NewzIntel.com

Category: European Union

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: More than 20 people housed as council seeks to end encampment

    Source: City of Canterbury

    Home  »  Latest News   »   More than 20 people housed as council seeks to end encampment

    A total of 21 people have been found somewhere to live away from the streets after people started sleeping and spending their days on the side of a busy main road in Canterbury.

    That is on top of the tailored help and support given to those who have been living in tents at an encampment in Pin Hill.

    Support has included working with a range of organisations, including homelessness charities Catching Lives and Porchlight and the NHS, to provide access to healthcare, dental care and support to help people overcome addiction to alcohol and drugs.

    Cllr Pip Hazelton, Cabinet Member for Housing, said: “It has broken everyone’s hearts to see people living in this way in such a dangerous place throughout the winter and officers in teams from across the council have done all they can to rehome people and offer other forms of support.

    “Only last week we managed to find emergency bedspace with Porchlight and persuaded someone to take advantage of that opportunity.

    “There is no magic wand and we cannot force people to accept our help.

    “The challenge all along has been that as soon as we find one person a home, they are replaced by someone equally desperate for help.”

    Today (Wednesday 19 March), letters have been posted at the site asking people to move their belongings within seven days.

    Cllr Hazelton added: “While we prefer to help people to move on, this situation simply cannot go on and now we need to take legal action to bring this sad situation to an end.

    “We have overcome challenges with knowing who owns the land and working our way through the complexities of what legislation and powers we can rely on.

    “We are now asking people to remove their tents and belongings within seven days before we the kickstart the legal process that results in enforcement action a little further down the line.”

    Published: 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2015 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalya Chernyshova, Senior Lecturer in Modern European History, Queen Mary University of London

    Germany’s ex chancellor, Angela Merkel, and France’s former president, François Hollande, were key to brokering the Minsk agreements. Sodel Vladyslav / Shutterstock

    The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has agreed to pause attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure for 30 days following a phone call with his American counterpart, Donald Trump. On social media, Trump said the call was “very good and productive” and came “with an understanding that we will be working quickly to have a complete ceasefire”.

    This optimism is misplaced. The White House did not mention that Putin issued additional conditions for a ceasefire. The Kremlin demands that Ukraine be effectively disarmed, leaving it defenceless against a Russian takeover. Such terms would be unacceptable to Ukraine and its European partners.

    At this juncture, Trump and his negotiators would do well to ponder why previous attempts to restrain Russia and secure a lasting peace for Ukraine did not succeed.

    This war did not start when shells began to rain on Kyiv in February 2022. Russia had already been waging an undeclared war on its neighbour for nearly eight years in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas, where pro-Russian proxy forces have been stoking up trouble in the border regions of Luhansk and Donetsk.

    Attempts to end the fighting there were made in September 2014 and February 2015, when Russia and Ukraine signed ceasefire agreements during negotiations in Minsk, Belarus.

    Both sets of Minsk agreements proved to be non-starters. The fighting in the region rumbled on until it culminated in Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The accords stored problems for the future.

    Russia-backed separatists have controlled the south-eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk since 2015.
    Viacheslav Lopatin / Shutterstock

    Minsk-1 and Minsk-2

    The first Minsk protocols were signed in 2014 by Russia, Ukraine, separatists from Donbas and representatives from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). The agreement provided for an immediate ceasefire monitored by the OSCE, the withdrawal of “foreign mercenaries” from Ukraine and the establishment of a demilitarised buffer zone.

    But Moscow also insisted that Kyiv grant temporary “special status” to the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, the two separatist regions in Donbas. Instead of helping Ukraine regain control over its eastern territories, the agreement allowed the Russia-backed rebels to hold local elections and legalised them as a party to the conflict.

    The ceasefire collapsed within days of signing. The provisions that sought to demarcate the lines of the conflict and give Ukraine back control over its eastern border were not observed by the rebels, and fighting intensified during the winter.

    With the death toll rising, the leaders of France and Germany rushed to broker a fresh round of negotiations in February 2015. The resulting accords, which were known as Minsk-2, also failed to bring peace.

    Russia and its proxy militants in Donbas immediately and repeatedly violated its terms. Astonishingly, Minsk-2 did not even mention Russia, despite it signing the protocols. Moscow continued to deny its involvement in eastern Ukraine, while stepping up armed assistance to the rebels.

    Kyiv was saddled with peace terms that were impossible to implement unless Ukraine was prepared to throw away its sovereignty. Minsk-2 stipulated that the “special status” of the eastern separatist regions was to become permanent, and that the Ukrainian constitution was to be amended to allow for “decentralisation” of power from Kyiv to the rebel regions.

    These regions were to be granted autonomy in financial matters, responsibility for their stretch of the border with Russia, and the right to conclude foreign agreements and hold referenda. To undercut Ukrainian independence further, a neutrality clause inserted into its constitution would effectively bar the country’s entry into Nato.

    Understandably, no one in Kyiv rushed to implement these self-destructive terms. In an interview with German magazine Der Spiegel in 2023, Volodymyr Zelensky said that when he became Ukraine’s president in 2019 and examined Minsk-2, he “did not recognise any desire in the agreements to allow Ukraine its independence”.

    Russia-backed separatists in Sloviansk, a city in Donetsk Oblast, in 2014.
    Fotokon / Shutterstock

    Zelensky’s comment points to the fundamental flaw of the Minsk-2 agreement. Its western brokers failed to recognise that Russian war aims were irreconcilable with Ukrainian sovereignty. Moscow’s objective from the start was to use Donbas to destabilise the government in Kyiv and gain control over Ukraine.

    Western peacemakers searched for a compromise, but the Kremlin used Minsk-2 to advance its goals. As Duncan Allan of the Chatham House research institute noted in 2020: “Russia sees the Minsk agreements as tools with which to break Ukraine’s sovereignty.” The war in Donbas raged on and, by 2020, had claimed 14,000 lives, with 1.5 million people becoming refugees.

    Germany’s ex-chancellor, Angela Merkel, a key broker, subsequently defended the Minsk agreements. She said they bought Kyiv time to arm itself against Russia. It was a costly purchase. Minsk-2 froze the conflict in one locality rather than ended it. And it encouraged Russia, paving the way for a full-scale invasion.

    Emphasising Ukrainian sovereignty

    The existential differences between Ukraine and Russia that plagued the Minsk agreements remain today. Ukraine has demonstrated its resolve to defend its sovereignty, while Russia’s invasion in 2022 testifies to its determination to squash Ukrainian resolve. The timing of the attack so close to the seventh anniversary of Minsk-2 adds grim emphasis to that point.

    This clash of objectives must be addressed head-on in any peace negotiations. The only way to secure lasting peace in Europe is to avoid rewarding the aggressor and punishing its victim.

    The Kremlin has already openly declared that it sees Trump-led brokerage as the west’s acknowledgement of Russian strategic superiority. It needs to be disabused of this notion. As argued by Nataliya Bugayova, a fellow at the Institute for the Study of War, the war is not lost yet. Russia is far from invulnerable, and it can be made to accept defeat.

    But for any agreement to be effective, there can be no ambiguity or middle ground on the subject of Ukrainian sovereignty. It must be protected and backed by security guarantees.

    So far, the Trump administration has shown little understanding of this. But ten years down the line from Minsk-2, Europeans have finally grasped it.

    Finland’s president, Aleksander Stubbs, told reporters on March 19 that Ukraine must “absolutely” not lose sovereignty and territory. And, on the day Trump and Putin had their discussion, Germany’s parliament voted for a massive boost in defence spending – another indicator that Europeans are no longer taking Putin on trust.

    Natalya Chernyshova received funding from the British Academy during 2020-2022.

    – ref. Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2015 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-deal-europe-has-learned-from-the-failed-2015-minsk-accords-with-putin-trump-has-not-252540

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why nicotine pouches may not be the best choice to help you to stop smoking

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Dipa Kamdar, Senior Lecturer in Pharmacy Practice, Kingston University

    Evidence suggests that nicotine pouch use is becoming more popular Andrey_Popov/Shutterstock

    If you are trying to stop smoking, you may have heard of nicotine patches or gum to help reduce cravings. But how about nicotine pouches? Small, tobacco-free sachets containing a powder made up of nicotine, flavourings and other additives, nicotine patches are placed between the upper lip and gum to release a nicotine buzz without the damage to lungs.

    Nicotine pouches were first introduced to the UK market in 2019. Common brands in the UK include ZYN, Velo and Nordic Spirit. Nicotine pouches are similar to snus – loose tobacco in a pouch that is used in the same way as nicotine pouches. Although snus has been used for many years in Scandinavia, it was banned in the UK in 1992. Today’s generation of nicotine pouches are marketed as a way to get the benefits of nicotine without the harmful effects of cigarettes or vapes.

    So, are they a helpful tool for those trying to kick the habit?

    Nicotine replacement therapy

    Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is available to buy over-the-counter in the UK. Common brands include Nicorette and Niquitin. NRT comes in different forms such as patches, lozenges and chewing gum. Nicotine pouches haven’t been approved for use as NRT – so why are they becoming a popular alternative to smoking and vaping?

    Pouches are heavily marketed on social media and, unlike NRTs, they’re readily available from supermarkets and shops from as little as £5 per box. Social media influencers are sponsored to promote nicotine pouches as “clean”, discreet and convenient. They come in a wide range of flavours, from cinnamon to citrus, which attracts younger consumers.

    Recent research found that approximately 1% of adults and 1.2% of youths aged 11-18 years-old reported currently using nicotine pouches. However, over 5% of adults and more than 3% of youths said they had used these pouches at some point. Although these are relatively low figures, data shows nicotine pouches are becoming increasingly popular in the UK and US.

    Unlike NRT, nicotine pouches are classed as consumer products, so are not regulated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency. Since they do not contain tobacco, nicotine pouches cannot be regulated by the Tobacco and Related Product Regulations either. This means there is no age restriction to buy them.

    Instead, nicotine pouches are governed by the General Product Safety Regulations, which means they are not regulated as stringently as NRT. Companies producing NRTs must apply for a marketing license because medicinal products have to undergo extensive testing to show they are safe and effective. This is not the case for nicotine pouches.

    ‘Healthy’ nicotine?

    Nicotine acts on receptors in the brain, releasing chemical messengers including the “happy hormone” dopamine. These chemical messengers are responsible for the pleasurable feelings and addictive behaviour that people often experience when using tobacco or nicotine products. The faster a drug is absorbed and activates brain receptors, the higher the addiction potential.

    Research shows that nicotine is released more slowly from pouches compared to cigarettes, so it may be less addictive than cigarettes. However, pouches can also vary in the amount of nicotine they contain – evidence shows some have very high levels, higher than cigarettes and NRT.

    Pouches can be marketed as a “clean” form of nicotine consumption – but, although they are smoke-free, they can contain other chemical ingredients such as pH adjusters like sodium carbonate, which allow nicotine to be absorbed in the mouth more easily. Pouches do not contain tobacco, which contains many chemicals and cancer-causing agents. However, nicotine on its own can still be harmful.

    Common side effects of nicotine pouch use include nausea, vomiting, headaches and heart palpitations. Nicotine causes the body to release of chemicals such as adrenaline and noradrenaline. Studies show increased levels of these can raise heart rate and blood pressure and the heart’s need for oxygen.

    Animal studies suggest that nicotine use during teenage years can cause long-term changes in the brain and behaviour as well as an increased likelihood of using other drugs, lower attention levels and mood problems.

    Young people have more nicotine receptors in the areas of the brain related to reward. This makes nicotine’s effects stronger in teenagers than in adults.

    Currently there is not enough evidence to confirm nicotine pouches are harmful to oral health but dentists are concerned about their potential effects. Last year, a review found that oral side effects include dry mouth, sore mouth, blisters on the gums and sometimes changes in the gum area – such as receding gumline – where the pouches were placed. This is similar to side effects of oral NRT. Unlike NRT, which is normally used for a three-month course, pouches may be used for longer – potentially raising the risk of side effects.

    Belgium and the Netherlands have banned nicotine pouches because of the potential risks. In the UK, the new Tobacco and Vapes bill will allow the government to regulate the use of nicotine pouches so that they can only be sold to people aged 18 and older. Advertising will be banned and the content and branding regulated.

    This could be a welcome move for those concerned that nicotine pouch brands are targeting young people who’ve never smoked. But, for current smokers looking for a product to help them quit, it might be wise to opt for the regulated NRTs – even if the flavours aren’t as appealing.

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

    – ref. Why nicotine pouches may not be the best choice to help you to stop smoking – https://theconversation.com/why-nicotine-pouches-may-not-be-the-best-choice-to-help-you-to-stop-smoking-251856

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: European defence spending: three technical reasons for political cooperation

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Francesco Grillo, Academic Fellow, Department of Social and Political Sciences, Bocconi University

    How much would it really cost the European Union to defend itself against aggression? In the immediate term, that question, of course makes us think of Russia, but we can no longer exclude multiple other possibilities, including the potential need to defend territory – say, Greenland – from a former ally.

