Young Montanans, including Rikki Held, center, sued their state government and won a key ruling forcing the state government to consider greenhouse gas emissions when reviewing proposed development projects.William Campbell/Getty Images
An ancient legal principle has become a key strategy of American children seeking to reduce the effects of climate change in the 21st century. A defeat at the U.S. Supreme Court in March 2025 has not stopped the effort, which has several legal actions continuing in the courts.
The legal basis for these cases is called the “public trust doctrine,” the principle that certain natural resources – historically, navigable waters such as lakes, rivers and streams and the lands under them – must be maintained in government ownership and held in trust for present and future generations of the public.
For the past decade, a nonprofit called Our Children’s Trust has argued for a 21st-century interpretation of the public trust doctrine to support lawsuits against state and federal agencies and officials, seeking to force them to take specific actions to fight climate change. Our Children’s Trust has focused on children, saying they are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change because their futures, which the public trust doctrine protects, will be lived in an unsafe and unhealthy climate unless governments take action. Children around the world have filed similar lawsuits against their governments on alternate legal grounds, including claims of constitutional and human rights violations.
Initial uses of the public trust doctrine in the US
The U.S. Supreme Court first endorsed the public trust doctrine in 1892, when it ruled that the doctrine prevented the Illinois legislature from selling virtually the entire Chicago harbor in Lake Michigan to a private railroad company. In the 20th century, state courts have ruled that the doctrine bars states and local governments from selling off lakefront property or harbors to private owners and protects public access to beaches, lakes and oceans.
The public trust doctrine had little to do with environmental protection until the 1970s, however, after law professor Joseph Sax wrote an influential article arguing that the doctrine could form the basis for lawsuits to protect water and other natural resources from pollution, destruction and other threats.
Over the past five decades, some states’ courts have expanded the public trust doctrine’s application beyond access to water-based resources, ruling it can also require governments to protect parks and wildlife from development. And Montana, Minnesota and several other states followed Sax’s recommendation to pass laws or amend their state constitutions to impose broader obligations on states to protect natural resources.
In 2011, Our Children’s Trust argued for the first time that governments had a legal obligation to protect the atmosphere as a public trust resource. The group filed lawsuits in all 50 states on behalf of children. Most state courts dismissed the lawsuits quickly, holding that there were no court decisions in their states that supported extending the public trust doctrine to claims involving the climate or the atmosphere.
In 2015 the group filed a similar lawsuit in federal court in Oregon, this time against the federal government. That lawsuit, Juliana v. United States, alleged that the federal government’s inaction to address climate change violated the public trust doctrine as well as the 21 young plaintiffs’ rights to life, liberty and property under the U.S. Constitution.
The plaintiffs asked the court to order the federal government to prepare an inventory of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions and to implement a national plan to phase out fossil fuels to “stabilize the climate system and protect the vital resources on which Plaintiffs now and in the future will depend.”
A talk with one of the plaintiffs in a lawsuit against the U.S. government seeking to force regulatory action to reduce the effects of climate change.
An updated strategy
Since the initial wave of litigation, Our Children’s Trust has continued to file lawsuits to force governments to address climate change. These newer ones are more narrowly tailored to state-specific constitutional and statutory provisions that protect environmental and public trust resources. And, so far, they have been more successful.
The plaintiffs won at trial, and in a landmark opinion in 2024 the Montana Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s finding that greenhouse gases were harmful to the state’s “climate, rivers, lakes, groundwater, atmospheric waters, forests, glaciers, fish, wildlife, air quality, and ecosystem.” The court similarly found that “a stable climate system … is clearly within the object and true principles” of the state’s constitution.
Children in Hawaii filed a similar lawsuit in 2022 against the state Department of Transportation, alleging that its failure to reduce transportation emissions in the state violated the state public trust doctrine and the state’s constitution. The lawsuit relied on Hawaii courts’ previous rulings that the state’s public trust doctrine and state constitution broadly protect natural resources for present and future generations. In 2024, days before trial was to begin, the parties reached a landmark settlement in which the state agreed to take concrete actions to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector.
In the Montana lawsuit, a U.S. court ruled that the government had failed to protect the rights of children by failing to take action to reduce or prevent climate change.
The road ahead
Looking back, it was perhaps not surprising that a one-size-fits-all nationwide legal strategy based on a doctrine that varies widely state by state would face long odds. But the public trust doctrine itself has been historically incremental, expanding and contracting as society and the needs of its citizens change over time. And Our Children’s Trust has several cases still pending, including in Alaska and Utah state courts, and in a federal court in California.
The campaign’s successes broke new legal ground: Montana courts held the first trial in the United States that examined evidence of the effects of climate change and states’ obligations to address them. The Hawaii settlement set concrete benchmarks and included provisions for continued feedback on state policies by the youth plaintiffs.
More broadly, Our Children’s Trust’s campaign demonstrates that a combination of legal advocacy and nationwide publicity over the plight of young people in a rapidly changing climate have the potential to result in real change, both in the law and in public perception of the importance of addressing climate change.
Alexandra Klass does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
FOLLOWING extensive consultation, Leicester City Council has revised its proposals to end post-16 school transport funding for young people with special educational needs and disability (SEND).
The council’s draft new travel policy proposes that support will still be provided to young people whose complex special education needs and disabilities mean they won’t be able to learn to travel independently.
Students who qualify for support would receive a personal transport budget which could be used to pay for any means of transport including a lift in a family car, or a bus pass. At current rates this would be a payment of 45 pence a mile, plus £500 a year.
Support could be increased and include taxi or bus provision if a student also has limited exceptional circumstances, and failure to provide this support would lead to financial hardship.
Those students who don’t qualify would be supported to take up independent travel training, to learn the skills they need to travel by public transport, and lead more independent lives.
Cllr Elaine Pantling, asst city mayor for children’s services said: “Many councils stopped funding post-16 transport some time ago, while in Leicester we have continued to support it for as long as we can. Unfortunately, our financial position means we can no longer do this.
“However, we have carefully considered all of the responses received as part of our consultation and have put forward some new proposals as a result.
“Our new policy would mean that around 83% of post-16 students with SEND would still receive transport funding, while an additional 4% would qualify for support due to their complex additional needs.
“We know that some students will be half-way through their studies if the new policy is introduced, and to avoid disrupting them, we are proposing that those now in year 12 will continue to receive support during year 13, for the academic year 2025/26.
“Support will be offered to all those students who don’t meet the proposed qualifying criteria, to help them to take advantage of independent travel training, school bursaries, and alternative options for travel support that are available.
“I can also give a commitment that the council will put more resources into independent travel training, and will build on the very good work being done at schools like Ellesmere College.”
As of March this year, 208 post-16 students with SEND were receiving financial support from the council at a cost of around £1.8m a year. The council predicts this cost would rise to at least £2.6m in 2025/26 if no action were taken.
Councils are not required to provide post-16 SEND transport, and receive no funding from the Government to do so.
Funding had been due to end in July 2024, following a previous consultation, but after concerns were raised by some parents about the process, the council agreed that funding would continue for the 2024/2025 academic year, and a new consultation would take place.
The council’s budget is in crisis due to years of government austerity, rising costs of social care and an increase in homeless families.
Savings made would contribute towards the £23m of savings the council needs to make by 2027/28. Even with the savings, the council is predicting an estimated shortfall of £68m between income and expenditure by 2027/28.
The final decision on the adoption of the policy is due to be made on Tuesday 13 May.
The council’s proposed travel policies are available on its website:
Source: The White House
Last night, President Donald J. Trump signed an executive order ending the taxpayer subsidization of National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) — entities that receive tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds each year to spread radical, woke propaganda disguised as “news.”
Here are some examples of the trash that has passed for “news” at NPR and PBS:
NPR ran a story titled “Cannibalism: It’s ‘Perfectly Natural,’” in which an author described eating another human’s placenta: “It was really the prep that made it taste good. Granted, the [husband] was a chef and so he knew how to prepare it osso bucco style and used a really nice wine I had brought. It smelled great. It didn’t taste bad.”
In 2021, NPR declared the Declaration of Independence to be a document with “flaws and deeply ingrained hypocrisies.”
In 2022, NPR scrapped its decades-long Independence Day tradition of reading the Declaration of Independence on air to instead discuss “equality.”
NPR subsequently issued an “editor’s note” warning the Declaration of Independence is “a document that contains offensive language.”
NPR apologized for calling illegal immigrants “illegal.”
NPR sounded the alarm about young men who abstain from masturbating to pornography.
NPR featured a Valentine’s Day story centered around “queer animals,” in which it suggested the make-believe clownfish in “Finding Nemo” would’ve been better off as a female, that “banana slugs are hermaphrodites,” and that “some deer are nonbinary.”
PBS devoted a panel to what it “mean[s] to be woke” and “white privilege.”
NPR routinely promotes the chemical and surgical mutilation of children as so-called “gender-affirming care” without mentioning the irreversible damage caused by these procedures.
In 2021, a PBS station aired a “children’s program” that featured a drag queen named “Lil’ Miss Hot Mess.”
NPR educated the nation on the “whole community of genderqueer dinosaur enthusiasts” and “trans-ceratops.”
Then-PBS White House Correspondent Yamiche Alcindor characterized President Trump’s patriotic 2020 Mount Rushmore speech as a love letter to “white resentment” that promoted the “myth of America.”
NPR reported on the “cousin of diet culture” known as “healthism, which is the idea that we have to be healthy” — as if that was a bad thing.
NPR assigned three reporters to investigate how the thumbs-up emoji is racist.
NPR suggested doorway sizes are based on “latent fatphobia.”
PBS produced an entire movie celebrating a transgender teenager’s so-called “changing gender identity.”
NPR absurdly claimed “limited scientific evidence of physical advantage” exists between male and female athletes.
NPR lamented that “animals deserve pronouns, too.”
NPR ran a feature titled “What ‘Queer Ducks’ can teach teenagers about sexuality in the animal kingdom.”
In 2023, PBS’s Washington Week roundtable covered up Joe Biden’s clear mental decline, with far-left “journalist” Jeffrey Goldberg claiming Biden was actually “quite acute.”
NPR dedicated an entire segment to the “population of anthropomorphic animal enthusiasts known as ‘furries.’”
PBS produced a documentary making the case for reparations.
NPR disparagingly referred to pro-life Americans at the March for Life as “anti-abortion rights activists.”
NPR explored “the racial origins of fat phobia.”
NPR management asked its editors to avoid the term “biological sex” when discussing transgender issues.
PBS show Sesame Street partnered with CNN on a one-sided narrative to “address racism” amid the Black Lives Matter riots.
NPR and PBS have zero tolerance for non-leftist viewpoints:
In 2020, NPR refused to cover the explosive Hunter Biden laptop scandal in the runup to the election, baselessly claiming its “assertions don’t amount to much” and writing they “don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.”
When a 25-year veteran NPR reporter and editor spoke out about the network’s obsession with liberal causes, they suspended him.
The editor found that registered Democrats outnumbered Republicans 87 to zero in their newsroom.
NPR prolifically reported on the Russian collusion hoax, with the editor describing “[Adam] Schiff talking points” as “the drumbeat of NPR news reports.”
NPR CEO Katherine Maher once called President Trump “racist,” shared a photo of herself wearing a “Biden for President” campaign hat, serves on the board of a Soros-funded activist group, and described “reverence for the truth” as a “distraction.”
In 2023, a study found that congressional Republicans saw 85% negative coverage while congressional Democrats saw 54% positive coverage on PBS’s flagship news program.
According to a 2024 study, PBS news staff used 162 variations of the term “far-right,” but only six variations of “far-left.”
Media bias rating agency AllBias — which surveyed nearly 24,000 readers — found NPR’s bias aligns with “liberal, progressive or left-wing thought and/or policy agendas.”
NPR repeatedly dismissed the theory that COVID-19 originated in a lab — a conclusion now deemed likely by the FBI, CIA, and Department of Energy.
April 2020: “Scientists Debunk Lab Accident Theory Of Pandemic Emergence”
May 2020: “As Trump Pushes Theory Of Virus Origins, Some See Parallels In Lead-Up To Iraq War”
May 2021: “Many Scientists Still Think The Coronavirus Came From Nature”
March 2023: “Virologist says COVID origin report could make it harder to study dangerous diseases”
September 2024: “New research points to raccoon dogs in Wuhan market as pandemic trigger. It’s controversial”
A 2024 Media Research Center study found that PBS’s coverage of the Republican National Convention was 72% negative, while coverage of the Democratic National Convention was 88% positive.
Derby City Council will be marking the 80th anniversary of VE Day with a special service at Derby Cathedral.
The VE Day Anniversary Commemoration Service, a partnership between the Council, the Lord Lieutenant of Derbyshire, Derby Cathedral, the Royal British Legion, the University od Derby, and Derby Cathedral, will take place at 5:30pm on Thursday 8 May.
This important occasion marks the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe Day, a moment of profound historical significance. The service will honour and remember the immense sacrifices made by so many during the Second World War, and celebrate the peace and freedoms secured as a result.
The commemorative service is open to all across Derby and Derbyshire. Following the service, guests are invited to remain for refreshments and to enjoy a special commemorative peal of the Cathedral bells.
Councillor Ged Potter, Mayor of the City of Derby, said:
As we prepare to mark the 80th anniversary of VE Day, we remember the courage and sacrifice of all those who played their part in the fight for our freedom. We particularly remember the Derby citizens who contributed to the war effort both on the frontlines and at home. This includes those who worked in our factories producing, among other things, the engines that powered much of the RAF.
Elizabeth Fothergill CBE, Lord Lieutenant of Derbyshire, said:
This 80th anniversary of VE Day is a time for reflection, remembrance and gratitude. It is an opportunity for our community to come together to honour those who served, those who sacrificed, and those who gave everything to secure the peace we are so fortunate to enjoy today. I warmly encourage everyone to attend and take part in this meaningful commemoration.
If you’re planning a street party, make sure you’ve read this guidance from the Government. It busts some common myths about what’s needed. There’s even more information and advice on the Street Party Site.
One of the key things you’ll need to do is apply to us for a road closure if you want to host a street party and your road isn’t already normally closed to traffic. Contact spacehire@derby.gov.uk for a road closure application form.
Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
The government continues to improve the conditions for doing business, including those related to industrial and amateur fishing. A resolution has been signed changing the procedure for paying fees for concluding new agreements for the use of fishing areas.
Until now, when concluding a contract, it was necessary to pay 40% of the total amount of the fee, 30% no later than one year from the date of concluding the contract, and another 30% no later than two years from the date of concluding the contract.
Now the document stipulates four payments instead of three. When concluding the contract, it is necessary to pay 25% of the payment amount, another 15% no later than one year, 30% no later than two years from the date of the contract, and another 30% no later than three years from the date of the contract.
“These opportunities will become available to existing enterprises without bidding if their contract expires. The entrepreneur himself makes the decision to renew it,” Mikhail Mishustin noted during Government meetings on April 30.
The Prime Minister recalled that there are a significant number of small and medium-sized enterprises operating in this area, including artels and agricultural cooperatives. Their profitability is not that high, and the previously established payments were significant expenses for them. He added that the new regulation will improve the sustainability of the industry and will help preserve jobs in the regions.
The document will be published.
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Company Announcement Date: April 28, 2025 FDA Publish Date: May 01, 2025 Product Type: Food & BeveragesAllergens Reason for Announcement:
Recall Reason Description Potential or Undeclared Allergen – Milk
Company Name: JJWV Marketing Corporation Brand Name:
Brand Name(s) Ankimo
Product Description:
Product Description Monkfish Liver
Company Announcement JJWV Marketing Corporation of Santa Fe Springs, California is recalling Ankimo Monkfish Liver because it may contain undeclared milk. People who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to milk run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume this product. Ankimo Monkfish Liver was distributed in California through retailers at Little Tokyo Market Place and H Marts, and it reached consumers through retail stores shelves. Vacuum packed with red label with white “ANKIMO” lettering. UPC number is 894042-002562, expiring either October 21st or 22nd of 2026, and expiring October 17, 2027. You can find it in the frozen food section. There were “No illnesses” have been reported to date. The recall was initiated after it was discovered that product containing the milk protein was in packaging that did not properly label the presence of milk. Consumers who have purchased the ANKIMO Monkfish Liver are urged not to consume the products and return it to the place of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at 1-562-906-9988 from 8:00 am to 5:00 pm, Monday through Friday, Pacific Standard Time. This recall is being made with the knowledge of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Company Contact Information
Consumers: 1-562-906-9988
Media: Jonathan Park, Victor Pak 562-606-4150, 213-255-8849
The Government of India must prioritize humanitarian aid and immediately implement a clear, inclusive and time-bound plan for the safe and voluntary return of communities displaced by ethnic violence in Manipur, said Amnesty International, ahead of the second anniversary of the outbreak of violence.
Since violence erupted on 3 May 2023 between the Meitei community and Kuki and other tribal hill communities, more than 50,000 internally displaced people (IDPs) from both communities continue to remain in relief camps across the state, living in inhumane conditions with limited access to healthcare, sanitation, and adequate nutrition.
“It is unacceptable that the Indian government has failed to address the humanitarian needs and implement a comprehensive rehabilitation policy for displaced communities who remain in relief camps two years since the start of the ethnic violence in Manipur. This inaction has left tens of thousands in limbo, forced to endure life in inhumane conditions with no end in sight,” said Aakar Patel, chair of board, Amnesty International India.
“Despite the devastating impact of the violence, including the loss of 260 lives, there has been no meaningful progress toward justice and accountability. The rehabilitation policy must also prioritize accountability for the grave human rights violations and abuses committed since May 2023.”
According to the latest government data as per sources, more than 58,000 people are living in 281 relief camps across the state. Many others have fled to states like Mizoram and Meghalaya. Despite the imposition of President’s rule in Manipur in February 2025 which suspended the state government and extended central government’s rule in the state, the conditions have not improved.
Fear and insecurity preventing return
Key stakeholders in Manipur told Amnesty International that while many IDPs are desperate to return home because of the terrible living conditions, fear and insecurity persist. Numerous homes have been destroyed, while others remain occupied by vigilante groups, making return impossible without proper state intervention and guarantees of safety.
Babloo Loitongbam, a human rights defender and lawyer from Imphal, said: “Thousands are still unable to return home – not by choice, but due to ongoing fear and insecurity. As delays persist, frustration and resentment continue to grow among those affected… potentially creating a far more volatile and dangerous situation.”
A community worker told Amnesty International: “If they go back to their homes, how can they sleep peacefully in a house where the roof and the walls are riddled with bullet holes? They need security and protection. And not many can afford to reconstruct their homes without assistance from the authorities.”
Inhuman conditions in relief camps
While the Union Home Ministry announced that it has provided INR 21,700,000 (256470 USD) for relief and rehabilitation during the 2024-25 fiscal year, the Home Minister Amit Shah on 3 April said that ‘discussions are ongoing’ regarding a rehabilitation package for the internally displaced people.
A community worker from a relief camp, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told Amnesty International: “The health facilities in these camps are very bad. We regularly see outbreaks of measles, dysentery and fever…There are also people with illnesses like cancer and tuberculosis and many who need dialysis treatment. The only government hospital nearby doesn’t have the capacity to treat these patients and there aren’t many specialist doctors, which is worrying. We are getting some assistance from civil society and philanthropic organizations but nothing much from the state.”
Another community worker told Amnesty International: “Sanitation is a big problem in these camps. More than 100 families are using two to three makeshift toilets right now. The living conditions are pathetic, cramped and very suffocating. My concern is also that they are provided with two meals a day and the quality of the food is not good.”
Under international law, IDPs have the right to access to adequate housing, water, sanitation, health and other essential services, without discrimination, as anyone else living in India. The denial of access to these essential rights is a violation of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), which India ratified in 1979 and the UN Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement.
Failure to ensure accountability
Since May 2023, homes, businesses, villages, and places of worship have been burned, attacked, looted, and vandalized in the ongoing ethnic violence. Two years on, the authorities have failed to bring the suspected perpetrators of the human rights violations to account, and to provide access to justice and effective remedies for victims, thereby contributing to impunity.
Benjamin Mate, Chairman of the Kuki Organisation for Human Rights Trust, said: “To ensure true progress in Manipur, the Government of India must appoint an independent commission to thoroughly investigate the role of senior officials, state bureaucrats, police officials, and armed groups during the ethnic violence over the past two years. Accountability is essential, and only through such a transparent and impartial inquiry can justice be delivered to the victims.”
“The BJP-led administrations at both the state and central levels have not succeeded in bringing an end to the ongoing violence in Manipur. By consistently failing to hold those suspected of serious human rights violations accountable, the government risks signaling that such impunity will persist – ultimately paving the way for further abuses which unfortunately will impede any proposed rehabilitation policy in the coming days,” said Aakar Patel.
