to cities and towns.

Under the new strategy, the shipping sector will be brought under the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS). This will see operators of larger vessels such as tankers and cruises – which cause the most pollution – pay more for their greenhouse gas emissions.

Furthermore, the strategy sets out plans to reduce emissions from shipping and increase the use of clean fuels and technologies, such as hydrogen, electric or ammonia vessels.

Later today the minister will launch the new strategy in Portsmouth with vessel chargeport pioneer ABB and demonstrate how these new green shipping technologies will bring in private investment, create thousands more jobs and revitalise coastal communities.

Such investment has already seen growth in coastal regions, with the £206 million of UK SHORE funding having already supported over 300 organisations across every nation and region in the UK and secured over £100 million of private investment, helping to kickstart economic growth.

Maritime Minister, Mike Kane, said:

Climate change is one of the greatest challenges we face today. Working together with industry and international partners, we are driving down emissions in every corner of the economy.

As part of our Plan for Change, we’re committed to making the UK a green energy superpower and our maritime decarbonisation strategy will help us build a cleaner, more resilient maritime nation.

In addition, the government is also launching 2 calls for evidence today to help inform the development of measures needed to reduce emissions at berth, understand the future energy demand at ports and decarbonise smaller vessels.

Richard Ballantyne OBE, Chief Executive of the British Ports Association, said:

We welcome today’s announcement. UK ports are already demonstrating their commitment to net zero with ambitious targets and investment in new technologies and fuels. The UK SHORE programme shows what can be achieved when government and industry work together on shared goals.

We will continue to work closely with the Department for Transport on lowering barriers to investment and decarbonisation for both ports and vessels and this strategy will help set a clear direction and expectations well into the future. We look forward to a continued close partnership built on common aims.

Chris Shirling-Rooke, Chief Executive of Maritime UK, said:

Decarbonisation is both an enormous challenge and opportunity for the maritime sector, with huge potential for growth, jobs and innovation in our coastal communities, and across the whole of the United Kingdom.

It is vital that our country continues to drive change and chase growth by creating a cleaner and more sustainable future. We welcome the government’s commitment today and look forward to continuing to work with them on the maritime decarbonisation strategy.

Mike Sellers, Director of Portsmouth International Port, said:

We welcome the announcement of the new maritime decarbonisation strategy, which the port’s master plan very much aligns with.

To help achieve this ambition, we’re on track to become the UK’s first multi-berth, multi-ship ‘chargeport’ by providing renewable plug-in energy when ships are alongside from spring 2025.

The seachange shore power project, demonstrates the success of both public and private investment, supported by the government’s zero emissions vessels and infrastructure (ZEVI) fund, driving innovation towards net zero. We’re pleased to show the minister what’s happening in Portsmouth and how this could be a model for ports across the country.

Rhett Hatcher, CEO of the UK Chamber of Shipping, said:

The UK Chamber is proud to have led the way on decarbonisation, publicly calling for the global shipping industry to reach net zero emissions by 2050, prior to the UK government and IMO commitments. Across our sector, we have already invested in new technologies and pioneering innovations to meet our commitments and are leading the drive towards net zero. We, therefore, welcome the government’s publication of the maritime decarbonisation strategy, as a much-needed successor to the 2019 clean maritime plan.

The government’s strategy must now be matched by delivering the regulatory framework, technology and infrastructure, including a shore power revolution, required to support the green transition for UK maritime, bringing benefits to maritime communities and the UK economy. We look forward to working collaboratively alongside government to progress this important agenda and reach our shared goals of a cleaner, more resilient maritime sector in the UK.

Anna Krajinska, UK Director at Transport & Environment (T&E), said:

T&E welcomes the government’s commitment to reduce shipping emissions by 30% by 2030, 80% by 2040 and net zero by 2050. It is crucial that ambitious targets are coupled with robust policy measures to slash the UK’s domestic and international shipping emissions without delay.

Geraint Evans, Chief Executive of the UK Major Ports Group, said:

Major ports are at the heart of the UK’s transition to net zero, acting as hubs of innovation and supporting the development of future fuels, clean maritime infrastructure, and greener supply chains. Today’s strategy provides much-needed policy certainty for industry, unlocking investment in the technologies and infrastructure that will drive down emissions.