    How much would it cost to defend Europe if we added in the need to defend the UK, Norway, Turkey or even Canada – and any other Nato country willing to pool resources to fill the void left by US disengagement? Is there an intelligent way to avoid painful trade-offs between this and, say, spending on healthcare or education?

    It looks like EU institutions are finally “doing something” (as former Italian prime minister Mario Draghi recently asked them to do). They may even break the taboo of raising common debt in order to increase spending on joint defence procurements.

    Yet, it also seems they are about to launch a plan that could change the very nature of the European Union without even tackling the question of its financial feasibility. The answer to how joint defence can be paid for certainly doesn’t come from the plan that the European Commission has unveiled on “rearming Europe”. At the very last line of that statement, a figure of €800 billion is posited, but it is not clear how the sum was calculated and quite a few critical qualifications are missing.

    The debate over how much it costs to prevent a war (which is a very different notion from fighting one), has been dominated by what I would call “the fallacy of the percentage of GDP”.

    In 2014 (at the time of Russia’s annexation of Crimea), the leaders of Nato countries agreed to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defence (specifying that retirement benefits to veterans should be included). Yet by 2022, the overall ratio for Nato defence spending had, in fact, shrunk from 2.58% of GDP to 2.51% (thanks to the sharp reduction in the percentage of GDP contributed by the US). And, according to the European Defence Agency, the EU is spending around €279 billion, which is 1.6% of its GDP. Most likely, the €800 billion figure that European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen was citing in her communique is simply an estimate of how much it would yield to increase that spending up to 2% of GDP for each of the next ten years.

    Politicians sometimes need to make back-of-the-envelope calculations, but I would argue that here it points to a much broader problem. Europe hasn’t yet bothered to try to develop a strategy for how this additional money would be spent. A proper strategy should, in fact, start from three key technical considerations. To which I would add a no-less important political one.

    1. Spending smart is better than spending big

    Technologies (including AI) are radically changing the equation. The conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza demonstrate that cheap drones are now the key to modern warfare – not super expensive F35 strike fighters. Why spend billions designing, building and maintaining 2,500 F35s when a drone the size of a mobile phone can cross enemy lines unnoticed?

    In a world in which data is a weapon, and a large-scale attack can be mounted by taking remote control of pagers, what generals call “supremacy” doesn’t necessarily belong to the biggest spender.

    Israel’s military budget is one-third that of Saudi Arabia, yet it dominates the Middle East because its perpetual state of conflict forces innovation. Russia spends less than half of the 27 EU member states, but it has much more experience in hacking other countries’ infrastructures. The EU spends as much as China, but China invests more than twice in research and development and is the world’s largest exporter of drones as a result.

    2. Spending together is better value

    The European parliament estimates that merging the 27 member states’ defence budgets would free up €56 billion (which is a third of what the defence bonds proposed by the Commission would raise).

    Yet the trend is to spend more alone than together. According to the European Defence Agency, the bloc has more than doubled its expenditure on new digital technologies; yet the percentage of that going into joint projects between member states fell from 11% before Ukraine’s invasion to 6.5% in 2023.

    Joint tech spending in Europe.
    Vision, CC BY-ND

    3. Homegrown suddenly looks safer

    Any common defence would also have to rely on “buying European” as much as possible. The F35 fighter jet is another good example here. Denmark agreed to buy 27 of them (to the tune of around €3 billion) with an idea to station four of them in Greenland. The problem is that, according to the former president of the Munich security conference Wolfgang Ischinger, they cannot even take off if remotely disabled by the US. Again, Europe is not walking the walk. The share of equipment that European nations import from the US has massively increased in the last five years.

    A new era for the union

    Defence is probably the most important issue when talking about the Europe of the future. It provides a concrete opportunity to fill a technological gap out of the necessity to do so. Spending on defence in the interests of self-protection may have longer-term benefits beyond the military arena. It has been often the case that military research leads to major breakthroughs that can applied in public services. Who knows. Military innovations with drone or AI technology on today’s battlefields could lead to beneficial uses in peace time.

    The historic opportunity to transform the way we protect ourselves may even force a radical rethinking of not just the EU treaties but of the nature of the EU. The idea of the “coalition of the willing” may, indeed, push Europe towards an alliance which does not include some of its members (such as Hungary) but does include non-members like the UK, Norway and even Turkey. New arrangements will need to be pragmatically flexible.

    Europeans need much more strategy, whereas we now largely have rhetorical announcements with little substance. And we need much more democracy. After all, defence is one of the defining dimensions of the state. Having a common defence policy in Europe could make people feel more like European citizens. But that cannot happen without engaging citizens in an intelligent debate.

    Francesco Grillo is affiliated with the think tank Vision.

    – ref. European defence spending: three technical reasons for political cooperation – https://theconversation.com/european-defence-spending-three-technical-reasons-for-political-cooperation-252410

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Update following fatal collision in Aldwych

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    Police are continuing to investigate a fatal collision in Aldwych on Tuesday, 18 March.

    Emergency services were called to a location close to The Strand, near King’s College London’s campus at 11:41hrs following a collision involving a van and pedestrians.

    Sadly, a woman in her 20s was pronounced dead at the scene. Her family have been made aware and continue to be supported by specialist officers.

    A 27-year-old woman was taken to hospital where she remains in a serious condition. Her injuries are not believed to be life-threatening. A 23-year-old man was taken to hospital and has since been discharged.

    Police arrested the driver of the van, a 26-year-old man at the scene on suspicion of causing death by careless driving. He was further arrested whilst in custody on suspicion of drug driving offences. He has since been bailed with conditions while enquiries continue.

    Detective Chief Superintendent Christina Jessah, in charge of policing for the area said:

    “This was a tragic incident which has deeply affected the community.

    “I commend the actions of the emergency services and members of the public, who provided aid to those involved who tried to save this young woman’s life and help the others who were injured.

    “This area of London is extremely busy and those who have been in the area over the last 24 hours would have noticed an increased police presence as our enquiries continue.

    “Cordons have since been lifted, however we continue to work with those in the area, including King’s College London.

    “We are aware of inaccurate speculation online about this incident being terrorism related. We ask the public to refrain from this speculation to protect the integrity of the ongoing investigation and avoid causing further suffering to the family of the young woman.

    “Our thoughts remain with the family of the young woman who has died.”

    Chief Superintendent Thomas Naughton of the Met’s Roads and Transport Policing Command said:

    “Our team is continuing to establish the facts around this extremely upsetting incident.

    “The investigation remains in the early stages and officers continue to gather CCTV and obtain witness statements from those at the scene.

    “The 26-year-old man who was arrested has since been bailed whilst our enquiries continue. This is a complex investigation which remains a priority to ensure justice for those affected.”

    Anyone with information is asked to call police on 101 or post @MetCC ref CAD 2771/18MARCH.

    To remain 100% anonymous contact the independent charity Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Two women charged after October 2023 protest

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    Two women have been charged with intending or likely to stir up racial hatred contrary to Sec 18(1) of the Public Order Act following an incident during a protest March in central London.

    Hadjer Boumazouna 27 (27.08.1997) and Fatiha Boumazouna 53 (15.07.1971), both of Croydon, are both due to appear at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on 21 March. They were both charged via postal charge requisition in February.

    The charges relate to an incident near Trafalgar Square during a march organised by the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign on Saturday, 28 October 2023.

    The two women attended a police station and were arrested on 29 October 2023 after an appeal was issued on the Met’s X account

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2014 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalya Chernyshova, Senior Lecturer in Modern European History, Queen Mary University of London

    Germany’s ex chancellor, Angela Merkel, and France’s former president, François Hollande, were key to brokering the Minsk agreements. Sodel Vladyslav / Shutterstock

    The Russian president, Vladimir Putin, has agreed to pause attacks on Ukrainian energy infrastructure for 30 days following a phone call with his American counterpart, Donald Trump. On social media, Trump said the call was “very good and productive” and came “with an understanding that we will be working quickly to have a complete ceasefire”.

    This optimism is misplaced. The White House did not mention that Putin issued additional conditions for a ceasefire. The Kremlin demands that Ukraine be effectively disarmed, leaving it defenceless against a Russian takeover. Such terms would be unacceptable to Ukraine and its European partners.

    At this juncture, Trump and his negotiators would do well to ponder why previous attempts to restrain Russia and secure a lasting peace for Ukraine did not succeed.

    This war did not start when shells began to rain on Kyiv in February 2022. Russia had already been waging an undeclared war on its neighbour for nearly eight years in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas, where pro-Russian proxy forces have been stoking up trouble in the border regions of Luhansk and Donetsk.

    Attempts to end the fighting there were made in September 2014 and February 2015, when Russia and Ukraine signed ceasefire agreements during negotiations in Minsk, Belarus.

    Both sets of Minsk agreements proved to be non-starters. The fighting in the region rumbled on until it culminated in Moscow’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The accords stored problems for the future.

    Russia-backed separatists have controlled the south-eastern Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Luhansk since 2015.
    Viacheslav Lopatin / Shutterstock

    Minsk-1 and Minsk-2

    The first Minsk protocols were signed in 2014 by Russia, Ukraine, separatists from Donbas and representatives from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). The agreement provided for an immediate ceasefire monitored by the OSCE, the withdrawal of “foreign mercenaries” from Ukraine and the establishment of a demilitarised buffer zone.

    But Moscow also insisted that Kyiv grant temporary “special status” to the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, the two separatist regions in Donbas. Instead of helping Ukraine regain control over its eastern territories, the agreement allowed the Russia-backed rebels to hold local elections and legalised them as a party to the conflict.

    The ceasefire collapsed within days of signing. The provisions that sought to demarcate the lines of the conflict and give Ukraine back control over its eastern border were not observed by the rebels, and fighting intensified during the winter.

    With the death toll rising, the leaders of France and Germany rushed to broker a fresh round of negotiations in February 2015. The resulting accords, which were known as Minsk-2, also failed to bring peace.

    Russia and its proxy militants in Donbas immediately and repeatedly violated its terms. Astonishingly, Minsk-2 did not even mention Russia, despite it signing the protocols. Moscow continued to deny its involvement in eastern Ukraine, while stepping up armed assistance to the rebels.

    Kyiv was saddled with peace terms that were impossible to implement unless Ukraine was prepared to throw away its sovereignty. Minsk-2 stipulated that the “special status” of the eastern separatist regions was to become permanent, and that the Ukrainian constitution was to be amended to allow for “decentralisation” of power from Kyiv to the rebel regions.

    These regions were to be granted autonomy in financial matters, responsibility for their stretch of the border with Russia, and the right to conclude foreign agreements and hold referenda. To undercut Ukrainian independence further, a neutrality clause inserted into its constitution would effectively bar the country’s entry into Nato.

    Understandably, no one in Kyiv rushed to implement these self-destructive terms. In an interview with German magazine Der Spiegel in 2023, Volodymyr Zelensky said that when he became Ukraine’s president in 2019 and examined Minsk-2, he “did not recognise any desire in the agreements to allow Ukraine its independence”.

    Russia-backed separatists in Sloviansk, a city in Donetsk Oblast, in 2014.
    Fotokon / Shutterstock

    Zelensky’s comment points to the fundamental flaw of the Minsk-2 agreement. Its western brokers failed to recognise that Russian war aims were irreconcilable with Ukrainian sovereignty. Moscow’s objective from the start was to use Donbas to destabilise the government in Kyiv and gain control over Ukraine.

    Western peacemakers searched for a compromise, but the Kremlin used Minsk-2 to advance its goals. As Duncan Allan of the Chatham House research institute noted in 2020: “Russia sees the Minsk agreements as tools with which to break Ukraine’s sovereignty.” The war in Donbas raged on and, by 2020, had claimed 14,000 lives, with 1.5 million people becoming refugees.

    Germany’s ex-chancellor, Angela Merkel, a key broker, subsequently defended the Minsk agreements. She said they bought Kyiv time to arm itself against Russia. It was a costly purchase. Minsk-2 froze the conflict in one locality rather than ended it. And it encouraged Russia, paving the way for a full-scale invasion.

    Emphasising Ukrainian sovereignty

    The existential differences between Ukraine and Russia that plagued the Minsk agreements remain today. Ukraine has demonstrated its resolve to defend its sovereignty, while Russia’s invasion in 2022 testifies to its determination to squash Ukrainian resolve. The timing of the attack so close to the seventh anniversary of Minsk-2 adds grim emphasis to that point.

    This clash of objectives must be addressed head-on in any peace negotiations. The only way to secure lasting peace in Europe is to avoid rewarding the aggressor and punishing its victim.

    The Kremlin has already openly declared that it sees Trump-led brokerage as the west’s acknowledgement of Russian strategic superiority. It needs to be disabused of this notion. As argued by Nataliya Bugayova, a fellow at the Institute for the Study of War, the war is not lost yet. Russia is far from invulnerable, and it can be made to accept defeat.

    But for any agreement to be effective, there can be no ambiguity or middle ground on the subject of Ukrainian sovereignty. It must be protected and backed by security guarantees.

    So far, the Trump administration has shown little understanding of this. But ten years down the line from Minsk-2, Europeans have finally grasped it.