Written in French, the book is the outcome of decades of botanical research and scientific collaboration between institutions and botanists from Burkina Faso, Mali, France, Switzerland and Germany. For the first time, it provides a complete inventory of ferns and flowering plants in Burkina Faso and Mali. It catalogues 2,631 species – both native and introduced – with 2,115 identified in Burkina Faso, 1,952 in Mali, and 1,453 shared between both countries.
Featuring over 800 photographs, 2,631 scientific illustrations, detailed descriptions, distribution maps, and identification keys, it serves as an essential tool for scientific research and biodiversity conservation. It’s also useful for sustainable development in the region.
We are a team of botanists from Burkina Faso, Mali and Europe who worked on this guide. One of our team is the botanist Jean César, who has carried out botanical research in the region for over 30 years. We based the guide on his earlier work in researching the flora of West Africa, and training young botanists.
By identifying plant species – whether common, rare, overexploited, or invasive – this guide can play a crucial role in conservation efforts: one can only protect what one knows.
The publication lays the groundwork for conservation of Sahelian ecosystems, which face increasing degradation with direct consequences for rural communities.
How we came up with the guide
As a team, we’ve conducted more than 40 years of research in Burkina Faso and Mali, documenting different plants. We also studied herbarium collections in Paris, Montpellier, Frankfurt and Geneva in Europe and Ouagadougou and Bobo-Dioulasso in Burkina Faso.
The book is written in French and includes an index of local plant names in the local languages of Bambara, Dogon, Sonrai, Sénoufo and Peulh. This makes it a valuable resource for local communities and researchers alike. There is an open access digital version to make sure that everyone can use the new illustrated guide.
Discovering new and rare species
The book highlights species previously known from only a few observations. These are both widely distributed species and plants that are rare, only found in unprotected areas facing heavy urbanisation.
About 330 of the plant species in the guide have only ever been seen once in Burkina Faso or Mali, although some are present in neighbouring countries.
Another 40 near-endemic species (mainly only found in Burkina Faso and Mali) have only been seen once 40 years ago. Most of those are aquatic plants, growing along the Niger River, or in small wetland environments.
Additionally, this research updates information on more than a hundred poorly understood species that require further study. Some of these are likely new to science and have not even been given formal names. For instance, we found a new type of Brachystegia tree in the Geneva Botanical Garden’s herbarium. It is new to science and will have to be described.
Many plants documented here hold ethnobotanical value. They are part of the indigenous knowledge of Burkina Faso and Mali and play roles in traditional medicine, agriculture and crafts.
We found more than 120 species that have medicinal uses. Identifying them with correct scientific names will be crucial for the study of how people can continue to use these plants, especially as medicine.
Unfortunately, the current insecurity in the region has made field studies extremely dangerous, threatening conservation projects. For instance, forest rangers can no longer travel freely, and some regions have become inaccessible.
Publishing this book at such a difficult time brings renewed momentum to scientists and serves as a positive sign of continued collaboration. It gives visibility to botanical studies in both countries and highlights the importance of collaborations among botanists from different continents.
By recording this biodiversity, this work not only preserves valuable ecological knowledge but also ensures that the knowledge of these species is not lost to conflict-driven environmental degradation. It sheds light on the importance of preserving plants for future generations.
Cyrille Chatelain receives funding from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC).
Adjima Thiombiano, Blandine Marie Ivette Nacoulma, and Mamadou Lamine Diarra do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi dedicates Vizhinjam International Seaport in Kerala worth ₹8,800 crore to the nation The Vizhinjam International Deepwater Multipurpose Seaport in Kerala is a significant advancement in India’s maritime infrastructure: PM
Today is the birth anniversary of Bhagwan Adi Shankaracharya, Adi Shankaracharya ji awakened the consciousness of the nation by coming out of Kerala and establishing monasteries in different corners of the country, I pay tribute to him on this auspicious occasion: PM
India’s coastal states and our port cities will become key centres of growth for a Viksit Bharat: PM
Government in collaboration with the state governments has upgraded the port infrastructure under the Sagarmala project enhancing port connectivity: PM
Under PM-Gatishakti, the inter-connectivity of waterways, railways, highways and airways is being improved at a fast pace: PM
In the last 10 years investments under Public-Private Partnerships have not only upgraded our ports to global standards, but have also made them future ready: PM
The world will always remember Pope Francis for his spirit of service: PM
Posted On: 02 MAY 2025 1:16PM by PIB Delhi
Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi dedicated Vizhinjam International Deepwater Multipurpose Seaport worth Rs 8,800 crore to the nation today in Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala. Addressing the gathering on the auspicious occasion of the birth anniversary of Bhagwan Adi Shankaracharya, the Prime Minister highlighted that three years ago, in September, he had the privilege of visiting the revered birthplace of Adi Shankaracharya. He expressed his joy that a grand statue of Adi Shankaracharya has been installed in the Vishwanath Dham complex in his parliamentary constituency, Kashi. He emphasized that this installation stands as a tribute to the immense spiritual wisdom and teachings of Adi Shankaracharya. He further highlighted that he also had the honor of unveiling the divine statue of Adi Shankaracharya at the sacred Kedarnath Dham in Uttarakhand. The Prime Minister noted that today marks another special occasion as the doors of the Kedarnath temple have been opened to devotees. Prime Minister Modi underscored that Adi Shankaracharya, originating from Kerala, established monasteries in different corners of the country, awakening the consciousness of the nation. He emphasized that his efforts laid the foundation for a unified and spiritually enlightened Bharat.
Shri Modi highlighted the vast ocean, rich with immense possibilities, standing on one side, while on the other, nature’s breathtaking beauty adds to the grandeur. Amidst all this, he emphasized that the Vizhinjam Deep-Water Sea Port has now emerged as a symbol of new age development. He extended his congratulations to the people of Kerala and the entire nation on this remarkable achievement.
Underscoring that the Vizhinjam Deep-Water Sea Port has been developed at a cost of ₹8,800 crore, the Prime Minister remarked that the capacity of this transshipment hub will triple in the coming years, enabling the smooth arrival of some of the world’s largest cargo ships. He pointed out that 75% of India’s transshipment operations were previously conducted at foreign ports, leading to significant revenue loss for the country. Emphasizing that this situation is now set to change, he asserted that India’s money will now serve India and the funds that once flowed outside the country will now generate new economic opportunities for Kerala and Vizhinjam’s people.
Shri Modi remarked that before colonial rule, India witnessed centuries of prosperity, emphasising that at one point, India held a major share in the global GDP. He highlighted that what set India apart from other nations during that era was its maritime capacity and the economic activity of its port cities. Noting that Kerala played a significant role in this maritime strength and economic growth, he highlighted Kerala’s historical role in maritime trade, emphasizing that through the Arabian Sea, India maintained trade links with multiple nations. He noted that ships from Kerala carried goods to various countries, making it a vital hub for global commerce. “Today, the Government of India is committed to further strengthening this channel of economic power”, he added and asserted, “India’s coastal states and port cities will become key centers for the growth of a developed India”.
“The port economy reaches its full potential when infrastructure and ease of doing business are promoted together”, emphasised the Prime Minister, stating that over the past 10 years, this has been the blueprint of the Government of India’s port and waterways policy. He highlighted that the government has accelerated efforts for industrial activities and holistic development of states. He further remarked that the Government of India, in collaboration with state governments, has upgraded port infrastructure under the Sagarmala Project and strengthened port connectivity. He noted that under PM Gati Shakti, waterways, railways, highways, and airways are being rapidly integrated for seamless connectivity. He added that these reforms in ease of doing business have led to greater investment in ports and infrastructure sectors. The Prime Minister stated that the Government of India has also reformed regulations concerning Indian seafarers, yielding significant results. He pointed out that in 2014, the number of Indian seafarers was below 1.25 lakh. Today, this figure has surged beyond 3.25 lakh. He emphasized that India now ranks among the top three countries globally in terms of seafarer numbers.
Highlighting that a decade ago, ships faced long waiting times at ports, significantly delaying unloading operations, Shri Modi noted that this slowdown affected businesses, industries, and the overall economy. He stressed that the situation has now transformed and over the past 10 years, India’s major ports have reduced ship turn-around time by 30%, improving operational efficiency. He remarked that due to enhanced port efficiency, India is now handling greater cargo volumes in shorter durations, strengthening the nation’s logistics and trade capabilities.
“India’s maritime success is a result of a decade-long vision and effort”, exclaimed the Prime Minister, underlining that over the past 10 years, India has doubled the capacity of its ports and expanded its National Waterways eightfold. He noted that today, two Indian ports are among the global top 30 ports, while India’s ranking on the Logistics Performance Index has also improved. Additionally, he pointed out that India is now among the top 20 countries in global shipbuilding. The Prime Minister further remarked that after strengthening the country’s basic infrastructure, the focus has now shifted towards India’s strategic position in global trade. He announced the launch of Maritime Amrit Kaal Vision, which outlines India’s maritime strategy to achieve the goal of a developed India. He recalled the G-20 Summit, where India collaborated with several major countries to establish the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor, highlighting Kerala’s critical role in this corridor, emphasizing that the state will greatly benefit from this initiative.
Underscoring the critical role of the private sector in elevating India’s maritime industry to new heights, Shri Modi said that under Public-Private Partnerships, thousands of crores have been invested over the past 10 years. He emphasized that this collaboration has not only upgraded India’s ports to global standards but has also made them future-ready. He noted that private sector participation has driven innovation and enhanced efficiency.
Prime Minister highlighted that India is advancing towards the establishment of a shipbuilding and repair cluster in Kochi. He emphasized that once completed, this cluster will create numerous new employment opportunities, providing Kerala’s local talent and youth with a platform for growth. The Prime Minister further stated that India is now setting ambitious targets to strengthen its shipbuilding capabilities. He noted that this year’s Union Budget introduced a new policy to promote the construction of large ships in India, which will significantly boost the manufacturing sector. He emphasized that this initiative will have direct benefits for MSMEs, generating a large number of employment and entrepreneurship opportunities across the country.
“True development is achieved when infrastructure is built, trade expands, and basic needs of the common people are met”, stressed the Prime Minister, remarking that the people of Kerala have witnessed rapid progress over the past 10 years, not just in port infrastructure, but also in highways, railways, and airports. He highlighted that projects like the Kollam Bypass and Alappuzha Bypass, which had been stalled for years, were advanced by the Government of India. He also noted that Kerala has been provided with modern Vande Bharat trains, further strengthening its transport network and connectivity.
Shri Modi emphasized that the Government of India firmly believes in the principle that Kerala’s development contributes to India’s overall growth. He remarked that the government operates with the spirit of cooperative federalism, ensuring Kerala’s progress across key social parameters over the past decade. He highlighted several initiatives that have benefited the people of Kerala, including Jal Jeevan Mission, Ujjwala Yojana, Ayushman Bharat, and Pradhan Mantri Suryagarh Free Electricity Scheme.
Reiterating that the welfare of fishermen remains a top priority, the Prime Minister noted that under Blue Revolution and Pradhan Mantri Matsya Sampada Yojana, projects worth hundreds of crores have been sanctioned for Kerala. He further highlighted the modernization of fishing harbors, including Ponnani and Puthiyappa. Additionally, he remarked that thousands of fishermen in Kerala have been provided Kisan Credit Cards, enabling them to receive financial assistance worth hundreds of crores.
Underlining that Kerala has always been a land of harmony and tolerance, Shri Modi highlighted that centuries ago, Saint Thomas Church, one of the oldest churches in the world, was established here. He acknowledged the recent moment of grief that has touched people across the world when Pope Francis passed away a few days ago, leaving behind a profound legacy. He added that President Droupadi Murmu represented India at his funeral, paying respects on behalf of the nation. Shri Modi once again expressed his condolences to all those mourning this loss from the sacred land of Kerala.
Paying tribute to Pope Francis, acknowledging his spirit of service and his efforts to ensure inclusivity within Christian traditions, the Prime Minister remarked that the world will always remember his contributions. He shared his personal experiences, expressing his gratitude for having had multiple opportunities to meet Pope Francis. He noted that he received special warmth from him and cherished their discussions on humanity, service, and peace, which will continue to inspire him.
Extending his best wishes to all present at the event, Shri Modi envisioned Kerala as a major center for global maritime trade, leading to the creation of thousands of new jobs. He reaffirmed the commitment of the Government of India, working alongside the state government, to advance this goal. Shri Modi concluded by expressing confidence in the capabilities of Kerala’s people and stated, “India’s maritime sector will reach new heights”.
The Governor of Kerala, Shri Rajendra Vishwanath Arlekar, Chief Minister of Kerala, Shri Pinarayi Vijayan, Union Ministers, Shri Suresh Prabhu, Shri George Kurien were present among other dignitaries at the event.
Background
Vizhinjam International Deepwater Multipurpose Seaport worth Rs 8,800 crore is country’s first dedicated container transshipment port that represents the transformative advancements being made in India’s maritime sector as part of the unified vision of Viksit Bharat.
Vizhinjam Port, having strategic importance, has been identified as a key priority project which will contribute in strengthening India’s position in global trade, enhance logistics efficiency, and reduce reliance on foreign ports for cargo transshipment. Its natural deep draft of nearly 20 meters and location near one of the world’s busiest sea trade routes further strengthens India’s position in global trade.
The Vizhinjam International Deepwater Multipurpose Seaport in Kerala is a significant advancement in India’s maritime infrastructure. https://t.co/sUeQ5k7TK1
Inauguration of the Vizhinjam Port in Kerala is significant for India’s maritime sector. People have been waiting for this port for many years. It will boost trade, commerce and will be particularly beneficial for Kerala’s economy.
My visit to Kerala has happened on a very auspicious day, the Jayanti of Adi Shankaracharya. His contribution towards India’s cultural regeneration will forever be remembered. pic.twitter.com/1ii569wBMR
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
Red tide sighted The red tide was spotted by staff of the Environmental Protection Department on April 25 at Tolo Harbour including Yim Tin Tsai fish culture zone. The red tide has dissipated. No associated death of fish has been reported.
A spokesman for the working group said, “The red tide was formed by Gonyaulax polygramma, which is commonly found in Hong Kong waters and non-toxic.”
The Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD) urged mariculturists at Yim Tin Tsai, Yim Tin Tsai East, Yung Shue Au and Lo Fu Wat fish culture zones to monitor the situation closely and increase aeration where necessary.
Red tide is a natural phenomenon. The AFCD’s proactive phytoplankton monitoring programme will continue to monitor red tide occurrences to minimise the impact on the mariculture industry and the public. Issued at HKT 14:28
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Government response
Response to arbitration tribunal final report: UK-Sandeel (The European Union v. the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)
UK Government statement on the sandeel Arbitration Tribunal’s final ruling in the UK-Sandeel case
The UK Government has received the sandeel Arbitration Tribunal’s final ruling in the UK-Sandeel case.
While the UK succeeded in the majority of its arguments, the Tribunal identified a procedural error in the decision to close English waters.
The ruling does not mean the UK is legally obliged to reverse the closure of English waters, and the decision to close Scottish waters was fully upheld.
The government will undertake a process in good faith to bring the UK into compliance.
The sandeel Arbitration Tribunal has published its final ruling.
This relates to decisions taken in March 2024 by the UK and Scottish Governments to close our North Sea Waters to sandeel fishing. The decisions were taken to protect vulnerable seabird populations and support the wider marine environment.
In April 2024, the EU launched dispute proceedings to challenge the closures. In October 2024, the EU referred the challenge to an arbitration tribunal to rule on the dispute.
The report found that the UK successfully demonstrated that the measures taken to close English and Scottish waters were based on the best available science and had sufficient regard to the principle of non-discrimination. The tribunal also found that the Scottish measures had sufficient regard to the principle of proportionality.
The Tribunal found that during the decision-making process to close English waters to sandeel fishing, the UK did not have sufficient regard to the principle of proportionality, specifically in relation to EU rights during the adjustment period – a requirement under the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA).
The government will now undertake a process in good faith to bring the UK into compliance.
There is no legal obligation for the UK to reverse the closures while the compliance process takes place, and the report does not indicate that compliance must require reversing the closures.
A government spokesperson said:
We welcome the clarity provided by this decision, and we will undertake a process in good faith to bring the UK into compliance on the specific issues raised by the Tribunal.
The ruling does not mean the UK is legally obliged to reverse the closure of English waters, and the decision to close Scottish waters was fully upheld.
We remain committed to protecting our seabirds and the wider marine environment, in accordance with our commitments to the TCA and other international agreements.
Disputes and the use of resolution mechanisms are a normal part of a mature relationship with international partners. We will continue to act in the national interest as we work towards a strong and lasting partnership with our European neighbours.
Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tamsin S. Mitchell, Visiting Researcher, Centre for Freedom of the Media, University of Sheffield
Humberto Padgett was reporting on the effects of drought in Cuitzeo, a rural area of central Mexico, when his car was intercepted by armed men on September 13 2024. They threatened him and stole the car, his identity papers and work equipment, including two bullet-proof jackets.
Padgett, a Mexican investigative journalist and author, was reporting on Mexico’s growing environmental worries for national talk radio station Radio Fórmula. It proved to be his last assignment for the station. Two days later, he tweeted:
Today I’m leaving journalism indefinitely. The losses I’ve suffered, the harassment and threats my family and I have endured, and the neglect I’ve faced have forced me to give up after 26 years of work. Thank you and good luck.
Padgett made this decision despite the fact he, like many other journalists in Mexico, has been enrolled in a government protection scheme for years – the Protection Mechanism for Journalists and Human Rights Defenders, set up in 2012. Several other Latin American countries have similar protection programmes, including Honduras since 2015.
These programmes offer journalists measures such as panic buttons and emergency phone alerts, police or private security patrols, and security cameras and alarm systems for their homes and offices. Some are provided with bodyguards – at times, Padgett has received 24-hour protection.
In Honduras, reporter Wendy Funes, founder of the online news site RI, was given a police bodyguard after being threatened while covering an extortion trial that linked the Mara Salvatrucha (MS-13), an international criminal gang, with the Honduran government of former president Juan Orlando Hernández, who is now serving a 45-year prison sentence in the US for drug trafficking and arms offences.
Yet even once journalists are enrolled in these government protection schemes, the attacks and threats continue. Shockingly, many come from state employees who, in both Mexico and Honduras, are thought to be responsible for almost half of all attacks on journalists. But the prospect of punishment is remote: at least 90% of attacks on journalists go unprosecuted and unpunished, meaning there is little deterrent for committing these crimes.
Both Mexico and Honduras currently have leftwing governments which have promised to protect journalists, following a long history of crimes against media professionals in both countries. Yet the risk to journalists posed by the state has worsened in recent years amid increasing use of spyware, online smear campaigns, and rising levels of anti-media rhetoric.
Journalists perceived as critical of the leadership are regularly accused of being corrupt, in the pay of foreign governments, and putting out fake news. Donald Trump’s vocal criticism of mainstream media since returning to power in the US is likely to have encouraged this anti-media hostility in Mexico and Honduras, as elsewhere in the world.
When I tell people about my research into how journalists in Latin America deal with the relentless violence and impunity, their first question is usually: “Oh, you mean drug cartels?” And indeed, both Padgett and Funes have received death threats for their investigations into cartels and other organised crime groups.
Padgett was once sent an unsolicited photo of a dismembered body in a morgue. He was beaten and kicked in the head by armed men who threatened to kill him and his family while he was reporting on drug dealing on a university campus in Mexico City in 2017. He wears a bullet-proof jacket – or did until it was stolen – and keeps his home address a closely guarded secret.
But cartels and gangs are only part of the story when it comes to anti-press violence and impunity in these countries. In many ways, the bigger story is the threat from the state. This has been a constant despite changes in government, whether right or left wing.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
My research project and resulting book were inspired by my work providing advocacy, practical and moral support for journalists at risk in Latin America for an international NGO between 2007 and 2016. The extent of the risk posed by state agents – acting alone or in cahoots with organised crime groups – is clear from the many journalists I’ve spoken to in both Mexico and Honduras.
I first interviewed these reporters, and the organisations that assist them, in 2018, then again in 2022-23 (89 interviews in total), to chart how journalists struggle for protection and justice from the state in the face of growing challenges at both domestic and international level.
For both Padgett and Funes, the intimidation, threats and attacks from organised crime groups often followed them reporting on state agents and their alleged links with such groups. Organised crime groups have deeply infiltrated the fabric of society in many parts of Mexico and Honduras – including politics, state institutions, justice and law enforcement, particularly at a local level.
In Padgett’s case, the suspected cartel threats came after he published a book and investigation into links between state governments and drug cartels, including drug money for political campaigns in Tamaulipas and a surge in cartel-related violence in Morelos under a certain local administration.
Padgett had first joined the federal protection mechanism after he was attacked by police when filming a raid in central Mexico City in 2016. The police confiscated his phone and arrested him.