The successful delivery of the government’s missions relies on strong public and private sector partnerships, and with the right long-term commitment and collaboration, we can accelerate the transition to lower-carbon shipping and ensure the UK remains a global leader in maritime sustainability.

Mark Dickinson, General Secretary of Nautilus International, said:

Nautilus International welcomes the government’s ambitious maritime decarbonisation strategy as a crucial step toward building a sustainable future for UK shipping. The targets to achieve zero emissions by 2050, with significant milestones in 2030 and 2040, demonstrate the commitment needed to address the climate emergency that threatens our planet.

As we transition to new fuels, technologies and vessel designs, we must ensure this green revolution delivers for maritime professionals too. A just transition must be at the heart of these changes – guaranteeing quality jobs, comprehensive training and appropriate upskilling for seafarers who will be operating these new systems. We look forward to working closely with the UK government in achieving a just transition that supports continued economic and employment growth and prosperity for coastal communities as well as all maritime professionals.

With global shipping accounting for 2% of all emissions, the UK will push for high ambitions at the UN’s next meeting of the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in April, as it develops important measures to reduce emissions from global shipping.

Maritime media enquiries

Media enquiries 0300 7777 878

Switchboard 0300 330 3000

Share this page

The following links open in a new tab

Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)

Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

Updates to this page

Published 25 March 2025
MIL OSI United Kingdom –
March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Justice Department Statement on Juliana Case

Source: US State Government of Utah

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari by plaintiffs in Juliana v. United States, a case the Justice Department has consistently defended across three presidential administrations.

The case, filed in 2015, sought to have courts force the government to implement more stringent, remedial measures related to climate change. The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon agreed to hear the case. The Justice Department moved to dismiss and sought an interlocutory appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit remanded the case to the district court with instructions to dismiss. The district court accepted an amended complaint, and the circuit court again instructed for the case to be dismissed. The plaintiffs then filed a petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court.

“For nearly a decade, lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Juliana case have tied up the United States in litigation, persisting even after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice instructed the case to be dismissed because the plaintiffs lack Article III standing,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD). “The U.S. Supreme Court’s cert denial brings this long saga to a conclusion. Through ENRD’s work, the Justice Department is enforcing our nation’s environmental laws and safeguarding America’s air, water, and natural resources. Cases like Juliana distract from those enforcement efforts.”

MIL OSI USA News –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Justice Department Statement on Juliana Case

Source: United States Attorneys General 1

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari by plaintiffs in Juliana v. United States, a case the Justice Department has consistently defended across three presidential administrations.

The case, filed in 2015, sought to have courts force the government to implement more stringent, remedial measures related to climate change. The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon agreed to hear the case. The Justice Department moved to dismiss and sought an interlocutory appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Ninth Circuit remanded the case to the district court with instructions to dismiss. The district court accepted an amended complaint, and the circuit court again instructed for the case to be dismissed. The plaintiffs then filed a petition for certiorari in the Supreme Court.

“For nearly a decade, lawyers for the plaintiffs in the Juliana case have tied up the United States in litigation, persisting even after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals twice instructed the case to be dismissed because the plaintiffs lack Article III standing,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD). “The U.S. Supreme Court’s cert denial brings this long saga to a conclusion. Through ENRD’s work, the Justice Department is enforcing our nation’s environmental laws and safeguarding America’s air, water, and natural resources. Cases like Juliana distract from those enforcement efforts.”

MIL Security OSI –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI New Zealand: Quarry Association says Immediate RMA reform needed to avoid quarry material shortages

Source: Aggregate and Quarry Association of NZ

The quarry industry warns of shortages and rising prices of foundation materials for housing and infrastructure due to at least two more years of delays in obtaining consents under the Government’s RMA reforms.

Aggregate and Quarry Association (AQA) CEO Wayne Scott says while quarries support the intent of yesterday’s announcements, it is totally unacceptable to wait until 2027 at the earliest to get any meaningful change in resource consenting.