    Finland’s president, Aleksander Stubbs, told reporters on March 19 that Ukraine must “absolutely” not lose sovereignty and territory. And, on the day Trump and Putin had their discussion, Germany’s parliament voted for a massive boost in defence spending – another indicator that Europeans are no longer taking Putin on trust.

    Natalya Chernyshova received funding from the British Academy during 2020-2022.

    – ref. Ukraine deal: Europe has learned from the failed 2014 Minsk accords with Putin. Trump has not – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-deal-europe-has-learned-from-the-failed-2014-minsk-accords-with-putin-trump-has-not-252540

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Changes to passport application fees

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    Changes to passport application fees

    The government will introduce new fees for passport applications on 10 April 2025.

    Image: Getty Images

    The proposals, which are subject to approval by Parliament, will include the following:

    • the fee for a standard online application made from within the UK will rise from £88.50 to £94.50 for adults and £57.50 to £61.50 for children
    • postal applications will increase from £100 to £107 for adults and £69 to £74 for children
    • the fee for a Premium Service (1 day) application made from within in the UK will rise from £207.50 to £222 for adults and £176.50 to £189 for children
    • the fee for a standard online application when applying from overseas for a UK passport will rise from £101 to £108 for adults and £65.50 to £70 for children
    • overseas standard paper applications will increase from £112.50 to £120.50 for adults and £77 to £82.50 for children

    The new fees will help the Home Office to continue to move towards a system that meets its costs through those who use it, reducing reliance on funding from general taxation. The government does not make any profit from the cost of passport applications.

    The fees contribute to the cost of processing passport applications, consular support overseas, including for lost or stolen passports, and the cost of processing British citizens at UK borders.

    Customers are advised that they should apply in good time before travelling.

    In 2024, where no further information was required, 99.7% of standard applications from the UK were processed within 3 weeks.

    Passport fees are reviewed in line with HM Treasury guidance.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UN Human Rights Council 58: UK Statement for the Special Rapporteur on the DPRK

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Speech

    UN Human Rights Council 58: UK Statement for the Special Rapporteur on the DPRK

    UK Statement for the Interactive Dialogue with Special Rapporteur on the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Delivered by the UK’s Human Rights Ambassador, Eleanor Sanders.

    Thank you, Mr Vice President.

    And thank you Special Rapporteur for your report and continued efforts to maintain international focus on the ongoing, systematic human rights violations in the DPRK.

    We are pleased that the DPRK engaged with the Universal Periodic Review in November and encourage them to implement recommendations and make lasting changes for the people of the DPRK.

    We share your serious concerns at the implementation of laws that further restrict the freedom of movement, work and expression in the DPRK.

    All governments have a responsibility to uphold their obligations in line with UN Conventions and international law.

    We also urge all Member States to respect the principle of non-refoulement and to not forcibly return those who have escaped the DPRK, where they face severe threats to their safety and human rights.

    The UK supports the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation that the DPRK incorporate all sustainable development goals, particularly those aimed at supporting individuals from vulnerable groups.

    Special Rapporteur,

    How do you propose to work with the DPRK to increase access to disaggregated data to better identify the needs of the most marginalised individuals?

    Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Travel gets greener for university students and staff

    Source: City of Derby

    A new sustainable travel hub at the University of Derby’s Kedleston Road site is now open, giving students and staff greater choice when deciding how to travel.

    Home to the new hub, Kedleston Road is the University’s largest site, two miles from the city centre.

    Now, thanks to a partnership between Derby City Council and the University of Derby, students and staff can take full advantage of the city’s growing sustainable transport offer. The first-of-its-kind in the city, the hub has been designed with the capacity to grow as Derby’s sustainable travel offer continues to expand.

    To begin with, the hub offers:

    • 11 Electric Vehicle (EV) charge points
    • Real Time Information (RTI) screens with live travel updates
    • Secure undercover cycle parking for up to 58 bicycles, plus a further 12 uncovered spaces

    Councillor Carmel Swan, Cabinet Member Climate Change, Transport and Sustainability said:

    I’m so pleased that we’ve been able to partner with the University of Derby to bring this new travel hub to life. A big thanks to everyone from the council and University, as well as our partners, for all their hard work to bring this project to fruition.

    We’ve made great progress over the past few years to expand and diversify the sustainable transport choices available across the city and it’s vital that we make sure that these schemes are also accessible to students who choose to study in Derby.

    Providing students and University staff with accessible and affordable alternative transport options will further support our climate ambitions and enhance Derby’s attractiveness as a leading university city.

    Stephen Dudderidge, Chief Operating Officer at the University of Derby, officially opened the hub with members from Derby City Council. He said:

    We are delighted to launch the new sustainable travel hub at our Kedleston Road Campus, providing greater access to sustainable travel options for our students, staff, partners, and visitors.

    We understand the importance of reducing our carbon footprint and supporting the sustainability of our environment. From our estate to our teaching, learning and research, we are making a concerted effort to reduce our emissions, set green targets and put sustainability at the heart of our growth and development plans, and this new travel hub reinforces this commitment.

    Work began on site in late 2024 and the hub was officially opened on Friday 14 March ahead of the University’s Go Green Week; an annual event to encourage staff, students and visitors to consider making greener choices.  

    The hub, funded by £800,000 from the Government’s Future Transport Zones Fund, complements the city’s growing active travel offer which gives citizens a range of sustainable transport options.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: OSCE supports Armenia’s efforts to combat cybercrime

    Source: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe – OSCE

    Headline: OSCE supports Armenia’s efforts to combat cybercrime

    Participants at a study visit on the development of a cybercrime database for a delegation of Armenian practitioners, Paris, 20 March 2025. (OSCE) Photo details

    The OSCE Transnational Threats Department (TNTD), in co-operation with the French Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs, organized a study visit on the development of a cybercrime database for a delegation of Armenian practitioners from 18 to 20 March 2025 in Paris, France.
    The study visit was a crucial step towards Armenia’s goal of developing a robust cybercrime database in line with international good practices and interagency co-operation.
    The event brought together key Armenian institutions involved in cybercrime prevention and investigation, including representatives from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Investigative Committee, Prosecutor General’s Office, National Police, Ministry of High-Tech Industry and other relevant agencies. Participants engaged in discussions with their French counterparts on international good practices, technical and legal frameworks for cybercrime databases, and strategies to strengthen cyber resilience.
    During the visit, the Armenian delegation met with officials from the French Ministry of Justice, the National Agency for Information Systems Security (ANSSI), and the Cyberspace Command (COMCYBER) of the Ministry of the Interior. They also visited the Cyber Campus in the La Défense district, where they explored data-driven approaches to cybercrime investigations, co-operation between law enforcement and private sector stakeholders, and innovative approaches to combating digital threats.
    “The cyber domain has become a field of conflict, whether through information manipulation or its exploitation by criminal networks. It is crucial to combat these threats by developing capacities and strengthening international co-operation,” said Pascale Vincent, Head of the Arms Control and OSCE Department at the French Ministry of Europe and Foreign Affairs.
    Alexandra Davin, Magistrate and Head of the Cybercrime Task Force at the Specialized Criminal Justice Division, highlighted the economic impact of cybercrime, particularly ransomware attacks. “Ransomware is projected to cost a total of $265 billion per year by 2031, a staggering increase from the estimated $5 billion in 2017 and $325 million in 2015,” she said.
    This initiative is part of the OSCE extra-budgetary project “Capacity Building on Combating and Preventing Cybercrime in Armenia” and is funded by France.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Council support for Nip it in the Bud campaign

    Source: Northern Ireland – City of Derry

    Council support for Nip it in the Bud campaign

    19 March 2025

    Derry City and Strabane District Council has agreed to promote the Rural Communities Cancer Project aimed at tackling cancer inequalities and helping to raise awareness of cancer locally among those in rural areas, particularly the farming community.

    The Rural Communities Cancer Project is an initiative between The Farming Community Network (FCN) and Macmillan Cancer Support, to help raise awareness of cancer signs and symptoms among the community as part of the “Nip it in the Bud” campaign.

    Mayor of Derry City and Strabane District Council, Cllr Lilian Seenoi Barr said it was important that council supported this campaign and played its part in sharing information to assist farmers and people living in rural communities to get checked for early signs of cancer and to be aware of the level of support that is available.

    She said: “We understand that farmers and those living in rural communities may not prioritise their health for several reasons – because of the lack of time and close proximity or availability of services and as a result some of the signs and symptoms of cancer – such as prolonged pains, tiredness and fatigue – can be missed or overlooked. It is for this reason that Council has agreed to do what it can to help get the ‘Nip it in the Bud’ message out there and to encourage communities to get any symptoms checked. Council hope that’s its support of the campaign will encourage people in the rural areas of Derry and Strabane to be more familiar with the early signs of cancer, and to take the necessary steps to get checked and ‘nip it in the bud’.”

    Caitriona Crawford, National Manager (FCN Northern Ireland) of the Farming Community Network said: “Thank you to the Derry City and Strabane District Council for supporting our project and for helping us to get our message out to the community in the district. The support from the council and Mayor Cllr Lilian Seenoi Barr is instrumental in encouraging early detection and normalising conversations around cancer care and support. By working collaboratively across farming and rural communities, we can make a real difference in supporting people impacted by cancer.”

    The ‘Nip it in the Bud’ campaign provides a range of useful resources for agri-businesses, Ag Colleges, Young Farmers’ Clubs and others to download or circulate – some focused on specific cancers that farmers can be more at-risk of developing, such as skin cancer, prostate cancer or lung cancer.

    The ‘Nip it in the Bud’ campaign encourages early detection and making time to see the GP if someone notices a change in their health. The campaign is part of a UK-wide partnership between FCN and Macmillan Cancer Support. Throughout the campaign FCN is inviting farmers and people in rural communities who have been affected by cancer to share their stories.

    Mayor Barr also encouraged the public to take part in a new survey that hopes to better understand current cancer service provisions in rural areas, whilst recommending areas for improvement: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/W9DQM5M

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: City Mayor proposes boundary expansion amid council reorganisation plans

    Source: City of Leicester

    LEICESTER City Council will this Friday (21 Mar) submit its interim proposal for the reshaping of local councils across the city, Leicestershire and Rutland.

    The interim submission – which includes outline plans for expanding Leicester’s boundaries – has been put forward in response to the Government’s invitation to councils to explore how local government could be reorganised.

    It proposes the creation of an expanded city council alongside a second, new unitary authority covering the remaining area of Leicestershire and Rutland, both meeting the Government’s target population of 500,000 or more residents.

    Reorganising the ten existing local councils into two unitary authorities of comparable size would deliver more cost-effective public services, streamlined decision making and a path to financial sustainability.

    To achieve this, the city council’s interim submission outlines a sensible expansion to Leicester’s boundary to include adjoining suburbs and space for future housing growth. This could include land currently within the boundaries of Charnwood, Harborough, Oadby and Wigston and Blaby councils. 

    City Mayor Peter Soulsby said: “Any realistic option for local government reorganisation in Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland must address the historic accident of our city’s boundaries.

    “Leicester is one of the most tightly constrained major cities in the UK. When you compare Leicester to cities like Bradford, Leeds or Sheffield, our population density is huge because our city covers such a relatively small area – less than a fifth of those cities.

    “That’s because, in the 1970s, when the country’s non-metropolitan districts were determined, the boundaries of most other cities were extended while ours have remained largely unchanged since the 1920s.

    “Critically, our almost uniquely constrained boundary means that now – unlike comparable cities – we have no chance of delivering the extra housing that our city so desperately needs within existing confines.

    “The county and district councils all know that the existing city boundary makes no sense and has to change. The Conservative leader of the county council and the Liberal Democrat leader of Rutland joined me in writing to the Minister in January saying those boundaries should be extended.

    “Unfortunately, although understandably, the forthcoming county elections mean they have chosen to withdraw from that initial proposal. I hope that we will be able to return to sensible discussions about where boundary lines should be drawn after the May elections.”

    Expansion of the city’s boundaries is key to unlocking devolution and the transfer of more powers and funding from central government to a new Mayoral Strategic Authority for the area.

    Initial engagement with stakeholders has been positive and further consultation is planned over the coming months as the proposal is developed, ahead of its final submission in November. It will then be up to the Government to determine which proposals are taken forward and to lead on formal consultation.

    The English Devolution White Paper – published in December 2024 – sets out the Government’s intention to end two tier councils, such as in Leicestershire, and create new, larger single tier unitary authorities. This will see an end to small district councils and pave the way for strategic authorities across England which will be given greater powers over issues such as planning and transport.

    Leicester City Council’s interim proposals for local government reorganisation would see the city population grow from 372,000 now to just over 600,000 by 2028. It would also provide more land for new development and help to accommodate the estimated future need for 32,000 new homes, 18,000 new affordable homes and an expansion of existing employment land.

    Leicester City Council’s full interim submission for local government reorganisation is available to view online at www.leicester.gov.uk/keystrategies

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Leader tours new Drumgeith Community Campus and Greenfield Academy

    Source: Scotland – City of Dundee

    Dundee City Council leader Councillor Mark Flynn visited the site of the new Drumgeith Community Campus and Greenfield Academy on Wednesday March 19 to see progress on the £100 million development. 