He was later assigned an around-the-clock bodyguard after the Mexico City prosecutor’s office made available his contact details and his risk assessment and protection plan – produced by the state programme that was supposed to safeguard him – for inclusion in the court file on the 2017 attack on him at the university. This meant the criminals behind the attack had full access to this information.
Being part of this protection programme did not stop the threats by state employees. In April 2024, while trying to report from the scene of the murder of a local mayoral candidate in Guanajuato state, Padgett was punched in the face by a police officer from the state prosecutor’s office, who also smashed his glasses and deleted his photos.
Years earlier, he had been subjected to a protracted legal battle by former Mexico state governor and presidential candidate Eruviel Ávila Villegas, who sued Padgett for “moral damages” to the tune of more than half a million US dollars. His offence? A 2017 profile which mentioned that the politician had attended parties where a bishop had sexually abused male minors.
Padgett eventually won the case – but only on appeal, thanks to a pro bono legal team, after 18 months of stress and travelling to attend the hearings. This is a part of a growing trend of “strategic lawsuits against public participation” (Slapps) in Mexico and Latin America, aimed at silencing journalists and other critical voices.
As Padgett put it: “[Even] once we manage to win, there are no consequences for the politicians who call us to a trial without merit – no consequences at all. Eruviel Ávila is still a senator for the PRI [Institutional Revolutionary Party]” – and he was not even liable for costs.
Mexico’s federal government and army have also carried out illegal surveillance of the mobile phones of journalists and human rights defenders investigating federal government corruption and serious human rights violations on multiple occasions, including by using Pegasus spyware.
In Honduras, Funes is no stranger to state harassment either. In 2011, she was among around 100 journalists, many of them women, who were teargassed and beaten with truncheons by officers of the presidential guard and the national police during a peaceful protest against journalist murders.
In recent years, according to Funes, she and her team at RI have been targeted by cyberattacks and orchestrated smear campaigns on social media that have sought to tar them as being corrupt or associated with criminal gangs. She suspects the army is behind some of these attacks since RI has written in favour of demilitarising the police. Several RI team members have been stopped at army checkpoints; when they have denounced this on TikTok or Facebook, they have been flooded by negative comments.
Profile of investigative journalist Wendy Funes, winner of the 2018 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression journalism award.
RI has also been attacked by government supporters unhappy with its critical coverage of the Honduras president Xiomara Castro’s leftwing administration. In August 2024, Funes was threatened with prosecution by the governor of Choluteca, southern Honduras, over RI’s investigation into alleged involvement by local government officials in migrant trafficking. And earlier in 2025, Funes and a human rights activist were subjected to misogynistic and sexist diatribes and threats by the head of customs for the same regional department, for demanding justice for a murdered environmental defender.
Almost half of all attacks on journalists in Mexico and Honduras are attributable to state agents, particularly at the local level. In Mexico, the NGO Article 19 has attributed 46% of all such assaults over the last decade to state agents including officials, civil servants and the armed forces.
In Honduras, according to the Committee for Free Expression (C-Libre), 45% of attacks on journalists in the first quarter of 2024 were attributed to state agents, up from 41% in 2021. These include the national police, the Military Public Order Police, officials and members of the government.
Impunity is a fact of life
One key reason for the failure of the journalist protection schemes in Mexico and Honduras is they lack the power to investigate, prosecute and punish those responsible for the attacks that caused the journalists to enter the programmes in the first place.
Padgett is yet to see justice, either for the attack on him by drug dealers at the university campus almost eight years ago or the results of the official investigation into the Mexico City prosecutor office’s apparent leaking of his contact details to the assailants. When he asked the prosecutor’s office for an update on its investigation in June 2024, he was told it had been closed two years earlier. His request for a copy of the file was denied.
When he went to the office to ask why, he was detained by police officers. “This is justice in Mexico City,” he said in a video he filmed during his arrest, adding:
Drug dealing is allowed. My personal data is leaked to the organised crime [group] that threatened to kill me and my family. Then the matter is shelved. I come to ask for my file and instead of giving it to me, they take me to court. That is the reality today.
News report by Al Jazeera English (February 2023)
Padgett lodged a complaint and, following “a tortuous judicial process”, eventually managed to get the investigation re-opened. But he says he has lost hope in the process and the justice system in general. Even something as simple as filing a report on the theft of his bullet-proof jacket during the armed attack in September 2024 has proved beyond the official responsible for the task, so the protection programme has not replaced it.
Funes says she reported one of the cyber-attacks on RI to the special prosecutor established by Honduras in 2018 to investigate crimes against journalists and human rights defenders. Funes provided the name and mobile phone number used by the hacker. However, she said the case was later closed for “lack of merit”.
Previously, the official investigation into the 2011 attack on her and other women journalists had also been quietly shelved after the evidence was “lost”. Funes says this put her off reporting subsequent incidents to the authorities:
What for? I just want them to protect me … why waste my time? Really, you get used to impunity, you normalise it.
There have been a few important advances in Mexico in recent years, including the successful prosecution of some of those behind the 2017 murder of two high-profile journalists, Javier Valdez and Miroslava Breach, but such cases remain the exception. Around 90% of attacks on journalists still go unprosecuted and unpunished by the state in both Mexico and Honduras, meaning there is little deterrent against these crimes.
Safer, better ways of working
Many of the journalists I have interviewed prioritise covering under-reported issues relating to human rights and democracy, corruption, violence and impunity. They use in-depth, investigative journalism to try to reveal the truth about what is happening in their countries – which is often obscured by the failings and corruption of the justice system and rule of law.
Many are developing safer, better ways of working, with three strategies having grown noticeably in recent years: building collaborations, seeking international support, and professionalising their ways of working.
Journalists from different media outlets often overcome professional rivalries to collaborate on sensitive and dangerous stories. In Mexico, members of some journalists’ collectives and networks alert each other of security risks on the ground, share and corroborate information, and monitor their members during risky assignments. Others travel as a group – when investigating the mass graves used by drug cartels, for example.
In Mexico and increasingly in Honduras, they publish controversial stories, such as on serious human rights violations involving the state, in more than one outlet simultaneously to reduce the chance of individual journalists being targeted in reprisal. Such collaborations build trust, solidarity and mutual support among reporters and editors – something that has traditionally been lacking in both countries.
Increasingly, international media partners also play an important role regarding the safety of Mexican and Honduran journalists and amplifying public awareness of the issues they report on – encouraging the mainstream media in their own countries to take notice and increasing pressure on their governments to act.
According to Jennifer Ávila, director of the Honduran investigative journalism platform ContraCorriente, transnational collaborations are a “super-important protection mechanism” because they give journalists access to external editors and legal assistance – as well as help leaving the country if necessary.
International partners also bring increased resources. In Mexico and Honduras, as in other Latin American countries, the main source of funding is government advertising and other state financial incentives. But these come with expectations about influence over editorial policies and content, so are not an option for most independent outlets. Private advertising is also challenging for these and other reasons. So, most independent media outlets and journalistic projects are heavily dependent on US and European donors such as the National Endowment for Democracy (Ned), Ford Foundation and Open Society Foundations.
Much of Latin America has high levels of media concentration, with the mainstream media typically being owned by a handful of wealthy individuals or families with wider business interests – and close economic and political links to politicians and the state. Combined with the strings of government advertising, this often results in “soft” censorship of the content that these outlets publish. Some journalists are escaping this either by setting up their own media digital outlets, like Funes, or by going freelance – as Padgett has decided to do following the attack on him in Cuitzeo in 2024.
At the same time, there has been a widespread raising of standards through increased training in techniques such as journalistic ethics, making freedom of information requests, digital and investigative journalism, and covering elections. This all helps to promote “journalistic security” – using information as a “shield in such a way that no one can deny what you’re saying”, according to Daniela Pastrana of the NGO Journalists on the Ground (PdP). It also helps counter the perception – and in some cases, reality – of longstanding corruption in parts of the profession.
Hostile environment puts progress at risk
Despite the promise of transforming journalism through increasing collaboration, professionalisation and international support, the current outlook for journalists in Mexico and Honduras – and other countries in Latin America – is not encouraging. Hostile government rhetoric against independent reporters and media outlets is on the rise, despite the presidents of both Mexico and Honduras having pledged to protect journalists and freedom of expression.
In Honduras, the hostile rhetoric towards journalists is growing in the run-up to the presidential elections in November. According to Funes: “There is a violent public discourse from the government which is repeated by officials [and] prepares the ground for worse attacks on the press … This is dangerous.”
In both countries, such attitudes at the top are often replicated by local politicians and citizens, including online, with the threat of violent discourse leading to physical violence. This hostility appears likely to grow given the example of Donald Trump’s aggressive and litigious attitude towards journalists and the media in the United States.
Indeed, the policies of the second Trump administration are already jeopardising progress made in terms of transforming journalism in Mexico and Honduras. In late January 2025, the US government suspended international aid and shuttered USAID, amid unsubstantiated accusations of fraud and corruption.
According to the press freedom group Reporters Without Borders, the USAID freeze included more than US$268m (£216m) that had been allocated to support “independent media and the free flow of information” in 2025.
USAID has been a key funder of organisations such as the nonprofits Internews and Freedom House, which in turn have been vital to the development of independent and investigative journalism in Latin America through their support of new media outlets, journalistic projects and media freedom groups. Another important donor, Ned – a bipartisan nonprofit organisation largely funded by the US Congress – has had its funding frozen.
Ned’s chair, Peter Roskam, explains its legal action against the Trump funding cuts.
Uncertainty about future funding has led to the immediate suspension of operations and layoffs by many nonprofit media organisations in Mexico, Honduras and across the region. While this seismic shift in the Latin American media landscape reinforces the urgent need to diversify its sources of funding, there is no doubt that in the short and even medium term, it has dealt a serious blow to the development of free and independent journalism and the safety of all journalists.
In a region of increasingly authoritarian leaders, it is now a lot harder to hold them accountable for corruption, human rights violations, impunity and other abuses.
International impotence
Anti-press violence and impunity are global problems, with more than 1,700 journalists killed worldwide between 2006 and 2024 – around 85% of which went unpunished, according to Unesco.
Although international organisations, protection mechanisms and pressure can be important tools in the fight against anti-press violence and impunity, they are ultimately limited in impact due to their reliance on the state to comply. Some journalists in Mexico and Honduras suggest the impact of such international attention can even be counter-productive, due to their governments’ increasing hostility toward any criticism by international organisations, journalists and other perceived opponents.
Twenty years ago, Lydia Cacho, a renowned journalist and women’s rights activist, was arbitrarily detained and tortured in Puebla state, east-central Mexico, after publishing a book exposing a corruption and child sexual exploitation network involving authorities and well-known businessmen. Unable to get redress for her torture through the Mexican justice system, Cacho eventually took her case to the United Nations.
Finally, in 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee ruled that her rights had been violated and ordered the Mexican state to re-open the investigation into the attack, and to give her adequate compensation. This judgment has led to several arrests of state agents in Puebla, including a former governor and chief of the judicial police and several police officers, as well as a public apology from the federal government.
Journalist Lydia Cacho speaking at the 2020 Camden Conference.
But cases like Cacho’s are the exception. Securing rulings from international bodies requires resources and energy, the help of NGOs or lawyers – and can take years. What’s more, enforcement of international decisions relies on the state to comply.
While international pressure was key to persuading the Mexican and Honduran states to set up their government protection schemes for journalists and specialised prosecutors to investigate attacks against them, these institutions have generally proved ineffective.
Resourcing is always an issue: typically, protection mechanisms and prosecutors’ offices are underfunded and the staff are poorly trained. Some bodies have limited mandates, such as protection mechanisms that lack the power to investigate attacks on journalists. Sometimes, these failings are believed to be deliberate. According to Padgett, the Mexican journalist protection scheme has “political biases against those whom officials consider to be hostile to the regime”.
Indeed, many journalists and support groups suspect the Mexican and Honduran governments don’t really want these institutions to work. As the pro-democracy judge Guillermo López Lone commented about the repeated failure to secure convictions for crimes against journalists and human rights defenders in Honduras: “These are international commitments [made] due to pressure, but there is no political will.”
López Lone, who was illegally removed from his position after the 2009 coup in Honduras and only reinstated as a judge after a years-long struggle, including a ruling by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, alleged that these institutions “play a merely formal role” in Honduras, because they have been “captured by the political interests of the current rulers, and by criminal networks”.
Similarly, according to Sara Mendiola, director of Mexico City-based NGO Propuesta Cívica, it’s not enough to talk about a lack of resources or training: “Even if you doubled the [state] prosecutors’ offices’ budgets, you’d still have the same impunity because the structures [that generate impunity] remain.”
Activism is a risky business
It’s clear that in both Mexico and Honduras, despite the governments’ stated commitment to freedom of expression, there is a deep-seated ambivalence about how important or desirable it is to protect journalists and media freedom.
The heart of this issue is the contradiction of the state as both protector and perpetrator – a state that does not want to, or is incapable of, constraining or investigating itself and its allies. This in turn is linked to longstanding structural problems of corruption, impunity and human rights violations, and a legacy of controlling the media dating to pre-democracy days.
Activism by journalists against this situation – another form of self-protection – takes various forms, including public protests and advocacy, and working for and setting up NGOs that support colleagues at risk. Increasingly, activism also involves the coming together of those who are the victims of violence.
But activism is a risky business in Mexico and Honduras, opening journalists and their loved ones up to further repression and attacks by the state – and sometimes raising questions about their impartiality and credibility. While many journalists have taken part in activism out of necessity or desperation, in both countries their main source of optimism in the face of violence and impunity is journalism itself.
Journalism as the solution
Fortunately, journalists like Padgett don’t give up easily. After an eight-month hiatus following the attack in Cuitzeo and its aftermath, he now feels ready to go back to reporting.
Although he succeeded in getting the shelved investigation into the 2017 attack on him and subsequent data leak reopened, the lack of any action since means he’s decided to draw a line under this labyrinthine process. He is now looking for “alternative means of justice to compensate for the impunity”.
As a part of the reparations, he has been promised a formal apology from the Mexico City Prosecutor’s Office (similar to the apology received by Cacho). Such a ceremony is not justice and may largely be symbolic, but Padgett feels it will allow him to move on and focus on journalism again – this time as a freelancer. He is keen to make the point that Mexico remains “an extraordinary place to be a reporter”.
Despite the lack of state protection and all the other challenges, journalists like Padgett and Funes are determined to keep going – investigating their countries’ ills, probing the root causes, transforming their profession. Their commitment offers a ray of hope for the emergence of a truly free and independent media in Mexico, Honduras and beyond.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
This article draws on research which was funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). Tamsin Mitchell’s new book, Human Rights, Impunity and Anti-Press Violence: How Journalists Survive and Resist, is published by Routledge.
Good morning to allAsofondosCongress attendees. I extend a special greeting to my esteemed fellow panelists in this opening session: Mr. Juan David Correa, President of the Board of Directors of the Association; the Minister of Labor, Mr. Antonio Sanguino; and the Financial Superintendent, Mr. César Ferrari.
I would also like to express my sincere appreciation to Andrés Velasco and Daniel Wills, President and Technical Vice-President ofAsofondos, respectively, as well as to all the members of the Association, for their kind invitation and the opportunity to participate in this vital forum.
On this occasion, I will first shareBanco de la República‘s perspective on Colombia’s macroeconomic and monetary outlook. Additionally, I will conclude my remarks with reflections on the Bank’s role in administering the Contributory Pillar Savings Fund, established by the Congress of the Republic as part of the pension reform approved last year.
It is important to clarify that the views I will present today do not necessarily reflect the position of the Bank’s Board of Directors, nor do they represent the opinions of its individual members, who may hold differing interpretations on some issues I will address.
On the Bank’s autonomy and essential objectives
I would like to begin by addressing recent allegations directed at the Board of Directors, particularly some of its members, regarding alleged political motivations behind the decision made on Monday, March 31 to keep interest rates unchanged. My response to these claims is a strong reaffirmation of the institutional integrity of the Board, which operates strictly on technical grounds and within the clear constitutional mandate of safeguarding the purchasing power of the peso in tandem with general economic policy.
It is essential to emphasize that none of the Board Members, except for the Minister of Finance, represent any particular government or political opposition. The Constitution is unequivocal on this matter. Article 372 explicitly states: “The members of the Board of Directors shall exclusively represent the interests of the Nation.”
I have had the distinct honor of serving as member of the Board of Directors ofBanco de la Repúblicafor the past twelve years and, more recently, for over four years as Governor. I can state with absolute clarity and conviction that throughout these sixteen years, I have never witnessed any Board Member-or the Board as an institution-act with any motivation other than pursuing what is best for the country and its people. Our sole objective has always been to fulfill the constitutional mandate of preserving the purchasing power of the peso while ensuring that this goal aligns with the highest possible level of sustainable economic growth and employment.
In this endeavor, the Board has been fortunate to rely on what I consider to be the most highly qualified team of economists in the country. Every decision the Board makes is preceded by a comprehensive recommendation document prepared by this technical staff. While these recommendations are not necessarily adopted in full, they serve as a crucial point of reference, providing the strongest available evidence to guide Board Members in making informed decisions. Ultimately, each vote is cast with the highest level of diligence, in adherence to the constitutional mandate, and with an unwavering commitment to the nation’s best interests.
Over the past 25 years, throughout this century, the Board has implemented its mandate to preserve the currency’s purchasing power through an inflation-targeting strategy. This approach seeks to maintain inflation at approximately 3%, with a flexible exchange rate and a very short-term interest rate as the primary policy instrument.
When inflation exceeds the target, it becomes necessary to uphold a contractionary monetary policy to bring it back under control. However, the short-term economic cost of such a policy-reflected in reduced productive activity-can be more pronounced and prolonged under certain conditions. This occurs, for instance, when prices and wages are heavily indexed to past inflation. Similarly, factors that elevate country risk premiums-such as global uncertainty or political idiosyncrasies, such as rising public debt or fiscal deficits exceeding expectations-can further complicate monetary policy efforts.
Under these circumstances, the burden on monetary policy intensifies as it seeks to steer inflation back to its target while restoring the conditions necessary for more substantial and sustainable economic growth in the medium and long term.
Colombia’srecent adjustment process: a success story
The high policy interest rates maintained over the past three years reflect a deliberately restrictive monetary policy necessary in response to a significant inflationary shock-one that affected most economies worldwide between 2021 and 2023. Our policy response, characterized by elevated interest rates, entailed notable short-term costs regarding its impact on aggregate demand and productive activity. However, these costs were considerably lower than many had anticipated. Contrary to some forecasts, the economy did not enter a recession, and the observed slowdown in productive activity did not hinder the current unemployment rate from standing below pre-pandemic levels.
Concurrently, this restrictive monetary policy effectively contributed to a substantial reduction in inflation-more than eight percentage points-bringing it down from its peak of 13.4% to the current level of 5.3%. Additionally, the domestic demand imbalances that had manifested in a current account deficit exceeding 6% of GDP in 2022 were significantly corrected, reducing the deficit to just 1.8% of GDP by 2024. The technical staff now projects that this deficit will rise slightly to 2.4% of GDP in 2025, reflecting clear signs of recovery in domestic demand. Even so, the projected deficit remains well below its level three years ago, leaving the economy less reliant on external financing and less vulnerable to abrupt changes in domestic and international conditions-an especially important factor given our current uncertainties.
I believe that this macroeconomic adjustment process has been successful. It is particularly noteworthy that, within this context, we are witnessing an evident recovery in economic activity. Growth is expected to reach 2.8% in 2025, a rate that compares favorably with forecasts for many regional economies and more advanced economies, including the United States and several European nations.
According to data from the National Administrative Department of Statistics (DANE), domestic demand grew by 4.4% in real terms in the last quarter of 2024. Similar growth rates are expected in 2025, providing the foundation for the projected recovery in GDP. This improvement is also reflected in labor market indicators, including the seasonally adjusted unemployment rate recorded last February, which was the lowest for any month since April 2017.
Undoubtedly, the reduction in policy interest rates implemented by this Board between December 2023 and December 2024 played a key role in supporting the recovery of domestic demand, productive activity, and employment.
Why do interest rates remain relatively high?
At this point, it is essential to emphasize that our monetary policy interest rates remain at levels indicative of a contractionary monetary stance. Both nominal and real interest rates are currently higher than what the Bank’s technical staff considers neutral and desirable in the medium and long term-conditions in which inflationary pressures are absent and the economy grows close to its potential rate.
In this context, I would like to reiterate a point I have made publicly on multiple occasions: I consider that interest rates lower than those currently in place would be desirable. Moreover, I am convinced that there is consensus among all members of the Bank’s Board of Directors on this matter.