He says Government Ministers were told upon taking office that two existing National Policy Statements had drafting flaws stopping quarries from getting consents on land needed to supply the rock, aggregate and sand needed for homes and roads. Over one-third of existing quarries across New Zealand are impacted by the NPS Highly Productive Land.

“We were told the problems with the flaws in the Highly Productive Land and Indigenous Bio-diversity national policy statements would be fixed,” says Wayne Scott.

“Yesterday’s announcements show little intent from the Government to address these in a timely manner.”

He says Ministers appear to believe that introducing the two new RMA bills before the end of the year – and passing them before the 2026 election – will solve all resource consenting and planning issues.

“The new Natural Environment and Planning Acts will include National Policy Statements and presumably any fixes, then there will be a process for each region to develop a regulatory plan. That’s great but we need action now not in 2027 at the earliest.”

Wayne Scott says the Government has been repeatedly advised that quarries around much of the country are at capacity and its big infrastructure and housing agenda will soon exceed supply.

“There may be a view that the Fast-track Approvals Act would sort out issues for quarries. That legislation is very welcome but it’s only going to apply to eight out of a thousand active quarries around New Zealand. “

He says all other quarries wanting to expand or develop a new site will have to do so under an RMA reform process that will take some years to bed in. In the interim, many will face constraints from two flawed National Policy Statements which two successive Governments promised to fix and both have failed to do so.

“Quarries are already stretched to meet supply and costs can now only rise. We need urgent attention to resource consenting constraints now,” says Wayne Scott.

MIL OSI New Zealand News –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI New Zealand: Doco – Greenpeace launches documentary exploring freshwater pollution in Canterbury

Source: Greenpeace

Greenpeace campaigner Will Appelbe says, “For decades, Canterbury’s lakes, rivers, and drinking water have been heading on a rapid downhill trajectory as a result of industry polluters. But it’s not too late to turn that around. People across Canterbury are fighting back to protect their access to fresh water – and that’s the story we’ve told through this documentary.”

There will be an advance screening of the documentary at Lumiere Cinemas, Christchurch, at 6pm on Thursday 3rd April. Tickets are free, but there will be limited seats available.

Appelbe, who is himself a Canterbury resident, says, “We know that no matter where they live or who they vote for, New Zealanders want to be able to go swimming in the local rivers, fishing in the lakes, and to be able to drink the water coming out of their kitchen tap. But these fundamental Kiwi values are being eroded by the ongoing pollution of fresh water by the intensive dairy industry.”

“Central to NZ’s freshwater crisis is the fact that Waitaha Canterbury has the most polluted water in the country. We are a hot spot for contaminated drinking water, unswimmable rivers, and lakes choked with algal bloom. It shouldn’t be this way. Those who are responsible for protecting the health of water in this region have failed drastically.

“Environment Canterbury has a responsibility to protect freshwater that’s used to source drinking water. Despite knowing about this issue, nitrate contamination is only getting worse in Canterbury. We’re coming up to local body elections later this year, and we expect safe drinking water to become a major election issue.”

Greenpeace is also running two town hall events in Canterbury – in Ashburton on the 4th April, and Methven on the 6th April – to provide free drinking water testing for nitrate contamination.

“We know that elevated levels of nitrate in drinking water have been linked to increased human health risks by a growing body of international science. This includes an increased risk of bowel cancer and pre-term birth, at levels much lower than what the NZ government allows to be present in drinking water.”

“We provide this free drinking water testing so that everyone – no matter where they live – knows whether the water coming out of their tap is safe to drink. Ultimately, though, this is simply a bandaid over a bullet wound. We need to stop the nitrate pollution at the source – the intensive dairy industry – if we want to have any shot at improving water quality in the Waitaha.”

MIL OSI New Zealand News –

March 25, 2025
MIL-OSI United Nations: Commission on Limits of Continental Shelf Concludes Sixty-Third Session

Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council

NEW YORK, 24 March (Office of Legal Affairs) ― The Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf held its sixty-third session at United Nations Headquarters from 17 February to 21 March. The plenary parts of the session were held from 24 to 28 February and from 10 to 14 March. The remainder of the session was devoted to the technical examination of submissions at the premises of the Division, including geographic information systems laboratories and other technical facilities.