    As the largest investment in education, sport and community provision in the city, the flagship Community Campus will deliver state-of-the-art facilities and services to the area.  

    Greenfield Academy will replace the current Braeview Academy and Craigie High School. 

    Set to open in August 2025, Drumgeith Community Campus will serve as a modern and vibrant central hub for the north and east of the city for both pupils and the community to use.  

    It will provide specialist pupil support provision, citywide music and performing arts, as well as community, library, leisure, and sports facilities for use by the wider community.   

    Facilities at the campus will support partnership working with Dundee & Angus College to provide Senior Phase Education curricular experiences for young people with complex additional support needs. 

    Sport facilities which include floodlit all weather pitches, a fitness suite and a dance studio in addition to gym and games halls.  

    Councillor Flynn said: “This is a really exciting time for the whole community, and I am pleased to see progress on such an important investment for the future of our city. 

    “It will host superb facilities for young people and the wider community that will help them to develop skills to take advantage of new opportunities in the years ahead. 

    “Drumgeith Community Campus and Greenfield Academy show our ambition to deliver real improvements and make the city a better place for everyone. 

    “I am delighted that pupils are also getting the chance to look at facilities that will become their learning environment from the start of the next school year.” 

    Children, Families and Communities Convener Councillor Stewart Hunter said: “Our ambition is for the campus to be the heart of the community with state-of-the-art facilities for everyone to enjoy and it’s great to see the vision coming together.”  

    Fair Work, Economic Growth and Infrastructure Convener Steven Rome added: “This £100 million investment in creating the Drumgeith Community Campus in the north east of the city is a significant project to transform educational and community facilities, replacing two outdated school buildings with a secondary placed within a modern and vibrant campus.” 

    Drumgeith Community Campus is being delivered through Procurement Hub Major Projects 2 Framework. 

    Elliot Robertson, Chief Executive Officer, Robertson Group, said: “As we near completion of the state-of the-art campus and academy, it’s been fantastic to show how we have realised Dundee City Council’s ambitious vision, which will be at the heart of the community for generations to come.   

    “We have been partner of choice with the Council for several years now and this project represents a shared vision of creating modern, sustainable, high quality buildings that make a difference to the people who use them, as well as the local economy through the construction process and beyond.”  

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Joint Statement on UK-Philippines JETCO

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    News story

    Joint Statement on UK-Philippines JETCO

    On Monday 17 March, the UK and the Philippines held the inaugural Joint Economic and Trade Committee (JETCO) meeting.

    Joint Statement on UK-Philippines Joint Economic and Trade Committee

    On Monday 17 March, the UK and the Philippines held the inaugural Joint Economic and Trade Committee (JETCO) meeting.

    The Ministerial JETCO reflects a commitment from both governments to upgrade the growing bilateral economic relationship between both countries, including by exploring ways to boost trade and investment, as well as addressing barriers to market access.

    The committee was hosted in London by UK Minister for Trade Policy and Economic Security, Douglas Alexander MP, and co-chaired by Undersecretary Allan B. Gepty of the Philippines Department of Trade and Industry.

    Minister Alexander and Undersecretary Gepty endorsed a programme of work to advance bilateral cooperation over the next 12-18 months, including government-to-government and government-to-business activity in agreed priority areas such as infrastructure, agriculture, energy, economic development, life sciences, and technology.

    Much of this work will be delivered through four Sectoral Working Groups, which will meet annually to facilitate technical policy exchange and project delivery.

    Infrastructure

    The UK and the Philippines committed to progressing a government-to-government Financing Framework Partnership to support the delivery of national priority infrastructure and development programmes and projects in the Philippines.

    The Framework aims to expand access to £5 billion of financing from UK Export Finance (UKEF) and other sources of cooperation, and provide the Philippines with new paths to UK expertise, technology, and comparative advantage.

    Both countries agreed to develop a project pipeline through the Infrastructure Sectoral Working Group in anticipation of the establishment of the Framework.

    Energy

    The UK and the Philippines reflected on the extensive cooperation in the last year between the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), the Philippines Department of Energy, and the UK Offshore Renewable Energy Catapult, supporting the offshore wind development of the Philippines.

    Both countries emphasised the importance of the sector, recognising its contribution to economic growth and an inclusive green transition and committed to continue working closely on policy and regulatory engagement in the coming year, driven by cooperation at the Energy Sectoral Working Group.

    Agriculture

    Minister Alexander and Undersecretary Gepty discussed the benefits of collaboration between the UK Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) and the Philippines Department of Agriculture with a view to safeguarding and expanding market access for agri-food exporters.

    They agreed to continue collaboration across issues such as animal disease detection and antimicrobial resistance as well as new opportunities for collaboration on precision breeding and genetics.

    They endorsed the role of the Agriculture Sectoral Working Group to drive greater trade and investment in our respective agriculture sectors, including by promoting commercial agriculture opportunities in the Philippines and the UK.

    Economic Development

    Minister Alexander and Undersecretary Gepty recognised the important role of bilateral trade in furthering economic development in the Philippines and endorsed efforts to improve utilisation of the Developing Countries Trading Scheme, which offers Philippine exporters tariff-free access on 92% of products.

    They were pleased to note the upcoming launch of an export handbook that details key regulatory compliance requirements, including how to leverage the UK Developing Countries Trading Scheme to benefit from preferential tariff rates.

    They agreed on activities to further strengthen the business landscape in the Philippines and facilitate investment and digitalisation of trade.

    This covers continuing collaboration on regulatory reform initiatives, facilitating business linkages, and capacity building on AI policy frameworks and governance.

    Regional collaboration

    Minister Alexander and Undersecretary Gepty used the JETCO meeting to discuss the importance of cooperation between the UK and the Philippines in support of regional economic integration.

    The UK looks forward to deepening the UK-ASEAN Partnership and working with the Philippines towards its Chairship of ASEAN in 2026.

    Trade promotion and investment

    Minister Alexander and Undersecretary Gepty concluded discussions by acknowledging the potential for future economic growth and shared prosperity through deepening trade links.

    They acknowledged that in 2024, the UK was the largest single investor in the Philippines, driven by investments in renewables.

    The Philippines, being one of the fastest growing economies in Southeast Asia last year with around 6% growth, has the capacity to boost trade in sectors where the UK holds significant commercial expertise.

    Minister Alexander and Undersecretary Gepty emphasised the importance of delivering real impact from strengthened trade and economic discussions.

    They encouraged future trade promotion and investment activities to facilitate more business opportunities in sectors such as technology and infrastructure including energy.

    After the JETCO meeting, UK Trade Envoy to the Philippines, George Freeman MP, and Undersecretary Gepty, co-hosted a business briefing in partnership with the UK-ASEAN Business Council to share insights from discussions and seek industry views on priorities for growing the bilateral trade and investment relationship.

    Bilateral economic relationship

    The Philippines was the UK’s 60th largest trading partner in the end of Q3 2024 accounting for 0.2% of total UK trade.

    Total trade in goods and services between the UK and the Philippines in the same period was £2.8 billion.  

    The new UK-Philippines JETCO adds extra emphasis to the UK’s deepening relationships across the wider Asia Pacific region.

    As an ASEAN Dialogue Partner, the UK is committed to further enhancing engagement with the region, through both multilateral and bilateral forums, including those with the Philippines.

    The JETCO follows the launch of the UK-Philippines Joint Framework for the Enhanced Partnership – an enhancement of our bilateral relations across foreign policy, economic growth, security and defence cooperation amongst other areas.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Statement by Jim Allister KC MP in Response to the Third Parcels Border Implementation Date

    Source: Traditional Unionist Voice – Northern Ireland

    Statement by Jim Allister KC MP in Response to the Third Parcels Border Implementation Date

    Jim Allister said:

    “Today we received yet another reminder of the fact that we are still being shielded from the destructive consequences of the Irish Sea border as it disinherits us from our wider home economy, on account of the fact that it has not yet been fully implemented and has indeed had its commencement postponed to a third date.

    “First the Irish Sea Parcels Border was to have been implemented on 30 September 2024, with seminars provided to help people get ready from April 2024.

    “Then on 19 September, in the context if growing concerns, and less than two weeks before implementation day, it was suddenly announced that it was being delayed until 31 March 2025.

    “Unbelievably today the Government has announced that it has been put back yet again until 1 May and now they are saying implementation will only begin on that date.

    “Trying to impose a customs border on parcels movements within a national economy is completely absurd, just as has been the attempt to frustrate the flow of other goods within what was the UK single market for goods through the imposition of other aspects of the customs border.

    “The costly and destructive implications of doing so are plainly demonstrated in the fact that we are now on our third commencement date and in the concerns eloquently presented by businesses to the Northern Ireland Affairs Select Committee last week.

    “The introduction of the parcels border would seal the demise of the UK single market for goods for many purposes and its replacement with what is effectively a GB single market for goods, and an island of Ireland single market for goods, subject to all island laws, imposed on us.

    “This is a deliberate attempt by the Republic of Ireland and wider EU to undermine the UK and is contrary to international law, including the Declaration on Principles of International Law, Friendly Relations and Co-operation among states in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations which states:

    ‘Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of any other State or country.’

    “Lest anyone should be in any doubt about the importance of these principles, the Declaration also affirms:

    ‘The principles of the Charter which are embodied in this Declaration constitute basic principles of international law, and consequently appeals to all States to be guided by these principles in their international conduct and to develop their mutual relations on the basis of the strict observance of these principles.’

    And

    ‘Where obligations arising under international agreements are in conflict with the obligations of Members of the United Nations under the Charter of the United Nations, the obligations under the Charter shall prevail.’

    The introduction of the Parcels border would also place further pressure on the Windsor Framework itself by means of generating further trade diversion in violation of Article 16.

    “The Windsor Framework is now failing not only in the sense that it is causing real difficulty but in its own terms, generating trade diversion in violation of Article 16.

    “In this context it must be replaced with the viable alternative Mutual Enforcement.”

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Minister Kinnock speech at Pulse GP conference

    Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements

    Speech

    Minister Kinnock speech at Pulse GP conference

    Minister Stephen Kinnock spoke at the Pulse Live London Conference for GPs.

    Thank you very, very much indeed for that very kind welcome.

    It’s such an honour and a privilege to be here with you today, coming off the back of another quiet and uneventful week at the Department of Health and Social Care.

    So it’s really good to be with you today.

    Complexity – that’s a word and an idea that’s been on my mind a lot recently.

    And when you look at the agenda for these two days of pulse live – stimulating and hugely varied, it’s such an insight into the complexity that you face every day.

    As GPs, you don’t know who’s coming through the door with what and what it will ask of you.

    It’s your ability to deal with that complexity and the needs of the person in front of you that will largely define their experience of the health system.

    That responsibility and reality for you is so important to acknowledge and to honour.

    So really, I wanted to start by saying thank you.

    Thank you both as a representative of the government, but also just as a citizen of this country for everything that you do.

    And as we look at the transformation that our healthcare system needs, complexity is our reality.

    For some, it is the reason to say, no, we can’t change.

    It’s all too complex.

    It’s all too hard.

    But we know that the complexity of the challenge itself is a call to action.

    It’s a call to get started on the work that needs to be done, because delay only intensifies complexity.

    And it’s also because of the scale of the mess that we inherited. [Political content redacted].

    When we came into office last year, we were facing a primary care sector that was underfunded, understaffed and in crisis.

    A bizarre situation where people were looking for GPs and qualified GPs were looking for jobs, and GPs were spending far too much of their time – a fifth of their working hours – in the back office pushing paper due to poor communication with secondary care.

    So we are utterly committed to getting primary care back on its feet.

    For every GP and for all those who need their family doctor, within weeks of coming into office, we put in place just shy of £100 million to put a thousand more GPs onto the frontline.

    And in October we included GPs in the additional roles reimbursement scheme and practice.

    Nurses are going to be included from April.

    At the Autumn Budget, the Chancellor announced £100 million of capital for GP estate upgrades over the next financial year.

    And just before Christmas, we announced an additional £889 million, which was the biggest uplift to the GP contract in years.

    Now, as you all experience every day, the context of every decision matters, that we have made these choices in the context of the dire financial situation we found in July last year, hopefully tells you that we both understand the reality of general practice now, and that we are determined to change it.

    So why are we so determined?

    You’ve probably heard me or Wes talk about the three shifts that we need to make over the next ten years to make our health service fit for the future: from hospital to community, from sickness to prevention, and from analogue to digital.

    Well, GPs are pivotal to all of those three shifts.

    You sit at the heart of our NHS and you are its front door, but you’ve been neglected for far too long.

    When you ask people what their top priority for the NHS is, the chances are they’ll say, fix general practice.

    And from the Treasury’s point of view and the taxpayers’ point of view, a GP appointment costs around £40, whilst a visit to A&E costs up to £400.

    So it is perfectly sensible to prioritise primary care as a way to relieve pressure on those parts of the service that are struggling to cope.

    Now look, none of the problems in general practice are going to be fixed overnight.