Why do we maintain interest rates that we deem contractionary and higher than what would be ideal in the medium and long term? The reason is that, despite our success in significantly reducing inflation from its peak in March 2023, the pace of disinflation in Colombia has been slower than in many other countries in the region and around the world, where inflation has already returned to the target ranges set by their central banks. This slower adjustment is primarily due to the high degree of price and wage indexation inColombiaand other idiosyncratic and circumstantial factors that have complicated the disinflation process.
Furthermore, the process of lowering interest rates-which we all wish to continue-had to be temporarily halted during the last two Board meetings in January and March. This decision was driven by a slowdown in the pace of inflation’s convergence toward the target, alongside factors that exerted upward pressure on inflation expectations and international interest rates relevant to Colombia’s external financing. Notably, the rise in long-term interest rates in global markets coincided with an increase in Colombia’s country risk spreads. The latter occurred in a context where fiscal deficit figures significantly exceeded forecasts, and public debt as a percentage of GDP was rising at a rate well above what is consistent with macroeconomic stability.
When comparing Colombia with other Latin American countries that, like us, follow a target inflation strategy, we observe that nations such asPerú, Uruguay, Paraguay/span>, and Costa Rica have made greater progress in reducing interest rates. This has been possible because inflation in these countries has already returned to the target ranges established by their respective central banks. In the case of Chile, inflation remains slightly above its target range due to specific factors related to public utility tariffs. However, inflation expectations suggest that by the end of 2025, Chile will be very close to its target of 3%-the same target set by Colombia.
The experiences of the region’s two largest economies,MéxicoandBrazil, are particularly relevant to our analysis. InMéxico, inflation currently stands at 3.7%, within the target range of 3% ± 1 percentage point. This allowed the Mexican Central Bank to lower its monetary policy interest rate last week from 9.5% to 9%. It is worth noting, however, that even after this reduction, the real ex-post policy rate (the difference between the nominal rate and observed inflation) remains at 5.3% (9% – 3.7%), significantly higher thanColombia’scurrent level of 4.2% (9.5% – 5.3%).
The case ofBrazilis particularly striking and serves as an important reference for the risksColombiafaces. Inflation inBrazilis currently at 5.1%, slightly lower than in Colombia. The Brazilian Central Bank had been making steady progress in lowering its monetary policy interest rate, reducing it from 13.75% in August 2023 (slightly aboveColombia’sat the time) to 10.5% by mid-2024. However, concerns over the country’s fiscal situation in the latter half of 2024 led to a sharp depreciation of the real and rising inflation expectations. In response, the Central Bank was forced to rapidly reverse course, raising the policy rate from 10.5% to its current level of 14.25%. In real ex-post terms, this rate is nearly five percentage points higher thanColombia’s. Additionally, the Brazilian Central Bank has signaled to markets that further rate hikes may be necessary in the coming months. Fortunately,Colombiahas not faced such a scenario recently, and clearly, avoiding such a situation remains a priority.
InColombia, inflation remains above the 3% target set by the Central Bank. The technical staff’s central forecast for year-end 2025 places inflation above the tolerance range of ±1 percentage point around the target, as announced by the Board last November. If this projection materializes, 2025 would mark the fifth consecutive year in which the inflation target is not met. This would pose a challenge to the credibility of the inflation-targeting framework, which relies on the firm anchoring of inflation expectations as a key element of its effectiveness. Unfortunately, recent analysts’ surveys suggest that inflation expectations among many economic agents have risen in recent months and remain above the target level.
The combination of deteriorating inflation expectations, fiscal risks inColombia, and uncertainty surrounding the global economy-exacerbated by the trade tensions triggered by the United States-led the majority of the Board to decide last Monday to maintain the pause in the process of reducing the policy interest rate. As stated in the press release following that meeting: “The decision to maintain the interest rate unchanged reflects a cautious approach to monetary policy, anticipating new information in the coming months that will provide further evidence on the feasibility of additional rate cuts. This decision reaffirms the Board’s commitment to achieving convergence with the inflation target in the context of recovering economic growth.” I believe this statement clearly conveys our expectations moving forward.
The role ofBanco de la Repúblicain administering the pension system’s Contributory Pillar Savings Fund
Before concluding, I would like to address the role thatBanco de la Repúblicawill play in administering the pension systems’ Contributory Pillar Savings Fund (FAPC), as established by the reform approved last year by Congress.
As you know, Law 2381 of 2024 stipulates that, within the contributory pillar, pension contributions from all workers will include an average premium component administered by Colpensiones, covering contributions on incomes between 1 and 2.3 times the legal monthly minimum wage. Since a portion of these contributions currently goes to the individual savings component, this change will significantly increase the resources received by Colpensiones once the reform takes effect. However, in the long term, this situation will reverse, as Colpensiones’ pension obligations will eventually surpass the resources it collects.
To address this, the law mandates that the temporary surplus of funds received by Colpensiones-expected to last for two or three decades-be allocated to the Contributory Pillar Savings Fund (FAPC). Congress also determined thatBanco de la Repúblicawould be responsible for administering this Fund. The resources administered through the FAPC will be channeled into capital markets via professional asset managers, generating returns that will help the government meet future pension obligations.
Currently, even before the reform is enacted, Colpensiones operates with a significant deficit, requiring substantial transfers from the national government. These transfers are included in the annual national budget and contribute to the fiscal deficit. The creation of the FAPC, administered byBanco de la República, has been structured to ensure that its funding is adjusted in a way that neither affects the national government’s current pension expenditures nor undermines aggregate savings in the economy.
It is essential to underscore that the temporary surplus of resources allocated to the FAPC will be insufficient to meet future pension obligations. According to the projections outlined in the bill, the Fund is expected to be fully depleted by 2070, at which point the government will need to allocate additional resources to cover the resulting deficit. Ensuring the long-term sustainability of the pension system will likely require adjustments to key parameters, particularly in retirement ages and contribution rates. The necessity of these reforms remains unchanged and is in no way diminished byBanco de la República’srole as a financial resource manager.
A little over a month and a half ago, on February 13, I addressed this very auditorium during the Treasury Congress of the Banking Association, stressing the urgency of issuing the government decree regulating the FAPC’s operation. I noted that without the prompt issuance of this decree, it would be impossible to establish the fundamental elements necessary to begin administering the Fund on time, as mandated by law for July 1.
Banco de la República’steam worked intensively and constructively with officials from the Ministry of Finance and the Financial Regulation Unit (URF) throughout the last months of 2024, expecting that by year-end, the decree would be in place, allowing us to begin developing the institutional and financial framework required for the Fund’s timely launch. Unfortunately, the process has been significantly delayed. In late February, a version of the decree was released for public consultation, which contained multiple provisions that had not been previously disclosed to the Bank, some of which were inconsistent with the law. Consequently, we submitted a detailed letter on March 7 highlighting our many concerns. Fortunately, several of these observations were taken into account by the Ministry of Finance and the URF, for which we are grateful. A revised draft was published for further comments last Friday, March 28. However, as of yesterday, we had to submit another letter reiterating key concerns that had not yet been addressed, raising the possibility that the decree’s issuance could be further delayed or that it may not fully resolve our outstanding issues. I mention these dates to convey the pressing urgency we currently face in securing the regulatory framework needed to fulfill our legal mandate, which takes effect in less than three months.
Only once the regulatory decree is issued can we move forward with drafting and signing the FAPC administration contract between the government and the Bank. This will allow us to initiate the selection and hiring of the first administering entities responsible for overseeing the resources, which are expected to accumulate at a rate of approximately 1.4 trillion pesos per month starting July 1. Among many other matters, the contract must explicitly establish thatBanco de la Repúblicawill administer the FAPC’s resources in its capacity as the government’s fiscal agent, as it does with other funds. It will provide the necessary technical and operational infrastructure while ensuring a strict separation between the Fund’s resources and the Bank’s own, both in budgetary and accounting terms. Furthermore, the administration of these resources will adhere to principles of prudence and diligence, as is standard in fiduciary mandates, with responsibility over the means rather than specific financial outcomes.
The law establishes a Steering Committee as the highest authority of the FAPC, composed of three government representatives and four independent experts appointed by the Board of Directors ofBanco de la República. However, the selection process for these four experts can only begin once the corresponding regulatory decree is in place. The draft decree published for public observations last Friday incorporated the Bank’s proposal for a transition period, during which the Bank could operate under provisional rules, investing resources in moderate-risk portfolios similar to those currently administered by the AFPs. Nonetheless, the challenge of establishing these delegated portfolios within such a short timeframe remains considerable.
Several regulatory elements still require definition. In particular, I want to highlight three pressing issues.
First, a provision included in the latest draft of the decree must be revised, as it allows for the use of savings accumulated in the FAPC to make payments under the contributory and semi-contributory pension frameworks. This pertains to the decumulation of the Fund, which should be explicitly regulated in a separate decree concerning generational sub-accounts-an essential regulation that is still pending. The law stipulates that this decree must undergo review and include a binding opinion from the Fund’s Steering Committee, which has not yet been established. Consequently, incorporating mechanisms for decumulating the Fund’s resources in the decree currently under discussion would not only be premature but also contrary to the law.
ForBanco de la República, as administrator of the FAPC, it is essential to clarify which Government entity will be responsible for the Fund’s accounting and which will oversee the corresponding auditing functions. After the bill was approved in the Senate and debated in the House of Representatives, the Bank highlighted the need for such clarity. While many House and government representatives showed willingness to make the necessary adjustments, procedural constraints in the legislative process prevented them. Given these circumstances, the government must define these key accounting and resource oversight aspects through a regulatory decree.
Regarding hiring delegated administrators during the transition period, it is imperative that government regulations establish clear limits on their remuneration in strict accordance with the law. Specifically, compensation should be structured as a fee based on the balance administered rather than as a percentage of the base income for contributions, as proposed in the version published last Friday. The latter approach is inapplicable for resources that do not correspond to individual contributions. Additionally, certain sections of the draft decree contain inconsistencies regarding the nature of the FAPC, treating it as if it were a savings fund for individual contributions-an interpretation that does not align with its legal framework.
Banco de la Repúblicaremains fully committed to collaborating with all relevant stakeholders to ensure a coordinated and efficient implementation of the new pension system and the successful launch of the Contributory Pillar Savings Fund. However, I must reiterate the urgency of establishing adequate regulations, without which we simply will not be able to fulfill the mandate assigned to us by law.
JAKARTA, 30 April 2025– The ASEAN Secretariat proudly announces the release of The ASEAN Magazine Issue No. 43: A Harvest of Plenty: Safe, Nourishing Food for All. This edition focuses on ASEAN’s shared commitment to ensuring food security, food safety, and nutrition across the region.
This edition features extensive discussions on ASEAN’s integrated approach, drawing on the expertise of those working across health, agriculture, and economic sectors, and reflects efforts to strengthen the region’s food systems through closer coordination and cooperation.
The magazine explores how regional dialogue is laying the groundwork for its implementation, as Member States move closer to ratifying the ASEAN Food Safety Regulatory Framework Agreement. This edition also explores ASEAN’s work on risk assessment and emergency response, as well as regional strategies to end malnutrition, promote sustainable agriculture, and address illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.
The issue also reflects on the significance of food beyond its practical role—how it connects, heals, and shapes the cultural fabric of ASEAN communities.
The ASEAN Magazine Issue No. 43 can be accessed and downloaded via https://asean.org/serial/a-harvest-of-plenty-safe-nourishing-food-for-all/ or on the official magazine website: https://theaseanmagazine.asean.org
The ASEAN Magazine is an official publication of the ASEAN Secretariat, managed by the ASEAN Socio-Cultural Community Analysis Division with the support of the Indian Mission to ASEAN.
The post New Release: The ASEAN Magazine’s latest edition “A Harvest of Plenty: Safe, Nourishing Food for All” appeared first on ASEAN Main Portal.
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, May 02, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company, today announced a change in the ownership of its longstanding joint venture, United Arab Emirates (UAE) based Al-Futtaim Willis (AFW). Al-Futtaim’s decision to sell their 51% stake in the joint venture will enable WTW to wholly manage the AFW business when regulatory approvals are received.
Pamela Thomson-Hall, Head of International at WTW, said: “We are fortunate to have enjoyed a prosperous relationship with Al-Futtaim spanning nearly 50 years, for which we are very thankful. WTW’s investment strategy remains acutely focused on investing strategically to optimize the company’s portfolio globally and pursue scaled and high-growth broking businesses. Our ability to wholly manage our businesses in Dubai and Bahrain on a go-forward basis will further strengthen this strategy and enable us to provide clients in the UAE and the wider region improved access to our specialist expertise and global placement capabilities. It also enhances our ability to serve our global benefit management clients through a more consistent delivery approach.”
Head of WTW CEEMEA, Eleni Lykoudi, commented: “Having worked with Al-Futtaim for half a century, our two companies will remain trusted friends and partners, and we look forward to many more years of working together in the future. This change in ownership structure complements WTW’s recent investments in the neighboring Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, where the company recently established insurance and reinsurance broking entities. The integration of AFW will allow our local, regional, and global clients to access WTW’s entire portfolio, enhancing our value proposition in the market. All of this speaks to WTW’s commitment to invest in the Middle East and our enhanced client service offering in the region.”
On behalf of Al-Futtaim, Omer Elamin said: “We are proud of the strong and successful relationship we have built with WTW over nearly five decades. As we amicably conclude this chapter of our partnership, we remain committed to maintaining the professionalism and spirit of collaboration that have defined our journey together and we look forward to the future possibilities that may arise from this mutual understanding.”
This transaction is subject to regulatory approval and is expected to close in the second half of 2025.
About WTW At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance. Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Learn more at www.wtwco.com
About Al-Futtaim Established in the 1930s as a trading business, Al-Futtaim today is one of the most diversified and progressive, privately held regional businesses headquartered in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Structured into five operating divisions—automotive, financial services, real estate, retail, and health—Al-Futtaim employs more than 33,000 people across over 18 countries in the Middle East, Asia, and North Africa. Its portfolio includes partnerships with over 200 of the world’s most renowned and innovative brands.
Driven by an entrepreneurial spirit and a steadfast commitment to meeting customer needs, Al-Futtaim continues to grow and evolve, aligning with the changing demands of the communities it serves. Anchored by its core values of respect, excellence, collaboration, and integrity, Al-Futtaim consistently enriches the lives and aspirations of its customers.
This document contains ‘forward-looking statements’ within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which are intended to be covered by the safe harbors created by those laws. You can identify these statements and other forward-looking statements by words such as ‘may’, ‘will’, ‘would’, ‘commit’, ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘intend’, ‘plan’, ‘future’, or similar words, expressions or the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, strategic plans and the future of our business, receipt of regulatory approvals and other statements that are not historical facts. Such statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of the Company’s management and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. All forward-looking disclosure is speculative by its nature.
There are important risks, uncertainties, events and factors that could cause our actual results or performance to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements contained in this document, including, but not limited to those described under “Risk Factors” in the Company’s most recent 10-K filing and subsequent filings filed with the SEC. The foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive, and new factors may emerge from time to time that could also affect actual performance and results. Although we believe that the assumptions underlying our forward-looking statements are reasonable, any of these assumptions, and therefore also the forward-looking statements based on these assumptions, could themselves prove to be inaccurate. Given the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements included in this document, our inclusion of this information is not a representation or guarantee by us that our objectives and plans will be achieved. Our forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made, and we will not update these forward-looking statements unless the securities laws require us to do so. With regard to these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events discussed in this document may not occur, and we caution you against unduly relying on these forward-looking statements.
Source: The White House
ENDING TAXPAYER SUBSIDIZATION OF BIASED MEDIA: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order ending the taxpayer subsidization of National Public Radio (NPR) and the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS).
NPR and PBS receive tens of millions of dollars in taxpayer funds each year, primarily from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).
The Order ceases federal funding to NPR and PBS to the maximum extent allowed by law.
It also ceases indirect funding to PBS and NPR by prohibiting local public radio and television stations and any other recipients of CPB funds from using taxpayer dollars to support these organizations.
The Order mandates that the CPB revise its 2025 General Provisions to explicitly prohibit direct or indirect funding to NPR and PBS.
It directs all federal agencies to terminate any direct or indirect funding to NPR and PBS and to review existing grants and contracts for compliance.
The Order instructs the FCC and relevant agencies to investigate whether NPR and PBS have engaged in unlawful discrimination.
EXPOSING BIAS IN PUBLIC BROADCASTING: NPR and PBS have fueled partisanship and left-wing propaganda with taxpayer dollars, which is highly inappropriate and an improper use of taxpayers’ money, as President Trump has stated.
Unlike in 1967, when CPB was established, today the media landscape is filled with abundant, diverse, and innovative news options, making government funding of news media outdated, unnecessary, and corrosive to journalistic independence.
Moreover, while the CPB is legally mandated to be “nonpolitical [in] nature” and not “contribute to or otherwise support any political party,” both NPR and PBS make significant in-kind contributions to the Democrat party and its political causes.
An NPR editor found that registered Democrats outnumbered Republicans 87 to zero in the newsroom’s editorial positions.
NPR’s President and CEO admitted that she regards “truth” as a harmful “distraction” from NPR’s objectives.
To illustrate its partisan capture, NPR management asked its editors to avoid the term “biological sex” when discussing transgender issues.
NPR has run stories defending looting and suggesting that crime fears are racist and has described its diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices as “inseparable” from its content.
NPR refused to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story, calling it a waste of time and a distraction, despite that it was highly relevant to the presidential election.
NPR repeatedly insisted COVID-19 did not originate in a lab and refused to explore the theory.
The FBI, CIA, and Department of Energy have all since deemed the lab-leak theory the likely cause.
NPR ran a Valentine’s Day feature around “queer animals,” in which it suggested the make-believe clownfish in “Finding Nemo” would’ve been better off as a female, that “banana slugs are hermaphrodites,” and that “some deer are nonbinary.”
Research shows that “congressional Republicans faced 85% negative coverage, compared to 54% positive coverage of congressional Democrats,” on PBS’s flagship news program.
Over a six-month period, PBS News Hour used versions of the term “far-right” 162 times, but “far-left” only 6 times.
A PBS station featured drag queen Lil Miss Hot Mess on a program meant for kids ages 3-8.
PBS produced a movie titled “Real Boy” which celebrates a transgender teen’s transition.
PBS show Sesame Street partnered with CNN for a town hall aimed presenting children with a one-sided narrative to “address racism” amid the Black Lives Matter riots.
PBS’s coverage of the 2024 Republican National Convention was 72% negative, while its coverage of the 2024 Democratic National Convention was 88% positive.
No media outlet has a Constitutional right to taxpayer subsidized operations, and it’s highly inappropriate for taxpayers to be forced to subsidize biased, partisan content.
SAFEGUARDING TAXPAYER DOLLARS: President Trump is working to ensure taxpayer dollars are no longer wasted on progressive pet projects, but rather used to benefit hardworking Americans.
President Trump established the “Department of Government Efficiency” to examine how to streamline the federal government, eliminate unnecessary programs, and reduce bureaucratic inefficiency.
President Trump launched a 10-to-1 deregulation initiative, ensuring every new rule is justified by clear benefits.
President Trump terminated DEI discrimination in the federal workforce, and in federal contracting and spending.
The Trump Administration is aggressively investigating Biden-era programs that wasted billions of taxpayer dollars on inefficient and politically-driven projects, including canceling unnecessary government contracts and grants that do not serve the national interest.