During the first plenary part of the session, the Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel, Elinor Hammarskjöld, addressed the Commission for the first time since her appointment. She acknowledged the crucial contribution of the Commission to the implementation of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and paid tribute to the significant work carried out by the members of the Commission in this regard. Noting the ongoing liquidity crisis affecting regular budget operations of the United Nations Secretariat, the Under‑Secretary-General reiterated that the Division would continue to do its utmost to deliver high-quality support to the Commission within the available means.

The Submissions of the following coastal States were considered by the Commission and its subcommissions: Mauritius in respect of the region of Rodrigues Island (partial submission); Palau in respect of the North Area (partial amended submission); Portugal; Spain in respect of the area of Galicia (partial submission); Namibia; Cuba in respect of the eastern polygon in the Gulf of Mexico; Mozambique; and Madagascar; as well as revised submissions made by Brazil in respect of the Brazilian Equatorial Margin (partial revised submission); Cook Islands concerning the Manihiki Plateau (revised submission); Iceland in respect of the western, southern and south-eastern parts of the Reykjanes Ridge (partial revised submission); Brazil in respect of the Brazilian Oriental and Meridional Margin (partial revised submission); and the Russian Federation in the Area of the Gakkel Ridge in the Arctic Ocean (partial revised submission).

The Commission approved three sets of recommendations, namely in regard to the submissions made by Brazil in respect of the Brazilian Equatorial Margin (partial revised submission); Cuba in respect the eastern polygon in the Gulf of Mexico; and Iceland in respect of the western, southern and south-eastern parts of the Reykjanes Ridge (partial revised submission).

During its plenary meetings, with regard to the submission made by Guyana, the Commission decided to defer its consideration in view of an objection conveyed by Venezuela.

The Commission further heard presentations on the submission of Mozambique, which was a repeat presentation made upon the request of the coastal State; the partial revised submission made by Brazil in respect of the Brazilian Oriental and Meridional Margin; and the partial submission made by Viet Nam in respect of the Central Area.

Underscoring the importance that submitting States attach to the work of the Commission, delegations were represented in the plenary at the high level: the delegation of Mozambique was headed by the Minister for Mineral Resources and Energy, Estêvão Tomás Rafael Pale; the delegation of Cuba was headed by the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs, Carlos Fernández de Cossío Domínguez; and the delegation of the Russian Federation was headed by the Minister for Natural Resources and Environment, Alexander Kozlov.

In view of the progress in its work, the Commission decided to establish subcommissions to consider the partial submission made by Mexico in respect of the eastern polygon in the Gulf of Mexico; the submission made by the United Republic of Tanzania; and the partial submission made by Denmark in respect of the Southern Continental Shelf of Greenland. With a view to facilitating the efficient consideration of submissions, the Commission decided that subcommissions could actively consider two submissions in parallel, as needed.

The Commission appointed the new member of the Commission, Ahmed Er Raji (Morocco), to subcommissions. In view of the resignation of Mr. Brekke due to health reasons and the establishment of new subcommissions, the Commission also adjusted the membership of some existing subcommissions and subsidiary bodies. The Commission also elected David Cole Mosher (Canada) as Vice-Chair of the Commission for the remainder of the current two-and-a-half-year term — until 15 December.

With regard to the request of the General Assembly in its resolution 79/144 for the Secretary-General to develop and make available training courses to assist States in relation to the preparation, making and maintenance of submissions, as well as their consideration, the secretariat informed the Commission that no earmarked voluntary trust fund contributions for such activities had been received as of 13 March, and that, if no contributions were received by April, the secretariat would not be in a position to deliver on this mandate in 2025.

The Commission also continued its consideration of initiatives to enhance efficiency in its work, including the development of technical bulletins and templates for presentations and recommendations.

Further details on the sixty-third session will be available in the Statement of the Chairperson of the Commission (document CLCS/63/2).

The background press release on this session is available at https://press.un.org/en/2025/sea2206.doc.htm.