    We’ve taken the important first steps to fix the broken door, and you should look at all of our decisions in the context of reversing the decade long cuts to GPs as a share of the NHS total budget, and we will be, for the first time in a very long time, reversing that trend.

    Our GPs are already going above and beyond, delivering more than ever, with over a million appointments a day last year, but with only a fraction more qualified GPs than there were in 2019.

    So that’s why it’s been so important for us to reset our relationship, and I’m proud of the progress that we’ve made together since July.

    Following extensive consultation and collaboration with the General Practitioners Committee of the BMA, the committee voted to accept the 25/26 GP contract, the first agreement in four years.

    I’d like to extend my appreciation to Dr Katie Bramall-Stainer and her team for the collaborative and constructive way in which they engaged in the recent contract consultation.

    We greatly appreciate their efforts and look forward to continuing this positive working relationship going into the future.

    This is a fair deal for patients, the profession and the public purse.

    And it’s the product of a relationship that’s built on dialogue, trust and respect.

    In place of strife, we see the 25/26 GP contract as an important first step in shifting the focus of healthcare out of the hospital and into the community, and towards rebuilding general practice.

    And today, we hope that GPs across the country can see our genuine intent to continue working together with GPs to build an NHS that is fit for the future.

    So I want this to be a conversation today, so not a lecture.

    So let me just quickly touch upon a few things that I hope will come up in our discussion.

    First, moving to a neighbourhood health service.

    I hope our investment and contract changes are the first steps towards broader reform.

    Primary care will be the foundation of the service with GPs at its heart.

    Second, bringing back the family doctor.

    The new contract will support practices to identify and prioritise patients who would benefit most from continuity of care, such as those with complex and long term conditions.

    And this was a pledge that was at the heart of our manifesto.

    Third, cutting bureaucracy.

    Back in October, we launched our Red Tape Challenge to bust bureaucracy between primary and secondary care.

    We also announced that we’re bringing NHS England back into the department, to scrap duplication and to give more power and tools to local leaders and systems so they can better deliver for their local communities.

    We’ve been listening closely to the sector, learning about what works and what needs to change, and we are removing 32 outdated indicators in the Quality Outcomes framework while prioritising key areas of prevention, such as cardiovascular disease.

    Fourth, integration – we are reinforcing collaboration between general practice and pharmacies by improving access to records for community pharmacists to give patients more coordination of care.

    Fifth, on waiting lists, we will invest up to £80 million supporting GPs to seek specialist advice before making referral, reducing unnecessary hospital visits and ensuring patients receive the right care at the right time.

    We could also touch on digital.

    The shift from analogue to digital must come with more online access for patients, providing parity with walk in and telephone access.

    These actions reflect our commitment to securing the long term sustainability of general practice as part of a wider transformation of the NHS.

    It is Change NHS.

    The development of a 10 Year Health Plan that we want to be shaped by as much expertise and lived experience as humanly possible.

    Change NHS is the biggest ever conversation about the NHS, with over 2,900 staff at workshops and events.

    This has been a collective effort and I want to take the opportunity to thank all of our partners for running 600 events in communities across the UK to ensure those whose voices often go unheard can have their say.

    We see GPs as the bedrock of the NHS and the 10 Year Health Plan.

    That’s why we’re engaging with GPs online and in person, and working with the BMA to promote these opportunities to its members.

    The 10 Year Health Plan represents a major opportunity for your profession to shape the next 50 years of health care in this country and beyond.

    We are seeking submissions until the 14th of April, so please make sure you’ve had your say.

    There’s still some time to provide your inputs and your insights.

    The relationship we want with the general practice profession is bigger than just one contract.

    It’s about partnership that can work through the complexity to create a system that works and delivers for the people that all of us serve.

    We will keep working with you, the BMA and the wider profession to shape the future of general practice.

    Moving towards a neighbourhood health service that focuses on prevention and proactive care.

    It’s why I’m so grateful to have the chance to be here and speak with you today.

    General practice is the front door of the NHS, so let’s fix it together. Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: A ‘golden age’ of global free trade is over. Smaller alliances can meet the moment

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Armin Steinbach, Professor of Law and Economics, HEC Paris Business School

    The global trade landscape is shifting, and not in the way free traders had hoped. For decades, the belief that economic openness could foster peace and stability reigned supreme. Trade, it was argued, could transform authoritarian regimes into more peaceful players. But Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shattered this way of thinking. Rather than mourning the end of a multilateralism based on states’ commitments to jointly agreed trade rules, we should see it as a necessary adjustment to a world where economic security takes precedence over market efficiency, and resilience over cost minimization.

    The World Trade Organization (WTO), which has constrained protectionism since its inception in 1995, is no longer the linchpin of global trade it once was. Multilateral trade talks have stagnated, and the WTO’s dispute settlement system is in paralysis. The US, once a champion of rules-based trade, now finds strategic advantage in a world where power dynamics outweigh legal frameworks. Years of negotiations on agriculture and fisheries subsidies have yielded little progress, underscoring the difficulty of reaching consensus among increasingly divergent national interests.


    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

    Consider the Uruguay Round negotiations in the 1990s that led to the establishment of the WTO – a rare moment when 123 countries found common ground on liberalizing trade in goods, services and intellectual property. That success stemmed from a broad agenda that offered enough variety to create win-win scenarios for all. Today, narrow negotiation agendas make compromise far harder to achieve.

    Free trade agreements are emerging less frequently: the average number of new trade agreements per year since 2020 is less than half the average of the previous decade. Meanwhile, protectionist measures have proliferated: there were about five times as many in 2023 as in 2015. Regardless of US President Donald Trump’s tariff frenzy, governments are erecting trade barriers and adopting policies that favour domestic industries, driven by the need to secure critical supply chains.

    The trend is clear: trade liberalization is no longer the top priority for most countries. Instead, security concerns are reshaping trade policy, echoing the arguments of the 18th-century philosopher Adam Smith. In The Wealth of Nations, Smith argued that national defence is more valuable than economic wealth. (“Defence,” he wrote, “is of much more importance than opulence”). This idea feels particularly relevant today. In a world of geopolitical conflict, trade is often yielding to strategic concerns.

    The United Nations, despite its mission to maintain peace, has struggled to prevent conflict. If international law cannot deter aggression, economic policy must step in.

    Security-driven trade

    For the EU, this translates into using its trade policy instruments, especially vis-à-vis China, on the basis of a careful dependency analysis that identifies strategic commodities and products. As the European Commission sets self-sufficiency benchmarks for green technologies following the bloc’s Net-Zero Industry Act, it errs if it sees the substitution of domestic products for imports as the right way to reduce dependencies. In most cases, reducing import concentration will require diversifying suppliers rather than European self-production.

    Security-driven trade requires shifting away from fragile multilateralism toward more selective, regional alliances. These “trade clubs” would align economic interests with shared security priorities. The EU’s strengthening ties with the South American Mercosur states, a group of non-hegemonic countries reliant on open trade, exemplify this approach. Intensifying trade with targeted countries could be the best response to Trump’s tariffs, avoiding the lose-lose outcome of tit-for-tat tariff wars. The goal of autonomy from an unpredictable US offers a good framework for crafting new bilateral relationships.

    Another example is the idea of a “climate club”, which policy-makers have discussed for some time. Climate clubs would consist of countries that agree on joint strategies to reduce carbon emissions while fostering energy security and protecting their economies from competitors without adequate carbon pricing.



    À lire aussi :
    Trump protectionism and tariffs: a threat to globalisation, or to democracy itself?

    The challenge is to distinguish between “legitimate” and “illegitimate” security claims. The latter refer to countries’ growing abuse of the national security card to justify trade policies. WTO dispute settlement panels ruled against the “self-judging” character of national security claims, hence subjecting them to legal scrutiny, but this “rule of law” approach has only heightened rejection of the WTO system on the US side. To limit abuse, the EU should seek alignment with the US on issues of common concern, such as responding to industrial overcapacity or preventing technology leaks. A joint approach could avert nationalist unilateralism.

    A new focus for the WTO

    Some worry this shift away from multilateralism could disadvantage poorer nations, leaving them vulnerable to the whims of powerful ones. However, regional trade alliances can empower smaller states. For example, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) gives African nations collective bargaining power they might lack individually. Since its inception with 22 signatories, AfCFTA has grown to include 48 countries, enhancing the continent’s influence in global trade.

    Abandoning multilateralism doesn’t mean sidelining the WTO entirely. Instead, the WTO can refocus on smaller, “plurilateral” agreements among like-minded countries. This “coalition of the willing” approach has already proven effective in areas like e-commerce and investment facilitation. The WTO can remain a forum for building consensus, but its future lies in fostering flexible partnerships rather than pursuing grand, all-encompassing trade deals. In a fragmented world, these smaller agreements could yield the most meaningful progress. Nascent but promising plurilateral efforts are under way to tackle fossil fuel subsidies and environmentally sustainable plastics trade.

    The golden age of global free trade may be over, but that doesn’t spell disaster. As nations grapple with security challenges, trade policy must evolve to reflect new priorities. Strategic alliances, diversified supply chains and targeted trade agreements will shape the future of global commerce. Rather than lament the decline of multilateralism, we should embrace this shift as a necessary response to a more volatile world. In doing so, we can craft a trade policy that prioritizes resilience and security, safeguarding both economic stability and national interests.

    Armin Steinbach ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

    – ref. A ‘golden age’ of global free trade is over. Smaller alliances can meet the moment – https://theconversation.com/a-golden-age-of-global-free-trade-is-over-smaller-alliances-can-meet-the-moment-251438

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Securing the future of aviation

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 2

    Speech

    Securing the future of aviation

    Secretary of State for Transport outlines next steps for modernising the aviation sector at the AirportsUK annual dinner.

    Good evening, everyone, and thank you Karen for inviting me tonight (18 March 2025). 

    I know better than to stand between people and their dinner, so rest assured I will keep my remarks brief.

    And despite this being my second aviation speech in less than a month, you’ll be glad to know I haven’t run out of things to say. I haven’t even exhausted my best material about feedstocks and revenue certainty mechanisms – so brace yourselves.

    But, seriously, it really is a pleasure to be here. I hope you feel, as I do, that these are exciting times for your sector, with much to focus on in 2025 and beyond.

    But let me start with the remarkable year you’ve just had. Bristol exceeding 10 million annual passengers for the first time. Or the busiest year on record for Manchester and Stansted. All told, passenger levels at UK airports were 7% higher in 2024 than the previous year.

    I know none of this happens by accident. Much is down to the changes you’ve made to the passenger experience. The technology you’re implementing. And the investments you’re making to increase capacity.

    Looking longer term, it’s clear this is a trend, not an unusual year. In fact, everything points to a record-breaking 2025 – and it’s easy to see why.

    The world has never been more interconnected. The desire for travel never stronger. Global forecasts show a near doubling of passengers and cargo in the next 20 years  

    So the demand is there. It’s growing. And if we don’t seize it, we not only risk being outpaced by European competitors, but we will be on the wrong side of public aspirations.

    Obviously, I’m preaching to the converted here. But it is brilliant that, right across our airports, we’re seeing palpable optimism for the future.  

    Heathrow’s £2.3 billion investment to overhaul its infrastructure. The best ever financial results for Newcastle, ahead of a £17 million investment to resurface its runway and taxiway. And European Cargo’s decision to choose Cardiff as its second UK base – with regular flights to China.

    But these impacts aren’t just felt within the industry, but outside too. Take Leeds Bradford. Where plans to upgrade its terminal will see a £940 million boost to the local economy, creating thousands of new jobs.

    These investments reveal airports not only as hubs for travel, but hubs for growth – driving jobs, creating opportunity and facilitating the trade which underpins our way of life.

    Now more than ever, you need a government that recognises this. That’s why we see airports as a crucial pillar of our Plan for Change. And it’s why we’ve  acted, and acted quickly, across 3 areas – starting with expansion. 

    It’s no secret that long ignored capacity issues in the south-east, has meant some of our major airports are now bursting at the seams.

    And yet – when it came to expansion – too many people stuck their heads in the sand. It left the industry in a perpetual holding pattern, with decisions circling around Whitehall for years, waiting for a clear signal. 

    Earlier this year, the Chancellor gave that signal – taking the brakes off growth by welcoming plans for a third runway at Heathrow. Britain’s first full-length runway in nearly 25 years. 

    Now, my job has to be balancing the economic benefits of expansion with our social and environmental commitments.

    That underpinned my announcement a few weeks ago on Gatwick, where I set a clear path for expansion if certain conditions are met.

    And, of course, I’ll be making an announcement on Luton very shortly.

    But while I cannot go into any more details tonight – let me say this. I will never accept the false trade off that pits growing aviation against protecting our environment. I honestly believe we can, and must, do both. And how we do that is already being answered – by many in this room.

    Firstly, we cannot hope for quieter, cleaner and greener flights if our most critical piece of infrastructure is stuck in the past.

    Modernising our airspace will create more efficient flight paths, ensure quicker climbs and smoother descents, and help meet our commitments to noise and emission reduction.  