Details 2025-04-29 President Lai meets NBR delegation On the morning of April 29, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation from the National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR). In remarks, President Lai stated that as Taiwan stands at the very frontline of defense of global democracy, we are actively implementing our Four Pillars of Peace action plan, which includes continuing to enhance our national defense capabilities, demonstrating our commitment to defending freedom and democracy. The president said he hopes to further advance national security and industrial cooperation between Taiwan and the United States. He also expressed hope that this will help boost economic resilience for both sides and establish each as a key pillar of regional security, elevating our relations to even higher levels. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I am delighted to meet with Admiral John Aquilino again today. I also warmly welcome NBR President Michael Wills and our distinguished guests from the bureau to Taiwan. I look forward to exchanging views with you all on Taiwan-US relations and the regional situation. During his tenure as commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command, Admiral Aquilino placed much attention on the Taiwan Strait issue. And the NBR has conducted a wealth of research and analysis focusing on matters of regional security. Thanks to all of your outstanding contributions and efforts, the international community has gained a better understanding of the role Taiwan plays in the Indo-Pacific region and in global democratic development. For this, I want to extend my deepest gratitude. Taiwan stands at the very frontline of defending global democracy and is located at a strategically important location in the first island chain. We are actively implementing our Four Pillars of Peace action plan, which includes continuing to enhance our national defense capabilities, building economic security, demonstrating stable and principled cross-strait leadership, and standing side-by-side with the democratic community to jointly demonstrate the strength of deterrence and safeguard regional peace and stability. At the beginning of this month, I announced an increase in military allowances for volunteer service members and combat troops. The government will also continue to reform national defense and enhance self-sufficiency in defense. In addition, we will prioritize special budget allocations to ensure that Taiwan’s defense budget exceeds 3 percent of GDP. These efforts continue to strengthen Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities and demonstrate our commitment to defending freedom and democracy. As we mark the 46th anniversary of the enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act, we thank the US government for continuing its arms sales to Taiwan and strengthening the Taiwan-US partnership over the years. We believe that, in addition to engaging in military exchanges and cooperation, Taiwan and the US can build an even closer economic and trade relationship, boosting each other’s economic resilience and establishing each as a key pillar of regional security. I expect that your continued assistance will help advance national security and industrial cooperation between Taiwan and the US, elevating our relations to even higher levels. Once again, I welcome our distinguished guests to Taiwan and wish you a pleasant and successful trip. I hope that through this visit, you gain a more comprehensive and in-depth understanding of Taiwan’s economy and national defense. Admiral Aquilino then delivered remarks, thanking the Ministry of National Defense for the invitation and President Lai for receiving and spending time with them. Mentioning that this is his second visit in five months, he said he continues to be incredibly impressed with the president’s leadership and the actions he has taken to secure Taiwan and defend its people. Admiral Aquilino said that he has watched the efforts of the ministers on whole-of-society defense to demonstrate deterrence and added that the pace of the work is nothing short of inspiring. Admiral Aquilino noted that Taiwan’s thriving democracy is incredibly important to the peace and stability of the region. He stated that he, alongside the NBR, will continue to offer support, noting that President Wills and his team are an asset to Taiwan and the US that helps continue our close relationship and ensure peace and stability in the region.
Details 2025-04-28 President Lai meets Japanese Diet Member and former Minister of State for Economic Security Takaichi Sanae On the afternoon of April 28, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Member of the Japanese House of Representatives and former Minister of State for Economic Security Takaichi Sanae. In remarks, President Lai thanked the government of Japan for repeatedly emphasizing the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait at important international venues. The president expressed hope that in the face of China’s continually expanding red supply chains, Taiwan and Japan can continue to cooperate closely in such fields as semiconductors, energy, and AI technology to create non-red supply chains that enhance economic resilience and industrial competitiveness for both sides, and jointly pave the way for further prosperity and growth in the Indo-Pacific region. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: First, I would like to extend a warm welcome to Representative Takaichi as she returns for another visit to Taiwan. I am also very happy to have Members of the House of Representatives Kikawada Hitoshi and Ozaki Masanao, and Member of the House of Councillors Sato Kei all gathered together here to engage in these very important exchanges. Our visitors will be taking part in many exchange activities during this trip. Earlier today at the Indo-Pacific Strategy Thinktank’s International Political and Economic Forum, Representative Takaichi delivered a speech in which she clearly demonstrated the great importance she places upon the friendship between Taiwan and Japan. For this I want to express my deepest appreciation to each of our guests. The peoples of Taiwan and Japan have a deep friendship and mutual trust. We have a shared commitment to the universal values of democracy, freedom, and respect for human rights, but beyond that, we both have striven to contribute to regional peace and stability. I also want to thank the government of Japan for repeatedly emphasizing the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait at important international venues. Tomorrow you will all make a trip to Kaohsiung to visit a bronze statue of former Prime Minister Abe Shinzo, who once said, “If Taiwan has a problem, then Japan has a problem.” We will always remember the firm support and friendship he showed Taiwan. Since taking office last year, I have worked hard to improve Taiwan’s whole-of-society defense resilience and implement our Four Pillars of Peace action plan. By strengthening our national defense capabilities, building up economic security, demonstrating stable and principled cross-strait leadership, and deepening partnerships with democratic countries including Japan, we can together maintain peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region and across the Taiwan Strait. At the same time, in the face of China’s continually expanding red supply chains, we hope that Taiwan and Japan, as important economic and trade partners, can continue to cooperate closely in such fields as semiconductors, energy, and AI technology to create non-red supply chains that further enhance economic resilience and industrial competitiveness for both sides. Going forward, Taiwan will work hard to play an important role in the international community and contribute its key strengths. I hope that, with the support of our guests, Taiwan can soon accede to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership and sign an economic partnership agreement (EPA) with Japan so that we can jointly pave the way for further prosperity and growth in the Indo-Pacific region. Lastly, I thank each of you once again for taking concrete action to support Taiwan. I am confident that your visit will help deepen Taiwan-Japan ties and create even greater opportunities for cooperation. Let us all strive together to keep propelling Taiwan-Japan relations forward. Representative Takaichi then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai and Taiwanese political leaders for the warm hospitality they extended to the delegation, and mentioning that the visiting delegation members are all like-minded partners carrying on the legacy of former Prime Minister Abe. July 8 this year will mark the third anniversary of the passing of former Prime Minister Abe, she said, and when the former prime minister unfortunately passed away, President Lai, then serving as vice president, was among the first to come offer condolences, for which she expressed sincere admiration and gratitude. Representative Takaichi stated that Taiwan and Japan are island nations that face the same circumstances and problems, and that Japan’s trade activities rely heavily on ocean transport, so once a problem arises nearby that threatens maritime shipping lanes, it will be a matter of life and death for Japan. Taiwan and Japan are similar, as once a problem arises, both will face food and energy security issues, and supply chains may even be threatened, she said. Regarding Taiwan-Japan cooperation, Representative Takaichi stated that both sides must first protect and strengthen supply chain resilience. President Lai has previously said that he wants to turn Taiwan into an AI island, she said, and in semiconductors, Taiwan has the world’s leading technology. Representative Takaichi went on to say that Taiwan and Japan can collaborate in the fields of AI and semiconductors, quantum computing, and dual-use industries, as well as in areas such as drones and new energy technologies to build more resilient supply chains, so that if problems arise, we can maintain our current standard of living with peace of mind. Representative Takaichi indicated that cooperation in the defense sector is also crucial, and that by uniting like-minded countries including Taiwan, the United States, Japan, the Philippines, and Australia, and even countries in Europe, we can build a stronger network to jointly maintain our security guarantees. Representative Takaichi expressed hope that Taiwan and Japan will continue to strengthen substantive non-governmental relations, including personnel exchange visits and information sharing, so that we can jointly face and respond to crises when they arise. Regarding the hope to sign a Taiwan-Japan EPA that President Lai had mentioned earlier, she also expressed support and said she looks forward to upcoming exchanges and talks. The visiting delegation also included Japan-Taiwan Exchange Association Taipei Office Chief Representative Katayama Kazuyuki.
Details 2025-04-23 President Lai delivers remarks at International Holocaust Remembrance Day event On the afternoon of April 23, President Lai Ching-te attended an International Holocaust Remembrance Day event and delivered remarks, in which he emphasized that peace is priceless, and war has no winners, while morality, democracy, and respect for human rights are powerful forces against violence and tyranny. The president stated that Taiwan will continue to expand cooperation with democratic partners and safeguard regional and global peace and stability, defending democracy, freedom, and human rights. He said we must never forget history, and must overcome our differences and join in solidarity to ensure that the next generations live in a world that is more just and more peaceful. Upon arriving at the event, President Lai heard a testimony from the granddaughter of a Holocaust survivor, followed by a rabbi’s recitation of the prayer “El Maleh Rachamim.” He then joined other distinguished guests in lighting candles in memory of the victims. A transcript of President Lai’s remarks follows: To begin, I want to thank the Israel Economic and Cultural Office (ISECO) in Taipei, German Institute Taipei, Taiwan Foundation for Democracy, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs for co-organizing this deeply significant memorial ceremony again this year. I also want to thank everyone for attending. We are here today to remember the victims of the Holocaust, express sympathy for the survivors, honor the brave individuals who protected the victims, and acknowledge all who were impacted by this atrocity. It was deeply moving to hear Ms. [Orly] Sela share the story of how her grandmother, Yehudit Biksz, escaped the Nazi regime. I want to thank her specially for traveling so far to attend this event. From the 1930s through World War II, the Nazi regime sought to exclude Jewish people from society. In their campaign, they perpetrated systematic genocide driven by their ideology. Policies and directives under the authoritarian Nazi regime resulted in the deaths of approximately 6 million Jews. Millions of others were persecuted, including Romani people, persons with disabilities, the gay community, and anyone who disagreed with Nazi ideology. It is one of the darkest chapters in human history. Many countries, including Taiwan, have enacted anti-massacre legislation, and observe a remembrance day each year. Those occasions help us remember the victims, preserve historical memory, and most importantly, reinforce our resolve to fight against hatred and discrimination. Twenty-three years ago, Chelujan (車路墘) Church in Tainan founded the Taiwan Holocaust Memorial Museum. It is the first Jewish museum in Taiwan, and the second Holocaust museum in Asia. Its founding mission urges us to forget hatred and love one another; put an end to war and advocate peace. Many of the exhibition items come from Jewish people, connecting Taiwan closer with Israel and helping Taiwanese better understand the experiences of Jewish people. In this way, we grow to more deeply cherish peace. When I was mayor of Tainan, I took part in an exhibition event at Chelujan Church. I was also invited by the Israeli government to join the International Mayors Conference in Israel, where I visited the World Holocaust Remembrance Center. I will never forget how deeply that experience moved me, and as a result, peace and human rights became even more important issues for me. These issues are valued by Taiwan and our friends and allies. They are also important links connecting Taiwan with the world. Peace is priceless, and war has no winners. We will continue to expand cooperation with democratic partners and safeguard regional and global peace and stability. We will also continue to make greater contributions and work with the international community to defend democracy, freedom, and human rights. This year also marks the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. However, we still see wars raging around the world. We see a resurgence of authoritarian powers, which could severely impact global democracy, peace, and prosperous development. Today’s event allows for more than reflection on the past; it also serves as a warning for the future. We are reminded of the threats that hatred, prejudice, and extremism pose to humanity. But we are also reminded that morality, democracy, and respect for human rights are powerful forces against violence and tyranny. We must never forget history. We must overcome our differences and join in solidarity for a better future. Let’s work together to ensure that the next generations live in a world that is more just and more peaceful. Also in attendance at the event were Member of the Israeli Knesset (parliament) and Taiwan friendship group Chair Boaz Toporovsky, ISECO Representative Maya Yaron, and German Institute Taipei Deputy Director General Andreas Hofem.
Details 2025-04-23 President Lai pays respects to Pope Francis On the morning of April 23, President Lai Ching-te visited the Taipei Archdiocesan Curia to pay respects in a memorial ceremony for His Holiness Pope Francis. As officiant of the ceremony, President Lai burned incense and presented flowers, fruits, and wine to pay his respects to Pope Francis. At the direction of the master of ceremonies, the president then bowed three times in front of Pope Francis’s memorial portrait, conveying his grief and deep respect for the late pope. After hearing of Pope Francis’s passing on April 21, President Lai promptly requested the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to express sincere condolences from the people and government of Taiwan to the Vatican. The president also instructed Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) to convey condolences to the Holy See’s Apostolic Nunciature in Taiwan.
Details 2025-04-23 President Lai meets US CNAS NextGen fellows On the morning of April 23, President Lai Ching-te met with fellows from the Shawn Brimley Next Generation National Security Leaders Program (NextGen) run by the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). In remarks, President Lai thanked the government of the United States for continuing its arms sales to Taiwan over the years, supporting Taiwan’s efforts to enhance its national defense capabilities and jointly maintaining peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. The president pointed out that we will promote our “Taiwan plus one” policy, that is, new arrangements for Taiwan plus the US, and form a “Taiwan investment in the US team” to expand investment and bring about even closer Taiwan-US trade cooperation, allowing us to reduce the trade deficit and generate development that benefits both sides. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: Ms. Michèle Flournoy, chair of the CNAS Board of Directors, is a good friend of Taiwan, and she has made major contributions to Taiwan-US relations through her long-time efforts on various aspects of our cooperation. I am happy to welcome Chair Flournoy, who is once again leading a NextGen Fellowship delegation to Taiwan. CNAS is a prominent think tank focusing on US national security and defense policy based in Washington, DC. Its NextGen Fellowship has fostered talented individuals in the fields of national security and foreign affairs. This year’s delegation is significantly larger than those of the past, demonstrating the increased importance that the next generation of US leaders attach to Taiwan. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend my sincerest welcome to you all. The Taiwan Strait, an issue of importance for our guests, has become a global issue. There is a high degree of international consensus that peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait are indispensable elements in global security and prosperity. Facing military threats from China, Taiwan proposed the Four Pillars of Peace action plan. First, we are actively implementing military reforms, enhancing whole-of-society defense resilience, and working to increase our defense budget to more than 3 percent of GDP. Second, we are strengthening our economic resilience. As Taiwan’s economy must keep advancing, we can no longer put all our eggs in one basket. We are taking action to remain firmly rooted in Taiwan while expanding our global presence and marketing worldwide. In these efforts, we are already seeing results. Third, we are standing side-by-side with other democratic countries to demonstrate the strength of deterrence and achieve our goal of peace through strength. And fourth, Taiwan is willing, under the principles of parity and dignity, to conduct exchanges and cooperate with China towards achieving peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. This April 10 marked the 46th anniversary of the enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act. We thank the US government for continuing its arms sales to Taiwan over the years, supporting Taiwan’s efforts to enhance its national defense capabilities and jointly maintaining peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. We look forward to Taiwan and the US continuing to strengthen collaboration on the development of both our defense industries as well as the building of non-red supply chains. This will yield even more results and further deepen our economic and trade partnership. The US is now the main destination for outbound investment from Taiwan. Moving forward, we will promote our “Taiwan plus one” policy, that is, new arrangements for Taiwan plus the US. And our government will form a “Taiwan investment in the US team” to expand investment. We hope this will bring Taiwan-US economic and trade cooperation even closer and, through mutually beneficial assistance, allow us to generate development that benefits both our sides while reducing our trade deficit. In closing, thank you once again for visiting Taiwan. We hope your trip is fruitful and leaves you with a deep impression of Taiwan. We also hope that going forward you continue supporting Taiwan and advancing even greater development for Taiwan-US ties. Chair Flournoy then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for making time to receive their delegation. Referring to President Lai’s earlier remarks, she said that it is quite an impressive group, as past members of this program have gone on to become members of the US Congress, leading government experts, and leaders in the think-tank world and in the private sector. She remarked that investing in this group is a wonderful privilege for her and that they appreciate President Lai’s agreeing to take the time to engage in exchange with them. Chair Flournoy emphasized that they are visiting Taiwan at a critical moment, when there is so much change and volatility in the geostrategic environment, a lot of uncertainty, and a lot of unpredictability. She stated that given our shared values, our shared passion for democracy and human rights, and our shared interests in peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region, this is an important time for dialogue, collaboration, and looking for additional opportunities where we can work together towards regional peace and stability.
Details 2025-04-06 President Lai delivers remarks on US tariff policy response On April 6, President Lai Ching-te delivered recorded remarks regarding the impact of the 32 percent tariff that the United States government recently imposed on imports from Taiwan in the name of reciprocity. In his remarks, President Lai explained that the government will adopt five response strategies, including making every effort to improve reciprocal tariff rates through negotiations, adopting a support plan for affected domestic industries, adopting medium- and long-term economic development plans, forming new “Taiwan plus the US” arrangements, and launching industry listening tours. The president emphasized that as we face this latest challenge, the government and civil society will work hand in hand, and expressed hope that all parties, both ruling and opposition, will support the measures that the Executive Yuan will take to open up a broader path for Taiwan’s economy. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: My fellow citizens, good evening. The US government recently announced higher tariffs on countries around the world in the name of reciprocity, including imposing a 32 percent tariff on imports from Taiwan. This is bound to have a major impact on our nation. Various countries have already responded, and some have even adopted retaliatory measures. Tremendous changes in the global economy are expected. Taiwan is an export-led economy, and in facing future challenges there will inevitably be difficulties, so we must proceed carefully to turn danger into safety. During this time, I want to express gratitude to all sectors of society for providing valuable opinions, which the government regards highly, and will use as a reference to make policy decisions. However, if we calmly and carefully analyze Taiwan’s trade with the US, we find that last year Taiwan’s exports to the US were valued at US$111.4 billion, accounting for 23.4 percent of total export value, with the other 75-plus percent of products sold worldwide to countries other than the US. Of products sold to the US, competitive ICT products and electronic components accounted for 65.4 percent. This shows that Taiwan’s economy does still have considerable resilience. As long as our response strategies are appropriate, and the public and private sectors join forces, we can reduce impacts. Please do not panic. To address the reciprocal tariffs by the US, Taiwan has no plans to adopt retaliatory tariffs. There will be no change in corporate investment commitments to the US, as long as they are consistent with national interests. But we must ensure the US clearly understands Taiwan’s contributions to US economic development. More importantly, we must actively seek to understand changes in the global economic situation, strengthen Taiwan-US industry cooperation, elevate the status of Taiwan industries in global supply chains, and with safeguarding the continued development of Taiwan’s economy as our goal, adopt the following five strategies to respond. Strategy one: Make every effort to improve reciprocal tariff rates through negotiations using the following five methods: 1. Taiwan has already formed a negotiation team led by Vice Premier Cheng Li-chiun (鄭麗君). The team includes members from the National Security Council, the Office of Trade Negotiations, and relevant Executive Yuan ministries and agencies, as well as academia and industry. Like the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement, negotiations on tariffs can start from Taiwan-US bilateral zero-tariff treatment. 2. To expand purchases from the US and thereby reduce the trade deficit, the Executive Yuan has already completed an inventory regarding large-scale procurement plans for agricultural, industrial, petroleum, and natural gas products, and the Ministry of National Defense has also proposed a military procurement list. All procurement plans will be actively pursued. 3. Expand investments in the US. Taiwan’s cumulative investment in the US already exceeds US$100 billion, creating approximately 400,000 jobs. In the future, in addition to increased investment in the US by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, other industries such as electronics, ICT, petrochemicals, and natural gas can all increase their US investments, deepening Taiwan-US industry cooperation. Taiwan’s government has helped form a “Taiwan investment in the US” team, and hopes that the US will reciprocate by forming a “US investment in Taiwan” team to bring about closer Taiwan-US trade cooperation, jointly creating a future economic golden age. 4. We must eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade. Non-tariff barriers are an indicator by which the US assesses whether a trading partner is trading fairly with the US. Therefore, we will proactively resolve longstanding non-tariff barriers so that negotiations can proceed more smoothly. 5. We must resolve two issues that have been matters of longstanding concern to the US. One regards high-tech export controls, and the other regards illegal transshipment of dumped goods, otherwise referred to as “origin washing.” Strategy two: We must adopt a plan for supporting our industries. For industries that will be affected by the tariffs, and especially traditional industries as well as micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, we will provide timely and needed support and assistance. Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) and his administrative team recently announced a package of 20 specific measures designed to address nine areas. Moving forward, the support we provide to different industries will depend on how they are affected by the tariffs, will take into account the particular features of each industry, and will help each industry innovate, upgrade, and transform. Strategy three: We must adopt medium- and long-term economic development plans. At this point in time, our government must simultaneously adopt new strategies for economic and industrial development. This is also the fundamental path to solutions for future economic challenges. The government will proactively cooperate with friends and allies, develop a diverse range of markets, and achieve closer integration of entities in the upper, middle, and lower reaches of industrial supply chains. This course of action will make Taiwan’s industrial ecosystem more complete, and will help Taiwanese industries upgrade and transform. We must also make good use of the competitive advantages we possess in such areas as semiconductor manufacturing, integrated chip design, ICT, and smart manufacturing to build Taiwan into an AI island, and promote relevant applications for food, clothing, housing, and transportation, as well as military, security and surveillance, next-generation communications, and the medical and health and wellness industries as we advance toward a smarter, more sustainable, and more prosperous new Taiwan. Strategy four: “Taiwan plus one,” i.e., new “Taiwan plus the US” arrangements: While staying firmly rooted in Taiwan, our enterprises are expanding their global presence and marketing worldwide. This has been our national economic development strategy, and the most important aspect is maintaining a solid base here in Taiwan. We absolutely must maintain a solid footing, and cannot allow the present strife to cause us to waver. Therefore, our government will incentivize investments, carry out deregulation, and continue to improve Taiwan’s investment climate by actively resolving problems involving access to water, electricity, land, human resources, and professional talent. This will enable corporations to stay in Taiwan and continue investing here. In addition, we must also help the overseas manufacturing facilities of offshore Taiwanese businesses to make necessary adjustments to support our “Taiwan plus one” policy, in that our national economic development strategy will be adjusted as follows: to stay firmly rooted in Taiwan while expanding our global presence, strengthening US ties, and marketing worldwide. We intend to make use of the new state of supply chains to strengthen cooperation between Taiwanese and US industries, and gain further access to US markets. Strategy five: Launch industry listening tours: All industrial firms, regardless of sector or size, will be affected to some degree once the US reciprocal tariffs go into effect. The administrative teams led by myself and Premier Cho will hear out industry concerns so that we can quickly resolve problems and make sure policies meet actual needs. My fellow citizens, over the past half-century and more, Taiwan has been through two energy crises, the Asian financial crisis, the global financial crisis, and pandemics. We have been able to not only withstand one test after another, but even turn crises into opportunities. The Taiwanese economy has emerged from these crises stronger and more resilient than ever. As we face this latest challenge, the government and civil society will work hand in hand, and I hope that all parties in the legislature, both ruling and opposition, will support the measures that the Executive Yuan will take to open up a broader path for Taiwan’s economy. Let us join together and give it our all. Thank you.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanna Mendelssohn, Honorary Senior Fellow, School of Culture and Communication. Editor in Chief, Design and Art of Australia Online, The University of Melbourne
More than 50 years ago, when I was a junior curatorial assistant at the Art Gallery of NSW, I had the daunting experience of hanging the annual Archibald, Wynne and Sulman prizes.