Background

Established pursuant to article 2 of annex II to the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Commission makes recommendations to coastal States on matters related to the establishment of the outer limits of their continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the breadth of the territorial sea is measured, based on information submitted by those coastal States. The recommendations are based on the scientific data and other material provided by coastal States in relation to the implementation of article 76 of the Convention and do not prejudice matters relating to the delimitation of boundaries between States with opposite or adjacent coasts or prejudice the position of States that are parties to a land or maritime dispute, or application of other parts of the Convention or any other treaties. The limits of the continental shelf established by a coastal State on the basis of the recommendations are final and binding. In the case of disagreement by a coastal State with the recommendations of the Commission, the coastal State shall, within a reasonable time, make a revised or new submission to the Commission.

Under rule 23 of its rules of procedure (Public and private meetings), the meetings of the Commission, its subcommissions and subsidiary bodies are held in private, unless the Commission decides otherwise.

As required under the rules of procedure of the Commission, the executive summaries of all the submissions, including all charts and coordinates, have been made public by the Secretary‑General through continental shelf notifications circulated to Member States of the United Nations, as well as States Parties to the Convention. The executive summaries are available on the Division’s website at: www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/clcs_home.htm. The summaries of recommendations adopted by the Commission are also available on the above-referenced website.

The Commission is a body of 21 experts in the field of geology, geophysics or hydrography serving in their personal capacities. Members of the Commission are elected for a term of five years by the Meeting of States Parties to the Convention having due regard to the need to ensure equitable geographical representation. Not fewer than three members shall be elected from each geographical region.

Currently, two seats on the Commission are vacant as a result of the resignation of Mr. Brekke and the long-standing vacancy resulting from a lack of nominations from the Group of Eastern European States. A call for nominations has been circulated to States Parties with a view to filling these vacancies at a by-election to be conducted at the thirty-fifth Meeting of States Parties, scheduled to be convened from 23 to 27 June. The nomination period opened on 12 February and will close on 12 May at midnight.

The Convention provides that the State party which submitted the nomination of a member of the Commission shall defray the expenses of that member while in performance of Commission duties. A voluntary trust fund for the purpose of defraying the cost of participation of the members of the Commission from developing countries has been established. It has facilitated the participation of several members of the Commission from developing countries in the sessions of the Commission.

The convening by the Secretary-General of the sessions of the Commission, with full conference services, including documentation, for the plenary parts of these sessions, is subject to approval by the General Assembly of the United Nations. The Assembly does so in its annual resolutions on oceans and the law of the sea, which also address other matters relevant to the work of the Commission and the conditions of service of its members.

For additional information on the work of the Commission see the website of the Division at www.un.org/depts/los/index.htm. In particular, the most recent Statements by the Chair on the progress in the work of the Commission are available at http://www.un.org/depts/los/clcs_new/commission_documents.

MIL OSI United Nations News –

March 25, 2025

Category: Environment

The secret lives of lizards

Tiny fishing poles

The Lizard Olympics

Evolution on the island

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS (20.2.2025)

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM (19.2.2025)

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (19.2.2025)

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (19.2.2025)

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON BUDGETARY CONTROL (18.2.2025)

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE ENVIRONMENT, CLIMATE AND FOOD SAFETY (18.2.2025)

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRY, RESEARCH AND ENERGY (19.2.2025)

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON CULTURE AND EDUCATION (19.2.2025)

LETTER OF THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS (18.2.2025)

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Solihull man prosecuted for failing to remove waste from land

Environment Agency investigation

The charges

Share this page

Updates to this page

Centre safeguards consumer rights via various provisions under Consumer Protection Act, 2019Central Consumer Protection Authority imposes penalty of ₹ 77 lakh 60 thousand on 24 coaching institutes for misleading advertisements

March 25, 2025

Buying land is only a fraction of the task

Which lands actually need protection?

Saving here, clearing there

Media Contacts

Media Contacts

Source: NIWA

Course charted for carbon free shipping by 2050

Share this page

Updates to this page

Source: Aggregate and Quarry Association of NZ

Source: Greenpeace

Centre safeguards consumer rights via various provisions under Consumer Protection Act, 2019

Central Consumer Protection Authority imposes penalty of ₹ 77 lakh 60 thousand on 24 coaching institutes for misleading advertisements