    So, I was grateful for the views you shared on the UK Airspace Design Service (UKADS) – the body that will drive this work. And you’ll have heard that the Chancellor has now given the green light. Not just for a new UKADS but also to reviewing key processes behind modernising our airspace, and to an Airspace Design Support Fund to deliver faster progress.

    We are now working with NATS on the shared goal that UKADS will be up and running this year. 

    Of course, to make progress on this critical reform agenda, we will rely heavily on your support and collaboration. Without that, we cannot maintain the pace we need. So I’m pleased that so many of you are already working constructively with airlines and local communities on your proposals.

    Alongside this, we must ramp up work on reducing emissions. Green flight isn’t only essential for the industry, it’s existential.

    Of course, sustainable aviation fuels will play a major role. It’s why we’ve signed the SAF Mandate into law.

    It’s why we’ve now launched a consultation into a price guarantee for UK SAF producers and investors. And it’s why we’ve backed homegrown SAF projects to the tune of £63 million via the Advanced Fuel Fund.  

    But SAF isn’t the only piece to this puzzle. Lighter wings and more efficient engines will play their part. As will new forms of zero-emission aircraft and supporting infrastructure.

    Many of you have also set net zero targets for your airport operations in advance of 2040. And I’m thrilled to see you following through with solar panels helping power Birmingham and Newcastle airports. And hydrogen power being trialled on the ground at Exeter and Bristol. 

    All this matters. Expansion. Modernisation. Decarbonisation. These 3 areas will secure this industry’s future. 

    It’s why the government has wasted little time in:

    • consulting on reforms
    • getting legislation on the books
    • making the crucial decisions on expansion and growth

    And doing in 8 months, what previously has taken years.

    Of course, challenges remain – I’m not blind to that. But throughout, I promise I will be working with you to remove the barriers holding you back.  

    Thank you.

    Updates to this page

    Published 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Bringing History to Life: Conservation of the Alexander Frieze Underway at The Harris

    Source: City of Preston

    A new chapter begins for the Alexander Frieze at The Harris Museum, Art Gallery and Library, thanks to awards totalling £25,000 gifted generously from the Pilgrim Trust, Henry Moore Foundation and Friends of the Harris to support conservation and redisplay of the Alexander Frieze.

    Councillor Hindle, Cabinet Member for Culture and Arts at Preston City Council said:

    “The Alexander Frieze is a significant part of The Harris, and this conservation work ensures that it remains an important feature for visitors to enjoy for years to come.

    We are grateful to the Pilgrim Trust, Henry Moore Foundation and Friends of the Harris for their support in helping to preserve this remarkable piece of history as we continue to transform the Harris through the Harris Your Place project.”

    Standing as one of the most striking features of The Harris, the Alexander Frieze is a large-scale sculptural work by Bertel Thorvaldsen, depicting Alexander the Great entering Babylon in 331 BC.

    The sheer size and intricate detail of the piece present a significant conservation challenge, requiring expert care to ensure its long-term preservation. Now, with the support of the funders, conservation specialists Mareva Conservation have begun the process of assessing, stabilising, and restoring this historic masterpiece.

    This work forms part of Harris Your Place, a major project designed to protect and enhance The Harris for future generations.

    Follow the Restoration Journey

    Throughout the conservation process, The Harris will share behind-the-scenes updates, progress images, and video footage, offering a closer look at the delicate work required to preserve the frieze. Visitors and supporters will be able to watch as experts examine the surface, carefully clean, and secure areas at risk of deterioration.

    The Harris will provide regular updates on the progress of the conservation project through its website and social media channels.

    For more information on the Alexander Frieze conservation project and the Harris Your Place project, visit The Harris – Harris Your Place.

    Follow The Harris on: Facebook – The Harris, Instagram – The Harris, X – The Harris.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Employability and Skills conference embraced by local employers

    Source: Northern Ireland City of Armagh

    Front Row (l-R): Mark Simpson, Lord Mayor Cllr Sarah Duffy. Roger Wilson OBE (ABC Chief Executive) Back Row (L-R): Deirdre Ward (DfC), Alderman Paul Greenfield (Chair of EDR Committee), Harry Hamilton (Vice Chair of ABC LMP), Graeme Wilkinson (DfE), Tracey Rice (Chair of ABC LMP)

    Over 130 local employers attended the ‘Get Future Ready: Employability and Skills’ Conference on Thursday 13 March in The Armagh City Hotel.

    The annual conference was organised by the Labour Market Partnership and funded by the Department for Communities. This year the theme was ‘Recruit, Retain and Reskill’ focusing on building a resilient and talented workforce.

    Hosted by Mark Simpson, guest speakers including Dr Eoin Magennis from Ulster University; Ann Watt from Pivotal; Kathleen O’Hare from Northern Ireland Skills Council and Elaine Leonard from The Appleby Trust.

    Local employers MTM Engineering, Alternative Heat, Irwin M&E and The Deluxe Group participated in a panel discussion touching on their strategies to support employees and boost their productivity.

    The event closed with an opportunity to network and speak to various support organisations present.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Have your say on Edinburgh’s Local Housing Strategy

    Source: Scotland – City of Edinburgh

    The Council is inviting stakeholders to share their views on the draft Local Housing Strategy (LHS) which outlines the vision and priorities for housing in Edinburgh over the next five years.

    It aims to address current and future housing needs across all tenures to make sure the housing landscape is responsive to changing demands.

    The draft strategy has already been shaped by two phases of consultation from May to October 2024. Following the final round of engagement, further revisions will be made before the strategy is presented to the Housing, Homelessness and Fair Work Committee in May 2025.

    The consultation period, which is open until Tuesday 22 April 2025, offers stakeholders a chance to provide feedback on various aspects of the strategy, including its vision, strategic objectives, and proposed actions. There is also an opportunity to make more general comments and suggestions.

    Housing, Homelessness and Fair Work Convener Lezley Marion Cameron said:

     Edinburgh is currently facing a housing emergency, with rising demand for affordable homes. This Local Housing Strategy will seek to address these challenges and create a future where everyone can access homes that meet their needs – homes that are warm, safe and of high quality.

    Your input will ensure that the Local Housing Strategy is not only forward-thinking but also responsive to the issues that matter most to our residents. That’s why I’d encourage everyone to share their views during this consultation period, so we can work together to create a housing system that is inclusive and sustainable for the long term.

    Find out more and share your views here.

    ENDS

    Published: March 19th 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: The numbers add up for our economy and air quality

    Source: Scotland – City of Edinburgh

    Council Leader Jane Meagher reflects on the latest edition of Edinburgh by Numbers.

    As those of us who live in the city know, it’s fair to say ‘Auld Reekie’ is no more thanks to our fantastic parks and air quality.

    Edinburgh has almost halved (a 40.9% reduction) greenhouse gas emissions over the last decade or so and people are 1.5x more likely to take up cycling or running in Edinburgh than other parts of Scotland.

    The city benefits from high wages and employment. Plus, we boast some of the highest satisfaction rates in the UK for public transport – testament to the value of keeping services like Lothian Buses publicly owned.

    That’s according to data collated for our latest Edinburgh by Numbers report, an annual snapshot of statistics gathered by the Council’s data team which tells us how our city is performing.

    I’m pleased that this year’s findings paint a picture of a green and thriving city. Most of us (74%) can enjoy local green space within a five-minute walk from home, and in my own ward of Portobello / Craigmillar I’m grateful to see the first signs of spring starting to appear in our fantastic parks.

    Perhaps it is this love for our parks which leads us to be one of the most climate conscious cities in the UK? According to the data, the percentage of people who believe that climate change is an urgent problem continues to increase and has reached nearly 88% in Edinburgh, the highest in Scotland.

    This has been evident during the council’s recent work with young residents to plan for the revitalisation and regeneration of Princes Street, Princes Street Gardens and the area around Waverley Station, with over 100 primary and secondary school pupils sharing their hopes as part of our public consultation on the Waverley Valley. The plans have ignited much debate, with architects choosing to share their own vision for the future of our most famous high street.

    I recognise that Princes Street is a vital and iconic part of our city’s economy and while it experiences the same challenges all high streets face, it is performing better than most with a low vacancy rate. I’m confident that recent changes to non-domestic rates relief on vacant buildings will also encourage landlords to bring long-term empty properties back into operation.

    It’s welcome news that it continues to attract significant investment, with news last week of a Zedwell Hotel replacing the former Debenhams. Cranes along the skyline signal work underway on the former Forsyth’s/Topshop, Next/Zara and Jenners stores, which are also set to become hotels. Eateries Blank Street, Ben & Jerry’s and Popeyes plus retailers MINISO, UNIQLO, and Panerai have all opened in the past year, or have announced plans to do so.

    Plus, as the new St James Quarter fills up, we expect to see demand spill onto Princes Street. Meanwhile, a new approach has been adopted to staging a year-round programme of events at the Ross Bandstand and Princes Street Gardens.

    I have no doubt that this investor confidence is thanks to the resilience of our local economy and our healthy business community. The numbers tell us that Edinburgh has retained its position as the UK’s most economically productive city outside of London, while tourism continues to recover from the pandemic.

    Hotel occupancy rates are at their highest in 6 years (81.4%), 5 million visitors are staying overnight in Edinburgh and it has been a remarkable year for air and rail travel with Edinburgh Airport posting its highest ever passenger numbers in 2024. Edinburgh is well and truly welcoming the world to visit.

    While there is much to celebrate, these findings also speak to the challenges Edinburgh faces. Drawn by good jobs and a good quality of life, migration means our population is growing three times faster than other Scottish cities. We’re living longer, but the birth rate has dropped.

    We know these challenges are on the horizon and that’s why the council budget we set in February prioritises vital services for residents. More affordable housing and infrastructure to help our growing population to move around the city will be key, particularly as we continue to grapple with our housing emergency and work with the Scottish Government to secure the additional resources we need. The ground-breaking visitor levy will also present a unique opportunity, which will invest tens of millions of pounds in preserving and enhancing the features that make our city such a fantastic place to be.

    The latest edition of Edinburgh by Numbers is available to view now.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Solar panel scheme to help more residents save money and protect the planet

    Source: City of Canterbury

    Home  »  Latest News   »   Solar panel scheme to help more residents save money and protect the planet

    More households in the Canterbury district will have the chance to save money and protect the planet through renewable energy as part of the latest round of Solar Together Kent.

    The group-buying scheme will reopen on Monday 31 March and offers residents cut-price high-quality solar panels and installation from trusted, qualified installers.

    Retrofitting battery storage will also be available as part of the scheme for those who have already invested in solar panels and are looking to get more from the renewable energy they generate.

    To date, Solar Together has installed over 38,900 solar panels in Kent, reducing carbon emissions by 87,100 tonnes over 25 years – equivalent to more than 47,370 cars off the road in that time!

    Cllr Mel Dawkins, Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change, said: “This new round of Solar Together comes just at the right time as energy prices are set to rise once again.

    “Investing in renewable energy now will not only protect you from future energy price increases caused by volatile global markets but can also help put money back in people’s pockets through selling electricity back to the grid.

    “On top of that, using solar panels to power your home will reduce your carbon dioxide or CO2 emissions and help you contribute to building a sustainable future.

    “Uptake for the scheme in our patch has been brilliant so far, with 245 low-carbon systems being installed to date, and I hope to see that continue in this latest round.”

    People can register their interest for free on the Solar Together website from 21 March until June this year. There is no obligation at this stage to take up the scheme and they can change their mind.

    Soon after, pre-approved solar panel installers will bid for the work in a reverse auction – the best price wins.

    Everyone who registered will be contacted with the best panels for their particular roof, including the cost and specification, by summer 2025.

    If they choose to accept the recommendation, the details of their installation will be confirmed with a technical survey and a date will be set for install.

    Telephone and email help desks will also be on hand throughout the process to help households make the right decision for them.

    More than 8,000 households will receive a letter from the council about the Solar Together scheme between April and May.

    Published: 19 March 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Resurfacing work marks final stage of Abbey Gate revamp

    Source: City of Leicester

    A REVAMP of a busy Leicester road is nearly complete, with the final phase of resurfacing work due to begin next week.

    Leicester City Council has been carrying out an extensive programme of improvements to Abbey Gate, in the Fosse area of the city, to improve the road for walkers, wheelers and cyclists.

    A new two-way cycle track has been created and footpaths improved along the length of the road.

    Now work to resurface the main carriageway is due to be carried out as the final phase of the £1.3million highway improvement scheme.

    The road will be closed to all traffic on Sunday 23 March, between 9am and 4pm, while the road surface is prepared for new tarmac.

    Resurfacing work will then be carried out over four nights from Monday 24 March. The road will be closed to traffic between 7pm and 5am. Overnight working has been arranged to help minimise disruption. Full vehicle access will be maintained during the day and businesses will remain open as normal during the works.

    A short, well signposted diversion will be in place during the roadworks,

    Abbey Gate is expected to reopen to all traffic from 5am on Friday 28 March.

    The Abbey Gate improvement scheme will improve the important route for all road users. It will provide a safe and attractive direct route linking new cycleways on the A50, within the Waterside housing development area, to Route 6 of the National Cycle Network at Abbey Park.