At the time the professional staff held the exhibitions in such disregard, they complained about the news media’s interest in this mediocrity while ignoring more worthy events.
Attitudes changed in the 1980s with the late director Edmund Capon, who recognised popularity was an asset – not a disadvantage.
Capon raised the prize money with sponsorships and started charging the public to see the winners. His strategy proved so successful that the Archibald, Wynne and Sulman exhibitions are now a significant source of revenue for the gallery.
This year, the highly experienced Beatrice Gralton, Senior Curator of Contemporary Australian Art, has curated the exhibitions with support from a crew of more than 40 colleagues.
Packing Room Prize goes to Abdul Abdullah
In the 1970s, the media was refused access to the exhibitions until just before the winner was announced. Now it is actively courted with a public viewing of the works that survive the rigorous culling process.
This takes place a week before the final judging, when the Packing Room Prize is announced. The changing status of this prize is also evidenced by changing personnel. Those who did the physical work of packing and loading artworks in the past were not expected to know much about art – and often gave the prize to paintings that would otherwise not be hung.
In 2025, the specialist installation crew that handles the portraits in the packing room are most likely to be professional artists themselves – a reminder that most artists need another gig to stay afloat.
This year’s Packing Room Prize winner is Abdul Abdullah’s portrait of fellow artist Jason Phu, No mountain high enough. There is a glorious irony in this, as Abdullah has long been a critic of the self-important art establishment.
His work is a riff on the heroic paintings of 19th century landscapes, except for the flock of twittering birds that surround the head of the solitary rider, a bit like a halo.
His subject, fellow artist Phu, has to be seen as a serious contender for the main prize, which will be announced on May 9. Phu’s portrait of actor Hugo Weaving – older hugo from the future fighting hugo from right now in a swamp and all the frogs and insects and fish and flowers now look on – has both the humour and energy that has long characterised his work.
But there are many serious contenders for this year’s prize. Kurdish refugee Mostafa Azimitabar first exhibited in the Archibald in 2022, with a self-portrait painted in coffee, with a toothbrush. Art became his refuge during the many years he spent incarcerated as an asylum seeker.
He still uses a toothbrush, but has used paint for his wonderfully fierce painting of a taut Grace Tame, appropriately named The definition of hope.
Then there’s Kaylene Whiskey’s delightful self-portrait From comic to canvas, which manages to include images of her heroines, Dolly Parton and Tina Turner.
Not all works are so strident, however. Lucila Zentner’s Wendy in the gallery, is a subdued portrait of fellow artist Wendy Sharpe, placing her in the context of her art, almost as a decoration.
As is spelt out in J.F. Archibald’s will, the judges of the Archibald Prize must be the trustees of the gallery, and no one else may interfere in their decision.
However, for decades after a spectacular court case resulting from the 1943 Archibald, the trustees were so nervous of litigation that the final judging was administered by the NSW electoral office. In a court case in 1944, plaintiffs claimed the trustees’ 1943 decision was a breach of trust as the winning painting wasn’t a portrait. And one trustee claimed he had accidentally voted for the winner, thinking he was voting against it.
Today, all decisions are made in-house. Court cases have been fought over whether entries were paintings (or not), painted from life (or not), selected by the trustees (or not). In 1990 Sidney Nolan had to withdraw his entry after it was pointed out he could not be described as a “resident in Australasia for 12 months preceding the date of entry”.
But once the entry conditions are met, the curator has a free hand. This year, Gralton has hung all three exhibitions on the premise they are “about stories and storytelling”.
In the Sulman prize exhibition – awarded for best subject painting, genre painting or mural project – the once academic modernist Mitch Cairns has gone full conceptual with his stark Narrow cast (studio mural). It looks like something straight out of the 1970s Art & Language movement.
The Wynne prize is for both Australian landscapes and sculptures. This year there are many three-dimensional works, ranging from the elaborate Billy Bain to the almost agonised restraint of Heather B. Swann.
Then there is Mehwish Iqbal’s beautiful, delicate Zameen muqaddas (sacred earth), a pen and ink contrast of fine botanical drawing and delicate wash, all on handmade paper.
While artist Elizabeth Pulie has already judged the Sulman prize, the judging for the Archibald and Wynne will be finalised early morning on May 9. This year’s result is anyone’s guess.
Joanna Mendelssohn has in the past received funding from the ARC.
The native shrimp _Paratya australiensis_ was among the species found to incorporate carbon from natural gas into their bodies in the Condamine River.Chris Van Wyk/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND
What’s the currency for all life on Earth? Carbon. Every living thing needs a source of carbon to grow and reproduce. In the form of organic molecules, carbon contains chemical energy that is transferred between organisms when one eats the other.
Plants carry out photosynthesis, using energy from sunlight to convert carbon dioxide and water into sugar and oxygen. Animals get carbon by consuming organic matter in their diet – herbivores from plants, carnivores from eating other animals. They use this carbon for energy and to produce the molecules their bodies need, with some carbon dioxide released by breathing.
But there are other, stranger ways of getting carbon. In our new research, we found something very surprising. River animals were feeding on methane-eating bacteria, which in turn were consuming fossil fuel as food.
Usually, the carbon used as food by river creatures is new in the sense it has been recently converted from gas (carbon dioxide) to solid carbon through photosynthesising algae or trees along the bank. But in a few rivers, such as the Condamine River in Queensland, there’s another source: ancient natural gas bubbling up from underground, which is eaten by microorganisms. Insects such as mayflies have taken to this methane-based carbon with gusto.
How does a river usually get its carbon?
The way photosynthesised carbon moves from a plant to an animal and then another animal can be described as a food web. Food webs show the many different feeding relationships between organisms, and show how species depend on each other for sustenance in an intricate balance.
In a river food web, carbon usually comes from one of two sources: plants growing and photosynthesising in the river (such as algae), or when organic matter such as leaves are washed in by rain or blown in by wind.
Rivers that are well connected to their floodplains often get plenty of carbon from leaf litter from trees which dissolves in water or is eaten directly by animals. Algae in rivers provide a high-quality source of carbon for animals because they can contain high concentrations of omega-3 fatty acids essential for growth and reproduction.
The primary source of carbon for river animals varies depending on prevailing conditions and the individual river.
The carbon of the Condamine
Some microorganisms called archaea naturally produce small amounts of methane in oxygen-depleted sediments of rivers.
But we wanted to look at the Condamine to see whether much larger volumes of methane could be used as food.
After it forms deep underground, natural gas can slowly escape through cracks in the earth. If a river bed is directly above, this methane-rich gas will seep into the river.
That’s what happens in Queensland’s Condamine River. The river rises on Mount Superbus, inland from Brisbane, and flows inland until it meets the Darling River.
In some parts of the river, methane bubbles up constantly through the water column from a natural gas reservoir that formed since the Late Pleistocene.
In these stretches of river, dissolved methane concentrations are extremely high: up to 350 times greater than trace concentrations upriver, away from the methane seep.
We wanted to see whether methanotrophic bacteria consuming methane from natural gas were being eaten by river animals, and whether we could trace the carbon signature through the food web.
To find out, we analysed the carbon in the bodies of river animals such as zooplankton, insects, shrimp, prawns and fish, and compared it to the different sources of carbon that could make up their food.
The results were clear: animals within reach of the natural gas seeping from underground had a distinct carbon signature showing they were eating food derived from the natural gas. In fact, for insects such as mayflies, methane-based food made up more than half (55%) of their diet.
Over time, this methane-derived food moved up the food web, showing up in prawns and even fish. Here too, it contributed a significant portion of their carbon.
Natural gas bubbles up through the water column to the surface of the Condamine in some stretches. Gavin Rees, CC BY-NC-ND
We found this methane–derived carbon moved through multiple levels of the local food web. It made up almost a fifth (19%) of the carbon in shrimp and 28% of the carbon in carnivorous fish.
For river shrimp and prawns, leaves washed into the river were still important sources of carbon. For mayflies, algae was still an important source of food.
But our work shows that natural gas seeps can be a major, even dominant, source of energy for the entire food web. This is very surprising. It shows an unexpected connection between Earth’s geology and living creatures in a river.
Why does this matter?
Until now, researchers have focused on river and land plants as the main way a river gets its carbon. Our research has uncovered a surprisingly significant way some rivers get their carbon – methane.
In deep sea research, this pathway is better understood. Methane-eating bacteria can form the basis of entire ecosystems which have sprung up around deep sea hydrothermal vents of hot water.
But until now, we have overlooked the role methane-eating bacteria can play in rivers. With this knowledge, we can better track the flows of carbon in rivers so we can gauge ecosystem productivity and see how a food web is functioning.
Paul McInerney receives funding from the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman David G. Valadao (California)
WASHINGTON –Today, the House of Representatives passed a Congressional Review Act resolution to repeal the Biden Administration’s listing of the longfin smelt as endangered under the Federal Endangered Species Act. This resolution would halt the proposed designation of critical habitat for the longfin smelt, as well as ensure California’s water remains available for those who need it most—families and farmers. Congressman Valadao joined Reps. Doug LaMalfa (CA-01), Vince Fong (CA-20), Tom McClintock (CA-05), Darrell Issa (CA-48), and Young Kim (CA-40) in introducing this resolution in March 2025.
“Th Biden Administration’s unnecessary decision to list the longfin smelt as an endangered species is yet another example of an environmental policy not grounded in science that puts fish over people,”said Congressman Valadao.“Our families and farmers are already struggling with burdensome regulations that restrict water deliveries and threaten the future of agriculture in the Central Valley, and this rule would have ensured even more of our water is sent out to sea. By passing this resolution, the House is taking an important step forward in rolling back draconian water restrictions that directly affect our farmers, families, and rural communities, and I’m happy to see common sense won.”
“The Biden Administration and activist judges have used this listing as a political tool to block progress on California water policy,”said Rep. LaMalfa.“This listing is based on cherry picked scientific anecdotes and even Stanford’s Center for Water California Recourses Policy and Management questioned the science of the listing. It adds yet another layer of conflicting regulations that dump tens of millions of acre feet of water out to the Pacific Ocean, with farmers receiving only 40% to 50% of their promised federal and state water. Congress isn’t going to stand by while bureaucrats and environmental lawsuits continue to wreck the water system that feeds our farms, our families, and our economy. I’m glad to see the House take a stand and push back with real solutions that help us grow food, provide water, and keep our economy strong.”
Background:
This designation, driven by litigation from an environmental group, by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service during the Biden Administration threatens California’s water supply by imposing new restrictions on the Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP). This listing resulted in subsequent burdensome requirements imposed on the CVP that will divert even more water to the Pacific Ocean instead of supplying farms and families across the state. Under the Congressional Review Act, Congress can review and potentially block such regulations within a specific timeframe, and it drops the usual 60-vote requirement in the Senate for these resolutions.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
GUANGZHOU, May 1 — At noon on Thursday, South China Sea waters north of the 12th parallel north entered a three-and-a-half-month annual fishing moratorium, according to China Coast Guard.
The South China Sea branch of China Coast Guard, in conjunction with marine fishery law enforcement departments and public security authorities in Guangdong, Guangxi and Hainan, has launched a special law enforcement operation for the 2025 South China Sea fishing moratorium to ensure its effective implementation.
Before the moratorium began, task forces boarded fishing boats and patrolled docks to make known relevant laws and regulations to local fishermen, ensuring that all boats were returned to port, all crew members came ashore and all fishing nets were stored. Law enforcement vessels have also been dispatched to patrol the jurisdictional waters to establish a strict presence from the start of the moratorium.
Source: United States Senator for Alaska Dan Sullivan
05.01.25
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), a member of the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, today pressed the nominee to serve as deputy secretary of the Department of Commerce, Mr. Paul Dabbar, on concerns about the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) ability to complete fisheries stock surveys in Alaska if staffing and approved funding from the department are not prioritized. Sen. Sullivan noted in the committee hearing that conducting surveys is one of the Commerce Department’s core responsibilities with regard to fisheries, and surveys are needed in order for Alaskans to harvest in various fisheries across the state. Sen. Sullivan also demanded that Dabbar and Commerce officials work promptly with Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to sign the pending maintenance contract for the Kodiak, Alaska-based NOAA research vessel, Oscar Dyson, which conducts these critically important surveys.
“When you don’t do stock assessment surveys, you know what happens? My fishermen can’t fish,” said Sen. Sullivan. “All they need is a survey and it’s not happening. I have a whole list and I’m going to mention them here. I hope to hell someone from Commerce is watching. Okay? Because if you’re not doing surveys, that’s the basic stuff you’re supposed to do at NOAA, then my guys can’t fish. They don’t want subsidies. They just want to fish.”
Fishing and seafood processing employ more Alaskans than any other industry and are vital to the economic well-being of dozens of coastal communities throughout the state. Roughly two-thirds of all seafood harvested in America comes from Alaska’s waters.
[embedded content]
Below is a transcript of Sen. Sullivan’s exchange with Mr. Dabbar.
SEN. SULLIVAN: I think we’re off to a good start, certainly on fisheries. We have this “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential” executive order from President Trump on day one. This includes fisheries, LNG, all kinds of great things in Alaska. Then, just a couple days ago, the “Restoring America’s Seafood Competitiveness” EO. So we’re off to a good start. I want to commend the President, Secretary Lutnick, and their team. But I am concerned, to Senator Cantwell’s point—and this is a big issue—that we’re not having the staffing to do the two things that Commerce has to do for fisheries. American fisheries, unlike CHIPS and Science—a quarter of $1 trillion in subsidies—my guys don’t get subsidized at all. The federal government has to do two things: They need to do robust surveys to inform accurate stock assessments, and they need to do timely promulgation of regulations to open fisheries. That’s it. When the federal government doesn’t do that, you screw the hard-working fishermen of Alaska and America. Just think of “Deadliest Catch.” They do have to compete with Russia and China. To be honest, right now, it’s starting not to look good. I’m starting to get really upset, because when you got—Biden was horrible on the surveys. Horrible. We threw a ton of money at NOAA and the guy did climate change and all this BS. He didn’t do the blocking and tackling of NOAA, which is stock assessment surveys. You guys came in: “Hey, we’re not going to be like Biden.” But you’re not…I’m getting really worried that you guys aren’t doing this either. When you don’t do stock assessment surveys, you know what happens? My fishermen can’t fish. They don’t get $240 billion in subsidies. All they need is a survey and it’s not happening. I got a whole list and I’m going to mention them here. And I hope to hell someone from Commerce is watching. Okay? Because if you’re not doing surveys, that’s the basic stuff you’re supposed to do at NOAA. Then my guys can’t fish. They don’t want subsidies and they just want to fish. Can I get your commitment—and I hope to hell someone from NOAA’s watching this. I got a whole list of surveys right now that looks like you’re not going to complete. So what happens? My fishermen don’t fish. That is wrong. Can I get your commitment—and I hope to hell someone from NOAA and Commerce is watching this right now—get on with the surveys. Can I get your commitment? You can tell I’m a little rattled about this.
DABBAR: Yes, Senator, and I know that I’ve read your proposed bill, the latest one, and also how understanding research of, for example, salmon in Alaska, where some things are going well strong, and some things are weaker, and why. So I’m certainly committed on that also.
SULLIVAN: I just need your commitment to get the staffing and money to do the surveys. That’s it. If we’re failing on this, this is not good. Let me ask one final question. This relates. There’s a contract we’re trying to get the Secretary to sign, like right now. It’s for the Oscar Dyson. It’s a NOAA survey vessel homeported in Kodiak, Alaska. It’s coming up for its contract. It needs to be signed this week. Again, I hope Commerce people are watching. Okay? Just sign the contract so we can do the surveys from the Oscar Dyson. That’s a NOAA survey vessel ship. If that’s not signed in the next couple of days, that vessel won’t be able to do surveys. Again, this is blocking and tackling to take care of our fishermen, which is in the President’s EOs. But we’ve got to be able to support them with science. Can I get your commitment on that and maybe have someone get to the Secretary and sign this contract on the Oscar Dyson like today?
DABBAR: I’ll follow up, and there are people behind me watching, listening to you. I’m certain.
SULLIVAN: It’s really, really important. Thank you.
Source: United States Senator for Arkansas – John Boozman
WASHINGTON—The U.S. Senate unanimously adopted a resolution backed by U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR) designating April as Financial Literacy Month. Boozman joined Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott (R-SC) and Senator Jack Reed (D-RI) in leading the measure to raise awareness for access to resources that can help Americans of all ages develop and maintain healthy financial habits while underscoring the importance of financial education and empowerment.
“When Americans have the tools and knowledge to better manage their finances, they are empowered to chart a path to financial stability,” said Boozman. “I am pleased to support this commonsense, bipartisan effort to help hardworking people of all ages make positive money management choices.”
“Financial literacy is critical to achieving financial independence and the American Dream,” said Scott. “Unfortunately, many Americans growing up like I did lack basic financial education, which is why I’ve made it my mission to make programs and resources on this important topic more accessible. Designating April 2025 as Financial Literacy Month builds on our efforts to ensure all Americans can access the tools necessary to secure their financial future.”
“From managing a household budget to making major purchases to laying the foundation for a secure retirement, financial literacy is a lifelong endeavor. Unfortunately, too many Americans lack the basic financial literacy skills needed to make informed decisions,” said Reed. “This has impacts on families, communities, and future generations. Raising awareness about the resources available to improve financial literacy is the first step on the path to a financially secure future. I’m pleased our Senate colleagues are coming together on a bipartisan basis to recognize financial Literacy Month.”
In addition to Boozman, Scott and Reed, the resolution was also cosponsored by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Susan Collins (R-ME), Mike Crapo (R-ID), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), John Barrasso (R-WY), Jim Risch (R-ID), Angus King (I-ME), Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Gary Peters (D-MI), Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), Mike Rounds (R-SD), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-MS), Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Katie Britt (R-AL), Jim Banks (R-IN), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE) and Bernie Moreno (R-OH).
Click here for text of the resolution.
Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Winston Peters has concluded a constructive and positive visit to New Caledonia – New Zealand’s closest geographical neighbour. Mr Peters met the French Minister for Overseas Territories, Manuel Valls, and the President of the Government of New Caledonia, Alcide Ponga. “We came to listen and learn, and to demonstrate New Zealand’s support for the continuation of dialogue on New Caledonia’s institutional future, led by Minister Valls,” Mr Peters says.“These institutional discussions in Nouméa over the coming days send a positive signal to the Pacific region about the good faith efforts underway to return peace and stability to New Caledonia,” Mr Peters says.“Since last year’s crisis, New Zealand has consistently said that no matter your position on New Caledonia’s institutional future, violence is not the answer – and progress can only be made through careful, inclusive dialogue.“We wish everyone involved in the discussions in Nouméa in the coming week well. New Zealand, just like France and all our Pacific partners, wishes for a stable, secure, prosperous and cohesive New Caledonia.” When Mr Peters last visited Nouméa in December 2024, he announced a support package to help New Caledonia’s recovery. During this visit, he recommitted New Zealand, during discussions with Minister Valls and President Ponga, to support New Caledonia’s development through ongoing constructive, practical support. “New Zealand is not perfect, but we do have experience over recent decades in promoting economic development across our regions and communities,” Mr Peters says. “Economic development is the key to social cohesion. We hope there are pragmatic lessons we can share with New Caledonia, working closely with French authorities, including through Caledonian entrepreneurs gaining a deeper understanding of the Māori economy.”Mr Peters and Minister Valls also discussed regional security and foreign interference in the Pacific. “New Zealand and France are long-standing partners on Pacific security issues, including humanitarian assistance and disaster response and fisheries surveillance. We have a shared interest in ensuring that the Pacific Islands region is protected from efforts by external influences to undermine good governance and democratic decision making.” While in New Caledonia, Mr Peters also met with the Director-General of the Pacific Community (SPC), Dr Stuart Minchin. They discussed the SPC’s role in providing technical and scientific support to help drive the development of Pacific Island countries.Mr Peters also met New Zealand Defence Force personnel taking part in the military exercise Croix du Sud currently under way in New Caledonia and Wallis and Futuna, focused on humanitarian assistance and emergency response. In the exercise, NZDF staff are working alongside forces from other Pacific countries and likeminded partners – hosted by the French Armed Forces in New Caledonia. Mr Peters arrives back in New Zealand later today.
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
“Who is actually running the Department: Secretary Lutnick or Elon Musk and DOGE?” Senators ask
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) and Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, joined U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce Committee, and five Senate Democrats in demanding that Keith Sonderling, the purported Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), promptly turn over key documents and information related to the dismantling of the agency and recent funding termination notices sent to all grantees by a member of Elon Musk’s DOGE. The senators’ demands come as Paul Dabbar, President Trump’s nominee for Deputy Secretary of Commerce, appeared on Thursday before the Commerce Committee for his nomination hearing.
“In one MBDA termination notice reviewed by our offices, the Department claims the grant is being terminated because it ‘is unfortunately no longer consistent with the agency’s priorities and no longer serves the interests of the United States and the MBDA Program,’” the senators wrote in a letter to Sonderling, who was confirmed by the Senate as Deputy Secretary of Labor in March. “The termination notice further states that, ‘MBDA is repurposing its funding allocations in a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda.’ …[T]he notice is silent about why the grants are inconsistent with the MBDA’s priorities and programs—which Congress, not the Department, set by statute. And it suggests the DOC or others in the Administration may be using funding appropriated for the MBDA for other, unrelated purposes.”
The senators questioned Sonderling about the notice terminating all MBDA grants, which was signed by Nate Cavanaugh, a member of Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and “Under the Authority of Keith Sonderling, Acting Undersecretary of MBDA.”
“This raises significant questions regarding Mr. Cavanaugh’s precise role at DOC and the mechanism by which you or other members of DOC leadership delegated him authority to terminate MDBA grants on behalf of the Department,” their letter continued. “Our offices have also obtained information indicating you may not have been aware these termination notices were being sent out by Mr. Cavanaugh under your authority, which would raise further questions about who is actually running the Department: Secretary Lutnick or Elon Musk and DOGE?”
The letter is also signed by U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Andy Kim (D-N.J.).
In October 2024, Heinrich led the unveiling of a new, larger office space for the New Mexico Minority Business Development Center in Albuquerque to expand support for local businesses across the state as they create the types of careers New Mexicans can build their families around. Heinrich wrote the legislative provision that established and funded the New Mexico Business Center in 2020, securing more than $2.5 million in federal resources through the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Minority Business Development Agency for its staffing and programming.
Today, during the Senate Commerce hearing on the nomination of Paul Dabbar to be U.S. Deputy Secretary of Commerce, Luján pressed Mr. Dabbar on the dismantlement of the MBDA by the Trump administration and highlighted the successes of the MBDA. Senator Luján championed an amendment in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to make the MBDA permanent. He also secured passage of a provision to double the funding level for the MBDA’s Rural Business Development Center Program and to expand this program’s eligibility to include all Minority-Serving Institutions, which will expand opportunities for New Mexico’s colleges and universities. Additionally, in 2021, Luján championed legislation to make permanent and expand the reach of the Minority Business Development Agency.
The full text of the letter can be found HERE and below:
The Honorable Keith Sonderling
Acting Under Secretary for Minority Business Development Agency
U.S. Department of Commerce
1401 Constitution Avenue, NWWashington, DC 20230
Acting Under Secretary Sonderling:
On March 25, 2025, and April 17, 2025, we sent letters to Secretary Howard Lutnick raising serious concerns about the apparent dismantling of the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), despite his testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation stating he would not support doing so. In our April 17 letter, we requested specific documents and information that would help address our outstanding questions and concerns regarding the MBDA. On April 24, 2025, we received a letter from the Department of Commerce (DOC) Acting Assistant Secretary for Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs purporting to respond to our April 17 letter. This response, however, contained a mere three sentences related to the MBDA and failed to answer or meaningfully address any of our requests. Given Secretary Lutnick’s apparent disregard for our concerns about the Department’s actions against the MBDA, we are now requesting you provide documents and information related to this inquiry.
Since our most recent letter, our offices have obtained information demonstrating that DOC has canceled all MBDA grants—further dismantling an agency Congress statutorily authorized, despite Secretary Lutnick’s testimony to the contrary. In one MBDA termination notice reviewed by our offices, the Department claims the grant is being terminated because it “is unfortunately no longer consistent with the agency’s priorities and no longer serves the interests of the United States and the MBDA Program.” The termination notice further states that, “MBDA is repurposing its funding allocations in a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda.” Beyond these conclusory assertions, however, the notice is silent about why the grants are inconsistent with the MBDA’s priorities and programs—which Congress, not the Department, set by statute. And it suggests the DOC or others in the Administration may be using funding appropriated for the MBDA for other, unrelated purposes.
Raising further concerns, the termination notice was signed by Nate Cavanaugh—who we understand to be part of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—and is signed “Under the Authority of Keith Sonderling, Acting Undersecretary of MBDA.” Mr. Cavanaugh has reportedly been interviewing employees at the General Services Administration and overseeing efforts to dismantle another agency, the U.S. Institute of Peace. The termination notice indicates that Mr. Cavanaugh now has a DOC e-mail address. This raises significant questions regarding Mr. Cavanaugh’s precise role at DOC and the mechanism by which you or other members of DOC leadership delegated him authority to terminate MDBA grants on behalf of the Department. Our offices have also obtained information indicating you may not have been aware these termination notices were being sent out by Mr. Cavanaugh under your authority, which would raise further questions about who is actually running the Department: Secretary Lutnick or Elon Musk and DOGE?
Given the lack of responsiveness from the Department to date, we reiterate the requests raised in our April 17, 2025 letter, and request the following additional documents and information no later than May 14, 2025:
A complete description of Mr. Cavanaugh’s position at DOC, including his title, job description, date(s) of employment, any salary, any benefits, supervisor, and direct reports. Please also identify all other federal e-mail addresses assigned to or used by Mr. Cavanaugh of which you are aware.
Documents sufficient to show Mr. Cavanaugh’s delegated authority to execute termination notices to MBDA grantees.
Documentation sufficient to show your appointment as Acting Under Secretary for Minority Business Development Agency and the date of such appointment.
A complete description of your decision to delegate your authority to Mr. Cavanaugh for the purpose of terminating MBDA grants, including the extent to which Secretary Lutnick or any other senior DOC official was involved in making this decision.
A complete description of the types of funded activities that are considered “consistent with the agency’s priorities” and “serve[] the interests of…the MBDA program.”
A detailed explanation of how the MBDA intends to “repurpos[e] its funding allocations in a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda,” including any specific program or activity that has received or is expected to receive repurposed funding.
Sincerely,
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
***WATCH THE FULL PRESS CONFERENCE HERE; DOWNLOAD HERE***
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Patty Murray (D-WA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Alex Padilla (D-CA) held a virtual press call alongside West Coast ports to sound the alarm on the dramatic decline of container ships making the trip to West Coast ports and the harmful consequences of Trump’s tariffs across the American economy—price hikes, layoffs, empty store shelves, and more.
The Senators were joined by Mario Cordero, Chief Executive Officer of the Port of Long Beach; Ryan Calkins, Port of Seattle Commissioner; and Dick Marzano, Port of Tacoma Commissioner. The press call comes just one day after the overwhelming majority of Senate Republicans rejected a bipartisan resolution led by Senator Wyden and unanimously supported by Democrats to repeal President Donald Trump’s global tariffs.
A new forecast by Apollo Global Management contends that the U.S. economy is on the verge of a self-inflicted recession as a result of Trump’s tariff policies, drawing a plain timeline from Trump’s so-called “Liberation Day” on April 2nd to a dramatic slowdown of container ships making their way to U.S. ports. Apollo predicts this slowdown of container ships will lead to a sharp decrease in trucking demand by mid-to-late May, which will subsequently result in supply shortages and lower sales for retailers. By late May to early June, Apollo predicts layoffs will occur across trucking and retail industries and that the U.S. economy will fall into a recession by this summer.
During the call, the West Coast Senators sounded the alarm on the major warning signs for the economy and continued to urge their Republican colleagues to join them in asserting Congressional authority over tariffs to put an end to Trump’s trade war and minimize the economic damage already inflicted by the President.
“We are already seeing the consequences of Trump’s tariffs at our ports: fewer ships from across the Pacific, means less cargo at our ports, less cargo at our ports means less goods for our truckers to transport—and that ultimately means bare shelves for our retailers and the American consumer,” said Senator Murray. “Our ports know better than anyone that supply chains do not reset in an instant. The time to reverse these Republican tariffs was the same day they were announced. Every day This Republican Congress refuses to reject these tariffs is a day they are actively enabling Trump’s pro-recession agenda and higher taxes on every American. Congress needs to take the matches away from the President who is setting fire to the economy. Democrats are going to make sure Republicans continue to feel the pressure until this Congress takes action and overrides this President.”
“Oregon knows firsthand that Trump’s tariff chaos is already hurting small businesses and drying up markets for red-white-and-blue products,” said Senator Wyden. “Speaking with small businesses and workers all over Oregon last week, every single one warned of damage from tariffs in the near future. West Coast senators will be on the front lines pushing back against these senseless Republican tariffs.”
“California’s Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are keystones for the success of not just our state’s economy, but our national economy. So when the San Pedro Bay ports and other West Coast ports send warning signs about the damage of Trump’s tariffs, we know they’re really warning signs for our country,” said Senator Padilla. “The drop in cargo volume caused by Trump’s tariffs will mean empty shelves when products don’t reach our stores, rising prices on everything from groceries to clothes to cars, and undoubtedly, more Americans out of work. While today, it’s Western ports — we know it will only be a matter of weeks before the ripple effect causes pain across the nation.”
“We take our mission as ports seriously because a lot is at stake. The current tariffs will have far-reaching consequences for Washington businesses and consumers, and the thousands of jobs that rely on international trade. We are fortunate to have such a great advocate in Senator Murray and are grateful for her continued attention to these critical issues,” said Northwest Seaport Alliance Managing Member and Port of Tacoma Commissioner, Dick Marzano.
“At the Northwest Seaport Alliance, we have already started to see serious impacts of the tariff war on our docks. As our policy makers address economic and security concerns with international trading partners, we encourage them to tread carefully in order to preserve space for a commercial relationship. We thank Senator Murray for her advocacy for policies that support Washington businesses, jobs, and communities,” said Northwest Seaport Alliance Managing Member and Port of Seattle Commissioner, Ryan Calkins.
“As one of America’s largest ports, Long Beach moves more than $300 billion in cargo every year to and from every congressional district, supporting 2.7 million jobs. Due to the new trade policies, we are about to see a shift from cargo surge to cargo slowdown in the supply chain, and this will have a real impact on the American economy. For workers across the country whose jobs depend on cargo moving through the Port of Long Beach – dockworkers, truckers, logistics workers, retailers, farmers, factory workers – any sort of long-term, sustained downturn in shipments caused by the tariff will be detrimental to the job market. I remain hopeful that leaders in our nation’s capital recognize the significance of the goods movement industry and will take necessary action to ensure America’s economy can thrive,” said Mario Cordero, CEO of the Port of Long Beach.
“Cargo volume at the nation’s busiest port will drop by about one-third next week,” said Port of Los Angeles Executive Director, Gene Seroka. “That means fewer jobs along with rising prices for consumers and businesses. Additionally, counter tariffs are having a severe impact on American agricultural exporters. We need agreements quickly with our trading partners that benefit and support the U.S. economy and supply chain.”
Washington state has one of the most trade-dependent economies of any state in the country, with 40 percent of jobs tied to international commerce. Washington state is the top U.S. producer of apples, blueberries, hops, pears, spearmint oil, and sweet cherries—all of which risk losing vital export markets due to retaliatory tariffs from key trading partners including Canada. Additionally, more than 12,000 small and medium-sized companies in Washington state export goods and will struggle to absorb the impact of retaliatory tariffs. Canada is Washington’s largest trading partner, accounting for nearly $20 billion in imports and $10 billion in exports. China is the world’s second-largest economy and Washington state exported over $12 billion in goods to China last year—making China Washington state’s top export partner—and imported $11.2 billion in goods, the most in imports from any country aside from Canada. Trump’s tariffs during his first term were extremely costly for Washington state—for example, India imposed a 20 percent retaliatory tariff on U.S. apples, causing Washington apple shipments to India to fall by 99 percent and growers to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in exports.
Senator Murray has been a vocal opponent of Trump’s chaotic trade war from the very start and has been lifting up the voices of people in Washington state harmed by this administration’s approach to trade and calling on Republicans to end Trump’s trade war—which Congress has the power to do—and take back Congress’ Constitutionally-granted power to impose tariffs. Earlier last month, Senator Murray brought together leaders across Washington state who highlighted how Trump’s ongoing trade war is already a devastating hit to Washington state’s economy, businesses, and our agriculture sector. Senator Murray also took to the Senate floor to lay out how Trump’s chaotic trade war is seriously threatening our economy, American businesses, families’ retirement savings, and so much else.
Murray has also been sounding the alarm on Trump’s tariffs across Washington state. Recently, Senator Murray held a roundtable discussion in Tacoma with local businesses and ports, met with farmers in Yakima to discuss the consequences of Trump’s tariffs, and held a roundtable discussion in Vancouver at a local metal fabrication company to highlight how Trump’s trade war is hurting businesses and our economy Washington state. Just last week, Senator Murray met with small business owners in Seattle’s University District to hear how Trump’s tariffs and the broader economic uncertainty are affecting them, and later she met with farmers in Skagit County to discuss tariffs, and visited Blaine near the Canadian border to highlight the impacts of Trump’s trade war.
Senator Murray’s full remarks as delivered during today’s press call are below:
“Thank you everyone for joining us, and I am so glad to be on this call today with some of my colleagues from the West Coast—the best coast. You’re going to hear from Senators Wyden and Padilla, and our West Coast ports.
“We are here to sound the alarm on Trump’s disaster of a trade policy with some of the ports that we represent, because the window of opportunity we have to minimize the worst consequences of this inane tariff agenda is rapidly shrinking. I want to be clear what’s happening here, one economically illiterate President is forcing a totally unpredictable and thoughtless trade war onto the entire world—and although Trump inherited a remarkably strong and resilient American economy, he is singlehandedly pushing this nation toward a painful Republican Recession while forcing a tax increase on everyone.
“All of the major economic indicators are there, we’re talking big red, flashing sirens. We went from months of strong economic growth and predictions of more growth to come, to a shrinking economy all thanks to Trump and his tariffs. Consumer confidence is at its lowest level since COVID because it’s pretty obvious Trump is driving the economy into the ground on purpose. Small businesses in my state who rely on imports are telling me the situation is as dire for them as it was during COVID—during COVID! They’re actually calling Trump’s trade war a kind of COVID 2.0 for them.
“They are facing tariffs on items we either don’t grow or make in the United States, and realistically never will, for things like coffee or Green Tea. They are shouting from the rooftop that Trump is singlehandedly detonating a mass extinction event for small businesses in America.
“And listen, few people understand better than our Ports that you don’t need these tariffs to last very long for them to have a verybig impact. Fewer ships from across the Pacific, means less cargo at our ports, less cargo at our ports means less goods for our truckers to transport, and that ultimately means bare shelves for our retailers and the American consumer.
“Now even if you assume the most optimistic outlook that Trump is going to cut amazing new trade deals with everyone he’s burned—which he won’t—there will still be a painful cost from the shock to the economy that has already been set in motion. Supply chains do not reset in an instant. The time to reverse these Republican tariffs was the same day they were announced.
“Just three Republicans chose to support Senator Wyden’s resolution yesterday, with the majority blocking that bill. That is a dangerous and deliberate decision by Republicans to enable Trump’s pro-recession agenda and higher taxes on every American—and for every day that Republicans choose to allow Trump to sabotage the economy, more small businesses will continue to suffer.
“Businesses in Washington state are already having to take cost cutting measures, they’re laying off employees, some may even close for good. For what? There’s no strategy here. It’s short-term pain for long-term pain. This entire debacle is already a prime example of self-inflicted economic arson. No one wins here.
“Republicans need to cut their losses, and work with Democrats immediately to end this tax on consumers and stop these nonsense trade wars. Congress needs to take the matches away from the President who is setting fire to the economy. So, Democrats are going to make sure Republicans continue to feel the pressure until this Congress takes action and overrides this President.
“So, with that, I want to turn it over to Senator Wyden. He has been a leader in our efforts to rein in Trump’s tariffs.”
Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, introduced the Floodplain Enhancement and Recovery Act with Senator Steve Daines (R-MT). This bipartisan legislation would create a new pathway for ecosystem restoration projects in floodplains that meet specific low-risk criteria and would simplify approval for important restoration work while still upholding flood safety standards.
Under the current Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) policy, any proposed development in a regulated floodway, whether it’s a shopping mall or salmon habitat, must prove that it will not increase the base flood elevation (BFE) of the area. This requirement is commonly referred to as the “No Rise” rule. While important for protecting communities from increased flood risks, it has had major unintended consequences on important environmental restoration in Washington state and around the country.
“Here in Washington state ensuring our waterways stay healthy is critical for not just environmental conservation efforts, but important for our communities and economy as well. This legislation will simplify approval of ecosystem restoration projects in floodplains, which is critical for many projects in Washington state where many communities are in a regulated floodway,” said Senator Murray. “Government should be making it easier to protect our environment, not harder. I am proud to be a partner to the many Tribes and advocates in Washington state that have been pushing for the Floodplain Enhancement and Recovery Act, and I will continue to fight for commonsense solutions to protect and restore our ecosystems.”
In Washington state, many salmon habitat restoration projects involve placing woody debris in a waterway to slow water and make safe spaces for juvenile salmon to develop. These projects, and many others, often fail the “No Rise” rule. Currently, the only way around the rule is to first update FEMA’s flood maps with the projected BFE impacts. This requires extensive and very expensive hydrologic and hydraulic analyses, often performed by a third-party engineer. FEMA then reviews the analyses, replicates them, and approves them internally before giving the okay to move forward, which has taken up to three years to complete. While this process often makes sense in an urbanized, flood-prone community, it is an unnecessary exercise for restoration in remote areas.
“Critical ecosystem restoration projects across Montana have been abandoned due to FEMA’s onerous and costly ‘No Rise’ rule. This commonsense, bipartisan bill will reduce unnecessary burdens on important conservation and restoration work, while continuing to keep our communities safe from flooding,” said Senator Daines.
Many communities in Washington have avoided doing restoration work in regulated floodways—which makes up much of the state—to avoid the associated costs. This bill would allow for a more efficient process for ecosystem restoration in a regulated floodplain and addresses the issue of “No Rise,” which has been a priority concern for a number of Tribal communities and salmon advocates in Washington state for the last few years.
“Ecosystem restoration projects reduce flood risk and restore the natural functions of floodplains,” said Ed Johnstone, Chairman of Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. “This proposed legislation is a strong step toward removing an undue burden for these essential habitat restoration and nature-based solution projects. Treaty tribes support legislation that keeps communities safe while restoring salmon habitat and protecting treaty rights in the Pacific Northwest.”
“Restoring healthy floodplains is just one of many nature-based solutions that must be integrated into our national efforts to make communities safer and rivers healthier in the face of increasingly extreme weather,” said Eileen Shader, Senior Advisor for American Rivers Action Fund and a floodplains expert. “Making sure that these cost-efficient and common-sense restoration projects are not limited by inefficiencies in the regulatory framework is an important step in ensuring lives and property are protected.”
“The Association of State Floodplain Managers supports this legislation because it is a practical solution balancing the need to identify any relevant impacts of floodplain restoration projects with time, effort and resources to do so,” said Chad Berginnis, Executive Director of The Association of State Floodplain Managers. “The land use and development standards of the NFIP need to be sensibly applied in a way to protect and enhance the natural and beneficial functions of our nation’s floodplains.”
“We appreciate Senator Murray’s leadership and partnership in developing this important legislation. It’s a common-sense approach that reduces costs and delays for watershed restoration while maintaining flood safety,” said Casey Sixkiller, Director of the Washington State Department of Ecology. “By giving our federal partners more flexibility in their review processes, this bill will help move critical ecosystem and salmon recovery projects forward without unnecessary regulatory hurdles or added costs.”
“There are many benefits to having intact natural floodplains. One of them is that they lower the risks associated with flooding. That is one of the main reasons why The Nature Conservancy supports policies, like this one from Senators Murray and Daines, that help scale up work to restore floodplains,” said Cameron Adams, Policy Advisor for The Nature Conservancy. “This bipartisan legislation would give communities the flexibility they want and need to do science-backed ecosystem restoration projects in flood zones. These types of projects don’t just benefit people, but also plants and animals that thrive in healthy landscapes.”