    Cllr Geoff Whittle, assistant city mayor for environment and transport, said: “This important scheme will help provide a much-improved link to existing infrastructure for people on foot, on bikes or using wheelchairs or other mobility aids, extending the network of people-friendly routes in and around the thriving Waterside neighbourhood”.

    “It’s a further example of our commitment to deliver schemes that help make walking, wheeling and cycling the preferred choice for everyday trips for most people and to extend safe and attractive routes into our local neighbourhoods.”

    The Abbey Gate is being funded through a mix of Enterprise Zone funding and the Transforming Cities Fund following the city council’s successful bid for £32million of second tranche funding to support improvements to public transport and provide more safer routes for walkers, wheelers and cyclists in the city centre and local neighbourhoods.

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Israel’s war on Gaza is deliberately targeting children – new UN report

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachel Rosen, Associate Professor of Childhood, UCL

    A fresh round of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza which has killed more than 400 Palestinians has destroyed any hope that the ceasefire negotiated in January would hold. A statement from the child rights group Defence for Children Palestine claimed that 174 children had been killed in the bombing, claiming: “Today is one of the deadliest days for Palestinian Children in history.”

    The renewed bombing follows repeated violations of the ceasefire terms by Israel and comes days after a report commissioned by the United Nations said Israel is “deliberately inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians as a group”. The March 13 report from the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory examines what it calls Israel’s “systematic use of
    sexual, reproductive and other forms of gender-based violence
    since 7 October 2023”.

    The report alleges deliberate acts have been aimed against mothers and children, including the destruction of Gaza’s main fertility clinic, Basma IVF clinic, which it said amounted to “a genocidal act under the Rome Statute and Genocide Convention”. It concluded that “this was done with the intent to destroy the Palestinians in Gaza as a group, in whole or in part, and that this is the only inference that could reasonably be drawn from the acts in question”.

    The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has yet to rule on a case brought by South Africa in December 2023 accusing Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. In January 2024 it issued a ruling saying that Palestinians in Gaza had “plausible rights to protection from genocide” and set out provisional measures that Israel should follow to prevent genocide. There is no evidence that Israel has heeded this advice.

    Addressing the UN human rights committee in October 2024, special rapporteur Francesca Albanese said she believed it is important to “call a genocide as a genocide”. While noting the legal position according to the ICJ, we agree with her on the grounds that a post-hoc judgement of genocide does nothing to prevent it from occurring.

    Francesca Albanese addresses the United Nations, October 2024.

    The commission’s report is not the first time that international organisations and lawmakers have called attention to Israel’s violence against Palestinian mothers and children. In March 2024, Philippe Lazzarini, the commissioner-general of the UN agency Unrwa, wrote on X: “This is a war on children. It is a war on their childhood and their future.” The numbers are “staggering” he said. More children had been killed in Gaza in four months than in all global conflicts in the previous four years.

    This has continued throughout Israel’s assault on Gaza. Between October 7 2023 and January 15 2025, children made up at least 18,000 of the 46,707 Palestinians killed in Gaza, according to data collected by the Gaza health ministry. Both figures are likely to be underestimates, as so many bodies remain buried under the rubble.

    Most children have been killed by direct military strikes. Israel has dropped an estimated 85,000 tonnes of explosives on Gaza, killing Palestinians through direct hits, biolding collapses, fires and inhalation of toxic substances. Doctors have also reported evidence of children being killed in drone attacks and by snipers, including by shots to the head and chest.

    On March 2 Israel blocked the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza, using starvation and dehydration as military strategy. On March 15 a Unicef report claimed that 31% of children under two years of age in the north of the Strip were acutely malnourished. There has also been a “dramatic increase in child deaths due to acute malnutrition”.

    Israel’s destruction of medical and other infrastructure in the strip has resulted in “indirect deaths” by communicable illness and noncommunicable conditions. In April 2024, a report published in science journal Frontiers found that more than 90% of children in Gaza were affected by infectious diseases. There have also been multiple infant deaths from hypothermia as displaced families attempt to survive winter conditions.

    Killing the future

    The abnormally high child death rate is partly down to demographics. About 47% of Gaza’s population was under 18 years of age at the end of 2022. Children are generally more “susceptible to dehydration, diarrhoea, disease, and malnutrition” according to Unicef which says the nutritional needs for infants under 23 months “are greater per kilogram of bodyweight than at any other time of life”.

    But the problem with these arguments is that they make child mortality rates in Gaza appear as a simple reflection of natural factors. They are not. They are a direct consequence of Israel’s military aggression in Gaza.

    Israel has systematically used powerful explosives in densely populated areas and, through AI tracking systems such as “Where’s Daddy?”, deliberately targeted Palestinians in their family homes. Given the deep evidence base about childhood health, the logical outcome of using starvation as a method of war, actively denying aid, and destroying infrastructures that enable life is that children will die disproportionately.

    Palestinian children are being killed by design. This has been explicitly articulated by the Israeli state.

    Itamar Ben-Gvir, who was this week reappointed to the Netanyahu government as police minister, has publicly defended the army’s “open-fire” directive declaring: “We cannot have women and children getting close to the border … anyone who gets near must get a bullet in the head.” In January, MP and deputy speaker of the Knesset, Nissim Vaturi, said every child born in Gaza is “already a terrorist, from the moment of his birth”.

    But children represent their community’s dreams for their futures. Killing large number of children in Gaza is not simply forcible depopulation. It is an effort to destabilise communities and crush their hopes for liberation and the right of return as mandated by the UN.

    Palestinian children in Gaza have been telling their stories to a global audience. The killing, injury and starvation they are testifying to has proved a powerful counternarrative to the idea that Israel is simply “defending itself”. International humanitarian law states that: “Children affected by armed conflict are entitled to special respect and protection.”

    But in Gaza, children are being killed in their thousands.

    Rachel Rosen receives funding from Independent Social Research Foundation. She is affiliated with BDS @ UCL.

    Mai Abu Moghli is a policy member at Al- Shabaka: the Palestinian Policy Network.

    – ref. Israel’s war on Gaza is deliberately targeting children – new UN report – https://theconversation.com/israels-war-on-gaza-is-deliberately-targeting-children-new-un-report-252398

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Labour says benefit reforms are a ‘moral mission’ – it looks more like moral panic

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By James Morrison, Associate Professor in Journalism Studies, University of Stirling

    House of Commons/Flickr, CC BY-ND

    After weeks of speculation, Liz Kendall, work and pensions secretary, has unveiled her plans to reform welfare and cut the country’s ballooning benefits bill. The proposals include:

    • stricter eligibility requirements for Personal Independence Payments (Pip), the main disability benefit
    • scrapping the work capability assessment for universal credit
    • freezing or cutting the incapacity benefit “top-up” to universal credit for new claimants
    • reducing incapacity benefits for under-22s
    • increasing the standard rate of universal credit for claimants seeking work
    • introducing a “right to try”, so that people can try work without automatically losing benefits or being reassessed.

    Kendall, along with her fellow Labour ministers, has tried to sell the proposals as a “moral mission”. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has repeatedly framed the cuts as a “moral duty”.

    Cabinet office minister Ellie Reeves argues it is the party’s “moral obligation” to prevent “a lost generation” of young people being consigned to long-term worklessness.

    I research the impact of how the media and politicians talk about welfare (and people who claim it) on public attitudes and benefit recipients themselves. In recent weeks, I’ve asked myself: what exactly is “moral” about welfare reform? Do ministers see it as morally wrong to leave working-aged people “on the scrap heap”? Or are they more concerned with demonstrating their moral duty to taxpayers – by cutting benefits for people they claim could be working?

    The proposals do contain measures that back up ministers’ claims to genuinely want to help people, rather than simply cut costs. The “right to try” guarantee should allow those outside the labour market to give work a go without losing benefits if this doesn’t work out.

    But if ministers are being driven by morality, I would argue they have approached the problem the wrong way round. The first priority should be not to cut the benefit bill, but to introduce proper support. This, of course, will likely push costs up in the short term. Savings will follow, but only if help translates into meaningful, dignified work.

    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

    Starmer has pledged to stop a “wasted generation” of school leavers not in education, employment or training (Neets) missing out on the “the dignity of work”.

    But by hammering home this message with the uncompromising pro-worker slogan “this is the Labour party”, he aligns himself with a specific moral orthodoxy. This affirms the moral superiority of his government’s defining shibboleth, “working people”, by defending hardworking taxpayers who feel it is “unsustainable, indefensible and unfair” to keep footing a “spiralling bill” for welfare.

    The moral crusade to promote the virtues of honest toil is doubtless fuelled by surveys suggesting tough talk on benefits remains popular with socially conservative voters the party fears losing to Reform UK.

    However, many polls are nuanced. A new Ipsos survey identifies a “benefits paradox”, wherein 37% of Britons agree that “ensuring everyone who needs health-related benefits” should be “prioritised, even if it means some who could work do not”. The same survey had just 23% favouring tougher eligibility requirements.

    Moral mission or moral panic?

    As my own research shows, when “welfare reform” agendas are couched in the language of “moral missions”, what is really happening is moral panic. We are witnessing escalating alarm at a perceived threat to the moral order that is disproportionate to the true scale of the problem.

    True, the number of people inactive due to sickness or disability is higher than before the pandemic, but suggestions that overall inactivity has reached record levels are wrong. Although a higher percentage of 16- to 64-year-olds was inactive during 2024 than in Germany or Ireland, this was lower than the previous year’s rate (down from 22% to 21.5%), and fell further in early 2025, according to the Office for National Statistics.

    Britain’s 2024 inactivity rate was also beneath those of 15 other European countries (including France and Spain), the US and the EU average. The true high point of UK inactivity came in 1983, when more than a quarter of working-aged adults were inactive.

    Kendall has distanced herself from the language of “scroungers” I analysed in my book on welfare discourse under the 2010-15 coalition government. But connotations can be just as stigmatising as overt labels.

    In endlessly employing the mantra “those who can work should work,” ministers channel timeworn tropes distinguishing between the deserving and undeserving poor.



    Read more:
    Getting Britain to work without blaming ‘scroungers’ – can Starmer change the narrative?

    The new proposals include a ‘right to try’ work without fear of losing benefits.
    SeventyFour/Shutterstock

    There is a moral case for offering tailored, sensitive support to disabled people who want to work but face significant barriers – including inflexible employers and the pressure of caring for others.

    But this should not come at the cost of impoverishing people unable to work – as some unlikely critics of the government’s proposals point out.

    Tony Blair’s onetime Cabinet Secretary Gus O’Donnell told Radio 4 it would be “immoral” to damage people with severe disabilities “who don’t have any option but to be on benefits”. And Blairite former work and pensions secretary Lord Hutton warned that sweeping benefit cuts would “drive millions and millions of people into penury”.

    The government says its reforms are a moral mission, but they are already having immoral effects. Just how moral is it to terrify people already struggling to afford basic essentials with the prospect of being driven into deeper poverty? Or to encourage young people into work that is likely to be low-paid and insecure?

    If there’s one message we can take from the unseemly spectacle of leaks and briefings leading to this week’s announcement, it may be this: we’ve been watching a government on the brink of losing its moral compass.

    James Morrison receives funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council for a project entitled Voices from the Periphery: (De)Constructing and Contesting Public Narratives about Post-Industrial Marginalisation (VOICES).

    – ref. Labour says benefit reforms are a ‘moral mission’ – it looks more like moral panic – https://theconversation.com/labour-says-benefit-reforms-are-a-moral-mission-it-looks-more-like-moral-panic-252404

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why a journalist could obtain a minister’s ChatGPT prompts – and what it means for transparency

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tom Felle, Associate Professor of Journalism, University of Galway

    When the New Scientist revealed that it had obtained a UK government minister’s ChatGPT prompts through a freedom of information (FOI) request, many in journalism and politics did a double take. Science and technology minister Peter Kyle had apparently asked the AI chatbot to draft a speech, explain complex policy and – more memorably – tell him what podcasts to appear on.

    What once seemed like private musings or experimental use of AI is now firmly in the public domain – because it was done on a government device.

    It’s a striking example of how FOI laws are being stretched in the age of artificial intelligence. But it also raises a bigger, more uncomfortable question: what else in our digital lives counts as a public record? If AI prompts can be released, should Google searches be next?

    Britain’s Freedom of Information Act was passed in 2000 and came into force in 2005. Two distinct uses of FOI have since emerged. The first – and arguably the most successful – is FOI applied to personal records. This has given people the right to access information held about them, from housing files to social welfare records. It’s a quiet success story that has empowered citizens in their dealings with the state.

    The second is what journalists use to interrogate the workings of government. Here, the results have been patchy at best. While FOI has produced scoops and scandals, it’s also been undermined by sweeping exemptions, chronic delays and a Whitehall culture that sees transparency as optional rather than essential.

    Tony Blair, who introduced the Act as prime minister, famously described it as the biggest mistake of his time in government. He later argued that FOI turned politics into “a conversation conducted with the media”.

    Successive governments have chafed against FOI. Few cases illustrate this better than the battle over the black spider memos – letters written by the then Prince (now King) Charles to ministers, lobbying on issues from farming to architecture. The government fought for a decade to keep them secret, citing the prince’s right to confidential advice.