“Ecosystem restoration projects are a vital tool to address landscape recovery and habitat restoration, especially after major weather events. This amendment would make it easier for local communities to develop effective and necessary restoration projects by streamlining the approval process for ecosystem restoration projects,” said Jeremy Peters, CEO of National Association of Conservation Districts. “NACD appreciates the clarity and flexibility provided in this amendment and looks forward to seeing how local conservation districts will have an even greater impact in areas in need of restoration.”
Senator Murray has been a champion for protecting and strengthening critical salmon and fish populations throughout her time in the Senate. Senator Murray secured a historic $2.85 billion investment in salmon and ecosystem restoration programs—including $400 million for a new community-based restoration program focused on removing fish passage barriers in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law—and in the Inflation Reduction Act, Murray secured hundreds of millions for Washington state priorities including $15 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund, $3 million to support facilities at the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, $27 million for Pacific salmon research, and more.
Last Congress, as then-Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Murray protected critical funding for salmon recovery and fishery projects in the Fiscal Year 2024 government spending bills she negotiated and passed into law, including securing: $50 million in the construction of the Howard Hanson Dam Fish Passage facility; $75 million for the Pacific Salmon account at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), $65 million for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund, $54 million for the EPA’s Puget Sound Geographic Program, and more.
Source: United States Senator for North Carolina Thom Tillis
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, and Chris Coons (D-DE) and Representatives Kevin Kiley (R-CA) and Scott Peters (D-CA) reintroduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation will restore patent eligibility to important inventions across many fields while also resolving legitimate concerns over the patenting of mere ideas, the mere discovery of what already exists in nature, and social and cultural content that everyone agrees is beyond the scope of the patent system. It also affirms the basic principle that the patent system is central to promoting technology-based innovation.
“Clear, reliable, and predictable patent rights are imperative to enable investments in the broad array of innovative technologies that are critical to the economic and global competitiveness of the United States, and to ensuring the national security of our great country,” said Senator Tillis. “Unfortunately, a series of Supreme Court decisions have rendered patent eligibility law unclear, unreliable, and unpredictable, resulting in U.S. inventors being unable to obtain patents in areas where our economic peers offer patent protection. This is particularly concerning in the economically critical areas of biotechnology and artificial intelligence. This bipartisan, bicameral legislation maintains the existing statutory categories of eligible subject matter, which have worked well for over two centuries, while addressing inappropriate judicially created eligibility limitations by creating clear rules for what is eligible. We cannot allow foreign adversaries like China to overtake us in key areas of technology innovation due to the current state of patent eligibility law. I look forward to continuing to work with all stakeholders on this important matter. Passing patent eligibility reform is one of my top legislative priorities.”
“When American innovators know their ideas are eligible for patent protection, they take the risks that push us into the future – whether that’s the next medical test or the latest AI technology,” said Senator Coons. “PERA restores clarity to the law on what can be patented and what cannot – guidance that federal courts have been requesting for years and that the Supreme Court has refused to provide. Congress must step up to provide America’s inventors with the stable legal foundation they need to produce the cutting-edge technologies that power our economy.”
“American innovators have been at a disadvantage in recent years because of the U.S. patent system,” said Representative Kevin Kiley. “Convoluted Supreme Court rulings and tests on subject matter eligibility have made it increasingly difficult for inventors to receive patents, leading to foreign companies overtaking our own. That’s why I’m proud to introduce the bi-partisan Patent Eligibility Restoration Act, which will dramatically reverse this trend, and unleash a tide of economic growth and job creation here at home.”
“For more than two centuries, a U.S. patent has guaranteed inventions will be protected from theft, helping the U.S. become the innovation capital of the world. San Diego, in particular, is the proud home of a thriving life sciences and technology ecosystem that has benefited from these protections,” said Representative Peters. “Over the last 15 years, however, several Supreme Court decisions have created confusion about what exactly is eligible for a patent. Innovators, consumers, and even the judges who adjudicate patent law have called on Congress to provide clarity on what can be patented. I look forward to working with Congressman Kiley, Senator Coons, and Senator Tillis to advance our Patent Eligibility Restoration Act and protect American innovation.”
“Congress has not made substantive changes to what subject matter is patentable in the United States since the Patent Act of 1793, making it difficult for courts, inventors, and the public to understand how 21st-century technologies fit within an 18th Century patent statute,” said Andrei Iancu, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2018 to 2021. “I commend Congress for advancing PERA in order to finally modernize our patent laws and promote U.S. global leadership in biotechnology, artificial intelligence, and other modern technologies.”
“PERA provides the clarity needed to unlock the full potential of cutting-edge technologies and solidify U.S. leadership in scientific and technological breakthroughs,” said David Kappos, board co-chair of C4IP and former Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and USPTO Director from 2009 to 2013. “We cannot allow legal uncertainty to stall the next wave of American innovation.”
“Patent Eligibility is an important issue for cancer patients – both for life-saving, early diagnosis and for promising new treatments. PERA will provide the certainty needed to enable innovative breakthroughs to reach patients. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute applauds Congress for introducing and advancing this important bill – the patients are waiting.” – Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
“Passing PERA is essential if the US is to catch up to Europe and Asia, especially China,” said Judge Paul Michel (retired). “They make eligible for patenting many classes of inventions held ineligible here. The very uncertainty of the zone of eligibility is itself an obstacle to companies getting the investments they need to compete both domestically and globally. Only Congress can fix this chaotic mess because the courts are trapped in their own harmful precedents.”
“In my former court, which hears patent cases on appeal, concurring and dissenting opinions in patent eligibly cases have proliferated,” said Judge Kathleen O’Malley (retired). “Veteran jurists have described the state of affairs as ‘incoherent,’ ‘unclear,’ ‘fraught,’ and ‘inconsistent.’ The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act would return clarity to patent eligibly law and encourage continued innovation in key emerging technologies – technologies that are central to the United States remaining the world’s innovation leader.”
“NCLifeSci thanks Senator Tillis for reintroducing the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2025, which restores the confidence in our nation’s patent laws by bringing much needed clarity to Section 101 of the Patent Act. Confidence that the life sciences industry needs to robustly invest in the future of medicine. For too long, fields like diagnostics, precision medicine, cell and gene therapy, RNA medicine, and digital health have been threatened by unclear and uncertain patent-eligibility standards that put America’s innovators at a disadvantage, and that discourage local investment. Through this legislation, our members – which include leading innovators who operate cutting-edge gene therapy manufacturing facilities here in North Carolina and research potential treatments and cures for Alzheimer’s and cancer —will be able to continue to take the bold risks and make the high levels of investment necessary to take fields like these to their next level, with the confidence that our patent laws will continue to hold up through future waves of technological progress.” – NC Life Sciences Organization
“The Innovation Alliance applauds Senators Tillis and Coons and Representatives Kiley and Peters for sponsoring the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act, which will provide much needed predictability and clarity to the hopelessly confused law of patent eligibility. The Supreme Court has provided no workable framework to guide patent owners or the courts, and it has repeatedly refused to clarify the law, rejecting requests by the Federal Circuit and others to do so time and again. Investment dollars are flowing out of the United States as a result, jeopardizing the future of America’s innovation economy. It is past time for Congress to act.” – The Innovation Alliance
“This bipartisan and much-needed bill would strike a decade of judicial tinkering that has needlessly turned the question of patent eligibility into a confusing mess and harmed the U.S. versus our economic competitors. While the U.S. has spent a decade holding back innovations in areas such as fintech, diagnostic solutions and medical devices trying to figure out whether they are ‘abstract’ or not, our competitors are moving forward and protecting these inventions. PERA would be particularly beneficial to American startups and innovators by providing the clarity needed to attract investment for new ventures in essential areas such as medical devices, diagnostics, manufacturing and a whole new range of advancements powered by software.”- Alliance of U.S. Startups & Inventors for Jobs
“AUTM – the association representing technology transfer professionals – thanks Senators Tillis and Coons and others for their leadership in introducing PERA. This legislation is crucially needed to address the ambiguities that the courts have created about what is, and what is not, patent eligible. At a time when the U.S. is competing for innovation leadership, its patent system needs to clearly delineate this process so that it can move forward on numerous discoveries that otherwise would wither on the vine.” – AUTM
“The reintroduction of the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) marks a pivotal move toward restoring clarity and consistency in U.S. patent law. By providing clear statutory guidelines, PERA offers inventors, entrepreneurs, and research institutions the certainty needed to innovate confidently. We commend Senator Tillis and Senator Coons for their leadership on this critical issue and remain committed to collaborating with Congress to support a patent system that fosters transparency and predictability.” – American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA)
“The Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform applauds Congress for reintroducing PERA. This legislation represents a significant step forward in clarifying patent eligibility while maintaining necessary standards on what is ultimately patentable. 21C applauds these efforts as they will make sure that the United States remains the most attractive place in the world to invest, invent, and grow.” – The Coalition for 21st Century Patent Reform (21C)
The following organizations support the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act: Innovation Alliance, C4IP, AUTM, AIPLA, IEEE-USA, USIJ, MDMA, BIO, NCLifeSci, Adeia, Nokia, Sisvel, Conservatives for Property Rights, Eagle Forum Education & Legal Defense Fund, U.S. Business & Industry Council, Center for a Free Economy, Center for Individual Freedom, American Policy Center, Less Government, 60 Plus Association, American Association of Senior Citizens, Frontiers of Freedom, Consumer Action for a Strong Economy, Center for American Principles, Prosperity for Us Foundation, Market Institute, Inventors Defense Alliance, Lauder Partners, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Heritage Action, 21C, Netlist, and FICPI.
Background:
Unfortunately, due to a series of Supreme Court decisions, patent eligibility law in the United States has become confused, constricted, and unclear in recent years. This has resulted in a wide range of well-documented negative impacts – inconsistent case decisions, uncertainty in innovation and investment communities, and unpredictable business outcomes.
As of 2021, all 12 then-sitting judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit lamented the state of the law. Witnesses and stakeholders from a wide array of industries, fields, interest groups, and academia have testified and submitted comments confirming the uncertainty and detailing the detrimental effects of patent eligibility confusion in the United States. There is now widespread bipartisan agreement in Congress and across all recent Administrations that reforms are necessary to restore the United States to a position of global strength and leadership in key areas of technology and innovation, such as medical diagnostics, biotechnology, personalized medicine, artificial intelligence, 5G, and blockchain.
The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act achieves this critical goal by restoring patent eligibility to important inventions across many fields, while also resolving legitimate concerns over patenting of mere ideas, the mere discovery of what already exists in nature, and social and cultural content that everyone agrees is beyond the scope of the patent system, which is a system aimed at promoting technology-based innovation. As a general approach, the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act maintains the existing statutory categories of eligible subject matter, which have worked well for over two centuries, but eliminates the overly malleable set of current judicial exceptions – replacing them with five specific, defined statutory exclusions. By eliminating and replacing the current judicial exceptions, the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act provides predictable patent eligibility for important computer-implemented technological developments and medical advances, creating a solid bedrock for America’s innovation future.
Full text of the bill is available HERE.
Source: United States Senator Ben Ray Luján (D-New Mexico)
“Who is actually running the Department: Secretary Lutnick or Elon Musk and DOGE?” Senators ask
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), a member of the Senate Commerce Committee, and Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), joined U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, Ranking Member of the Senate Commerce Committee, and five Senate Democrats in demanding that Keith Sonderling, the purported Acting Under Secretary of Commerce for the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), promptly turn over key documents and information related to the dismantling of the agency and recent funding termination notices sent to all grantees by a member of Elon Musk’s DOGE. The Senators’ demands come as Paul Dabbar, President Trump’s nominee for Deputy Secretary of Commerce, appeared on Thursday before the Commerce Committee for his nomination hearing.
“In one MBDA termination notice reviewed by our offices, the Department claims the grant is being terminated because it ‘is unfortunately no longer consistent with the agency’s priorities and no longer serves the interests of the United States and the MBDA Program,’” the senators wrote in a letter to Sonderling, who was confirmed by the Senate as Deputy Secretary of Labor in March. “The termination notice further states that, ‘MBDA is repurposing its funding allocations in a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda.’ …[T]he notice is silent about why the grants are inconsistent with the MBDA’s priorities and programs—which Congress, not the Department, set by statute. And it suggests the DOC or others in the Administration may be using funding appropriated for the MBDA for other, unrelated purposes.”
The Senators questioned Sonderling about the notice terminating all MBDA grants, which was signed by Nate Cavanaugh, a member of Elon Musk’s so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) and “Under the Authority of Keith Sonderling, Acting Undersecretary of MBDA.”
“This raises significant questions regarding Mr. Cavanaugh’s precise role at DOC and the mechanism by which you or other members of DOC leadership delegated him authority to terminate MDBA grants on behalf of the Department,” their letter continued. “Our offices have also obtained information indicating you may not have been aware these termination notices were being sent out by Mr. Cavanaugh under your authority, which would raise further questions about who is actually running the Department: Secretary Lutnick or Elon Musk and DOGE?”
The letter was also signed by U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), and Andy Kim (D-N.J.).
Today, during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing on the nomination of Paul Dabbar to be U.S. Deputy Secretary of Commerce, Senator Luján pressed Mr. Dabbar on the dismantlement of the MBDA by the Trump administration and highlighted the successes of the MBDA. Senator Luján championed an amendment in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to make the MBDA permanent. Senator Luján also secured passage of a provision to double the funding level for the MBDA’s Rural Business Development Center Program and to expand this program’s eligibility to include all Minority-Serving Institutions, which will expand opportunities for New Mexico’s colleges and universities. Additionally, in 2021 Senator Luján championed legislation to make permanent and expand the reach of the Minority Business Development Agency.
In October 2024, Heinrich led the unveiling of a new, larger office space for the New Mexico Minority Business Development Center in Albuquerque to expand support for local businesses across the state as they create the types of careers New Mexicans can build their families around. Heinrich wrote the legislative provision that established and funded the New Mexico Business Center in 2020, securing more than $2.5 million in federal resources through the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Minority Business Development Agency for its staffing and programming.
The full text of the letter can be found HERE and below:
Acting Under Secretary Sonderling:
On March 25, 2025, and April 17, 2025, we sent letters to Secretary Howard Lutnick raising serious concerns about the apparent dismantling of the Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA), despite his testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation stating he would not support doing so. In our April 17 letter, we requested specific documents and information that would help address our outstanding questions and concerns regarding the MBDA. On April 24, 2025, we received a letter from the Department of Commerce (DOC) Acting Assistant Secretary for Legislative and Intergovernmental Affairs purporting to respond to our April 17 letter. This response, however, contained a mere three sentences related to the MBDA and failed to answer or meaningfully address any of our requests. Given Secretary Lutnick’s apparent disregard for our concerns about the Department’s actions against the MBDA, we are now requesting you provide documents and information related to this inquiry.
Since our most recent letter, our offices have obtained information demonstrating that DOC has canceled all MBDA grants—further dismantling an agency Congress statutorily authorized, despite Secretary Lutnick’s testimony to the contrary. In one MBDA termination notice reviewed by our offices, the Department claims the grant is being terminated because it “is unfortunately no longer consistent with the agency’s priorities and no longer serves the interests of the United States and the MBDA Program.” The termination notice further states that, “MBDA is repurposing its funding allocations in a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda.” Beyond these conclusory assertions, however, the notice is silent about why the grants are inconsistent with the MBDA’s priorities and programs—which Congress, not the Department, set by statute. And it suggests the DOC or others in the Administration may be using funding appropriated for the MBDA for other, unrelated purposes.
Raising further concerns, the termination notice was signed by Nate Cavanaugh—who we understand to be part of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—and is signed “Under the Authority of Keith Sonderling, Acting Undersecretary of MBDA.” Mr. Cavanaugh has reportedly been interviewing employees at the General Services Administration and overseeing efforts to dismantle another agency, the U.S. Institute of Peace. The termination notice indicates that Mr. Cavanaugh now has a DOC e-mail address. This raises significant questions regarding Mr. Cavanaugh’s precise role at DOC and the mechanism by which you or other members of DOC leadership delegated him authority to terminate MDBA grants on behalf of the Department. Our offices have also obtained information indicating you may not have been aware these termination notices were being sent out by Mr. Cavanaugh under your authority, which would raise further questions about who is actually running the Department: Secretary Lutnick or Elon Musk and DOGE?
Given the lack of responsiveness from the Department to date, we reiterate the requests raised in our April 17, 2025 letter, and request the following additional documents and information no later than May 14, 2025:
A complete description of Mr. Cavanaugh’s position at DOC, including his title, job description, date(s) of employment, any salary, any benefits, supervisor, and direct reports. Please also identify all other federal e-mail addresses assigned to or used by Mr. Cavanaugh of which you are aware.
Documents sufficient to show Mr. Cavanaugh’s delegated authority to execute termination notices to MBDA grantees.
Documentation sufficient to show your appointment as Acting Under Secretary for Minority Business Development Agency and the date of such appointment.
A complete description of your decision to delegate your authority to Mr. Cavanaugh for the purpose of terminating MBDA grants, including the extent to which Secretary Lutnick or any other senior DOC official was involved in making this decision.
A complete description of the types of funded activities that are considered “consistent with the agency’s priorities” and “serve[] the interests of…the MBDA program.”
A detailed explanation of how the MBDA intends to “repurpos[e] its funding allocations in a new direction in furtherance of the President’s agenda,” including any specific program or activity that has received or is expected to receive repurposed funding.
Sincerely,
On 2 April 2025, the US administration announced tariffs on all imports, which included a notable 20% tariff on exports from the European Union (EU) to the US. This decision followed the imposition of 25% tariffs on all aluminum and steel imports into the US on 12 March 2025. These policies will significantly alter growth opportunities within food processing and packaging machinery companies supplying the US market. This is because of changes in the packaging formats used to package goods in the US and changes in where automation opportunities reside, says GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.
GlobalData’s recent report “Industry Insights: The impact of tariffs on consumer packaged goods” reveals which CPG-relevant sectors are most affected by tariffs within specific trade relationships and how companies within these sectors will be affected. It also provides insights into consumer reactions to changes in the market caused by the imposition of tariffs.
Rory Gopsill, Senior Consumer Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “US tariffs have the potential to alter the demand for certain types of machinery within the US beverages market. Given the significant dependence of the US on aluminum imports to meet domestic needs, a 25% tariff on steel and aluminum imports is expected to increase the cost of beverage cans.
“Consequently, soft drink manufacturers may consider transitioning to plastic bottles as a response to the heightened costs associated with metal packaging, a possibility acknowledged by Coca-Cola’s chief executive during a call with investors in February following the tariff announcement. This could result in an increased demand for the blow moulding machines used to produce plastic bottles.”
In 2024, 126.2 billion soft drinks sold in the US were packaged in plastic bottles, and 60.5 billion were packaged in metal cans, according to GlobalData’s Primary Packaging and Outers database. These numbers are 60.0% and 28.8% of the US soft drinks market, respectively. The US tariffs could restrict the growth of rigid metal cans and promote the growth of rigid plastic bottles. This in turn could have knock-on effects for the machinery in the production of these packaging types.
EU processing machinery manufacturers will be hurt by US tariffs
Many of the largest manufacturers of packaging and food processing machinery are European. Krones, GEA, and Syntegon are all German companies, while Sacmi, Coesia, IMA, and PFM Group are all Italian companies. This strong ecosystem enabled the EU to export $3.4 billion worth of washing and bottling machines, $1.6 billion worth of industrial food preparation machinery, and $1.1 billion worth of industrial printers to the US in 2023, according to The Observatory of Economic Complexity. Germany alone accounted for 24% of the US’ industrial food preparation machinery imports in 2023, according to the same source. A 20% tariff on these EU exports to the US represents a serious problem for EU machinery manufacturers.
Gopsill continues: “Other elements of the US’ current policy agenda could also create disruptions in the US packaging and food processing machinery market. The Trump administration is also pursuing a budget reconciliation bill aimed at securing between $90 billion and $175 billion in additional funding for immigration and border enforcement agencies before the end of the year. This funding would enhance the government’s capacity to conduct business raids and detain and deport undocumented immigrants.
“Such actions could lead to labor shortages in various industries that heavily depend on packaging and food processing machinery. For instance, according to the American Immigration Council, approximately 23% of the workforce in the US meatpacking industry consists of undocumented immigrants, while this figure was around 62% in the seafood processing sector in 2017 (according to the New American Economy). Furthermore, according to the American Immigration Council, about 5.5% of employees in transportation and warehousing are also undocumented immigrants.
Gopsill concludes: “If a crackdown on immigrant labor creates workforce vacancies that companies are unable to fill, food processing and packaging machinery companies may be required to accelerate their innovation programs to supply the market with more automated packaging solutions.”