    Read more:
    Dull content, but the release of Prince Charles letters is a landmark moment

    When they were finally released in 2015 after a Supreme Court ruling, the result was mildly embarrassing but politically explosive. It proved that what ministers deem “private” correspondence can, and often should, be subject to public scrutiny.

    The ChatGPT case feels like a modern version of that debate. If a politician drafts ideas via AI, is that a private thought or a public record? If those prompts shape policy, surely the public has a right to know.

    Are Google searches next?

    FOI law is clear on paper: any information held by a public body is subject to release unless exempt. Over the years, courts have ruled that the platform is irrelevant. Email, WhatsApp or handwritten notes – if the content relates to official business and is held by a public body, it’s potentially disclosable.

    The precedent was set in Dublin in 2017 when the Irish prime minister’s office released WhatsApp messages to the public service broadcaster RTÉ. The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office has also published detailed guidance confirming that official information held in non-corporate channels such as private email, WhatsApp or Signal is subject to FOI requests if it relates to public authority business.

    The ongoing COVID-19 inquiry has shown how WhatsApp groups – once considered informal backchannels – became key decision-making arenas in government, with messages from Boris Johnson, Matt Hancock and senior advisers like Dominic Cummings now disclosed as official records.

    In Australia, WhatsApp messages between ministers were scrutinised during the Robodebt scandal, an illegal welfare hunt that ran from 2016-19, while Canada’s inquiry into the “Freedom Convoy” protests in 2022 revealed texts and private chats between senior officials as crucial evidence of how decisions were made.

    The principle is simple: if government work is being done, the public has a right to see it.

    AI chat logs now fall into this same grey area. If an official or minister uses ChatGPT to explore policy options or draft a speech on a government device, that log may be a record — as Peter Kyle’s prompts proved.

    This opens a fascinating (and slightly unnerving) precedent. If AI prompts are FOI-able, what about Google searches? If a civil servant types “How to privatise the NHS” into Chrome on a government laptop, is that a private query or an official record?

    The honest answer is: we don’t know (yet). FOI hasn’t fully caught up with the digital age. Google searches are usually ephemeral and not routinely stored. But if searches are logged or screen-captured as part of official work, then they could be requested.

    Similarly, what about drafts written in AI writing assistant Grammarly or ideas brainstormed with Siri? If those tools are used on official devices, and the records exist, they could be disclosed.

    Of course, there’s nothing to stop this or any future government from changing the law or tightening FOI rules to exclude material like this.

    FOI, journalism and democracy

    While these kinds of disclosures are fascinating, they risk distracting from a deeper problem: FOI is increasingly politicised. Refusals are now often based on political considerations rather than the letter of the law, with requests routinely delayed or rejected to avoid embarrassment. In many cases, ministers’ use of WhatsApp groups was a deliberate attempt to avoid scrutiny in the first place.

    There is a growing culture of transparency avoidance across government and public services – one that extends beyond ministers. Private companies delivering public contracts are often shielded from FOI altogether. Meanwhile, some governments, including Ireland and Australia, have weakened the law itself.

    AI tools are no longer experiments, they are becoming part of how policy is developed and decisions are made. Without proper oversight, they risk becoming the next blind spot in democratic accountability.

    For journalists, this is a potential game changer. Systems like ChatGPT may soon be embedded in government workflows, drafting speeches, summarising reports and even brainstorming strategy. If decisions are increasingly shaped by algorithmic suggestions, the public deserves to know how and why.

    But it also revives an old dilemma. Democracy depends on transparency – yet officials must have space to think, experiment and explore ideas without fear that every AI query or draft ends up on the front page. Not every search or chatbot prompt is a final policy position.

    Blair may have called FOI a mistake, but in truth, it forced power to confront the reality of accountability. The real challenge now is updating FOI for the digital age.

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

    – ref. Why a journalist could obtain a minister’s ChatGPT prompts – and what it means for transparency – https://theconversation.com/why-a-journalist-could-obtain-a-ministers-chatgpt-prompts-and-what-it-means-for-transparency-252269

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: How a lack of period product regulation harms our health and the planet

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Poppy Taylor, PhD Candidate, Women’s Health, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol

    JLco Julia Amaral/Shutterstock

    Did you know that in the UK period products are regulated under the same consumer legislation as candles? For 15 million people who menstruate each month, these items are used internally or next to one of the most sensitive parts of the body for extended times.

    Consumers should be entitled to know what is in their period products before choosing which ones to buy. Yet, because of the current lack of adequate regulation and transparency, manufacturers are not required to disclose all materials. And only basic information is available on brand websites. Campaigners are now calling for better regulation.

    Independent material testing shows that single-use period pads can contain up to 90% plastic. An estimated 4.6 million pads, tampons and panty liners are flushed away daily in the UK. These contribute to blocked sewers and fatbergs. They also pollute rivers and oceans.

    Meanwhile, reusable period products are promoted by aid charities as a way to tackle period poverty and reduce waste. But independent tests by organisations such as Which? have found harmful chemicals inside both single-use and reusable period products.

    These include synthetic chemicals that disrupt hormones – known as endocrine-disrupting chemicals – and forever chemicals or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that don’t degrade. These chemicals have been associated with a range of health harms from cancers to reproductive disorders and infertility. They have no place in period products.

    I work as a women’s health researcher at the University of Bristol’s Digital Footprints Lab alongside a team of data scientists. We harness digital data, such as shopping records, to study public health issues. My research looks at how things like education affect which menstrual products people choose.

    In collaboration with the charity Women’s Environmental Network, I am exploring intersections between gender, health, equity and environmental justice – especially among marginalised women and communities. But social stigma prevents open discussions about menstruation and how best to improve period product regulation.

    Menstrual stigma influences everything from the information and support people who menstruate receive to the types of products we use and how we dispose of them. In a study of menstrual education experiences in English schools, my colleague and I found evidence of teacher attitudes perpetuating menstrual stigma.

    Lessons typically lacked content about the health or environmental consequences of period products. Our study showed that just 2.4% of 18- to 24-year-olds surveyed were taught about sustainable alternatives to single-use tampons and menstrual pads.

    An environmenstrual workshop hosted bythe charity, Women’s Environmental Network.
    Women’s Environmental Network / Sarah Larby, CC BY-NC-ND

    For decades, period product adverts portrayed menstrual blood as a blue liquid. The social taboos around periods, largely created and reinforced by period brands over decades of fear-based marketing, has left its mark.

    For example, in response to customer’s anxieties about supposed menstrual odour, manufacturers are increasingly using potentially environmentally harmful antimicrobials like silver and anti-odour additives in period products. This is despite there being no evidence that period products such as menstrual pants or pads transmit harmful bacteria that need sanitising. The silver also washes out after a couple of washes.

    The role of regulation

    In New York state, the Menstrual Products Right To Know Act means that a period product cannot be sold unless the labelling includes a list of materials. In Scotland, a government initiative provides free period products to anyone who needs them.

    Catalonia in Spain has introduced a groundbreaking law that ensures access to safe and sustainable period products, while also working to reduce menstrual stigma and taboos through education.

    A new European “eco label” is a step forward, but companies don’t have to use it. This voluntary label, which shows a product is good for the environment, doesn’t cover period underwear.

    Now, campaigners at the Women’s Environmental Network are calling for the UK government to adopt a Menstrual Health, Dignity and Sustainability Act, backed by many charities, academics and environmentalists. This will enable equal access to sustainable period products, improved menstrual education, independent testing, transparent product labelling and stronger regulations.

    The regulation of period products is currently being considered as part of the product regulation and metrology bill and the use of antimicrobials in period products is being included in the consumer products (control of biocides) bill introduced by Baroness Natalie Bennett. By tackling both health implications and environmental harms, period products can be produced in a safer way, for both people and planet.

    Poppy Taylor’s PhD is funded by the University of Bristol and the Health Foundation.
    Poppy Taylor is a member of the Women’s Environmental Network.

    – ref. How a lack of period product regulation harms our health and the planet – https://theconversation.com/how-a-lack-of-period-product-regulation-harms-our-health-and-the-planet-248941

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Assassin’s Creed Shadows introduces a black samurai – that’s not as unprecedented as critics claim

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Fynn Holm, Junior Professor of Japanese Studies, University of Tübingen

    Fans of the video game franchise Assasin’s Creed have been pining for a game set in feudal Japan for decades. In theory, it looked like a match made in heaven.

    The series (which started in 2007 and has sold over 200 million copies) uses historical settings, such as ancient Greece, the Italian Renaissance or the American Revolution, to tell its fictional epic story of a battle between the Order of Assassins and the Knights Templar. What better scenario, then, than the Japanese civil war (1477-1600), where samurai and ninjas (known as shinobi) were fighting each other?

    Yet when the premiere trailer for Assassin’s Creed Shadows dropped on May 15 last year, it unleashed a torrent of criticism from fans around the world. By June, a Japanese-language petition had gathered over 100,000 signatures, claiming the game “insults Japanese culture and history” and “could be tied to anti-Asian racism”.

    The publisher of the franchise Ubisoft issued a public apology, delaying the game’s release multiple times. With other Ubisoft titles under-performing, Shadows rescheduled release on March 20 has become a high-stakes endeavour.

    Looking for something good? Cut through the noise with a carefully curated selection of the latest releases, live events and exhibitions, straight to your inbox every fortnight, on Fridays. Sign up here.

    So what exactly had fans so enraged? Online, amateur historians highlighted what they saw as copious historical inaccuracies in the promotional material.

    However, none was deemed as damaging as the fact that one of the two playable characters in the game was based on the historical figure of Yasuke. Yasuke was a formerly enslaved black man from Mozambique who became a retainer of the Japanese warlord Oda Nobunaga (1534-1582).

    While the historical existence of Yasuke stands without question, some gamers took offence at the notion that Yasuke was being portrayed as a “black samurai”. That’s because the historical sources are not clear on whether Yasuke was considered a “samurai” by his contemporaries.

    The trailer for Assassin’s Creed Shadows.

    Some gamers argue that focusing on Yasuke, rather than a more typical Japanese-born warrior, represents a misguided attempt at diversity, equity and inclusion. Especially since the second playable character is a fictional female ninja named Naoe.

    To critics, highlighting these two characters allegedly overwrites the history of male Japanese samurai, injecting a “foreignness” they believe distorts the setting.

    White samurai in popular media

    Despite the uproar over Assassin’s Creed: Shadows, it’s not the first piece of media to depict a non-Japanese samurai.

    In James Clavell’s 1975 novel Shōgun, English navigator John Blackthorne (based on the real-life William Adams) becomes a samurai in the rank of hatamoto of the warlord Toranaga (based on Tokugawa Ieyasu).

    Historians also debate whether the real Adams was a true samurai, yet his “white samurai” image endures in adaptations like the 2024 FX series Shōgun, which garnered praise from critics across the ideological spectrum.

    Another famous instance is Nathan Algren (played by Tom Cruise) who in the movie The Last Samurai (2003) joins the Satsuma Rebellion of 1877 led by the charismatic Katsumoto (played by Ken Watanabe and based on Saigō Takamori).

    Katsumoto represents in the movie the “true” samurai spirit of male honour, duty, loyalty and principles. In the end, he dies in a final showdown against modern weaponry, but Tom Cruise’s character survives and reminds the emperor that Japan needs to honour its past despite the modernisation.

    The movie follows the formula of films like Dances with Wolves (1990), and later the first James Cameron Avatar movie (2009), in which a white character joins a minority population to “save” said people from their doom. This is also known as the “white savior complex”.

    Accuracy v authenticity

    Why, then, is Yasuke’s portrayal as a black samurai so contentious when white foreigners in similar roles have been widely accepted?

    Racism is one answer, but audience expectations about historical authenticity also play a key role. It’s critics claim that Shadows teems with historical inaccuracies, yet other celebrated titles, such as Ghost of Tsushima (2020) are just as historically inaccurate.

    Ghost of Tsushima is set during the 13th-century Mongol invasion. Yet the game developers decided to base their protagonists on the heavily idealised and romanticised samurai of 1950s Akira Kurosawa movies, which have little in common with their historical 13th-century counterparts.

    However, since these samurai conform to audience expectations of Japanese warriors with two swords that follow the largely fictional honour code of bushido, the game feels authentic even though it is historically inaccurate. By contrast, Yasuke’s presence in Shadows challenges a deeply ingrained notion of a xenophobic or sealed-off Japan – an anachronistic concept that overlooks evidence of foreign influence in the 16th century.

    While Ubisoft has taken creative liberties and introduced historical inaccuracies, this is consistent with what has been done in other Assassin’s Creed titles and historically inspired games in general. Yet while predominantly white (and even Japanese) cultures seem quick to forgive depictions of white samurai figures, the same leniency does not seem to extend to a black character.

    Fynn Holm receives funding from the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft).

    – ref. Assassin’s Creed Shadows introduces a black samurai – that’s not as unprecedented as critics claim – https://theconversation.com/assassins-creed-shadows-introduces-a-black-samurai-thats-not-as-unprecedented-as-critics-claim-251293

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –